("So-called" because in History shows that less armor and mobility is way better in fight than heavy armor stuff. Ancient folks butt-kicked their adversary half-naked, and whiners should check about the battle of Agincourt...)
Longbows.
At the battle of Agincourt the English army had longbows, AND made the best use of the land. They dig trenches to stop the french army, and wooden spears to impale horses and knights. As there were woods on the side, the french knights could only come from one side, while being peppered with arrows from 3 sides.
As the land had turned to mud (due to heavy rain), the cavalry couldn't really charge, but tried anyway (morons, yes, charging up a slope of mud, with archers on the side). They were mostly killed by archers, or, because they use tight ranks, the ones who fell were trampled by the ones on the side (those who didn't drowned in mud, because of the weight of their heavy armors).
The French army didn't have any archers, as they mostly used crossbows, which were useless because of the damp.
So basically, the English used any advantages they could, while the French army just charged forward, like a bunch of barbarians.
Agincourt is seen as the battle that showed the superiority of ranged attacks, not mobility. On dry land, able to use their mobility, the English army would have been wiped out by the French cavalry.
About armors in game, I don't really want that
![[Linked Image]](http://i67.photobucket.com/albums/h307/TalkingHooves/Stuff/Fantasy%20Female%20Warriors/female_20armor.jpg)
