-snip-
Hmm, let's see... Agincourt is the most famous victory for the longbow in history, studied by huge numbers of actual historians who actually know what they're talking about. You, on the other hand, are some random anonymous nobody on a video game forum, and yet you think you can come along and say "nah, the longbow didn't matter at all."
Bull-fucking-shit. This isn't just some guesswork being done, this isn't what we think might have happened. This is documented, studied history. The effectiveness of the longbow is equally documented and studied. By notable professionals!
That's not to say that not everything you have said is false. Could the longbow penetrate plate armour? No, but we already KNOW that and it doesn't change anything. I tell you what, why don't you write a thesis, get it published by a noteable academic journal, and then you might have credability enough to argue your case.
It might be nice if you tried to read what I said. I did not say the longbow did not matter, I said it didn't matter as much as you blithely assume out of some misplaced nationalism. Besides that, if you must go all 'haha on the internet no-one knows what they're saying' then I'd like it if you actually QUOTED and/or linked to those mythical actual historians who say those things so conveniently close to your opinions.
That said, I don't understand why you'd even USE that argument. I never claimed to be anyone but a 'random anonymous nobody on a game forum.' I AM that, and in that function I posted my thoughts on the subject. Perhaps you don't like people saying things you don't entirely disagree with, but it might be an idea not to take it personally. Because I argued, relatively rationally, that I think some people overestimate the longbow and you immediately attack my 'credability'[sic].
You are right though, I have little credibility. I can say, and be honest, that I'm a 22 year old man-child studying to become second grade teacher of history in the Netherlands. Slightly less anonymous now, does it help? Of course not, any claim I'd make to credibility can be swept away because everyone can say what they want on a forum. And will. Everyone will say what they want on a forum. And if what they say is not something you agree with clearly you must throw a bitch-fit riddled with fallacy.
Tell you what, why don't YOU write a thesis about how the longbow made archers and crossbowmen look 'like kids shooting nerf guns' and see if any publications carries it.
Edit; holy shit, trying to discredit actual historians? I am not doing anything of the sort. I was merely saying that, in my opinion, you aren't quite right about the crossbows. Which means I'm disagreeing with you. That's not even discrediting, and you're not an actual historian.