Crossbow and arquebus/musket effectiveness vs cavalry

[circusmagnus]

Playing two Italian campaign battles, I had a peculiar observation: arquebusiers (and muskets I suppose) are better than crossbows vs infantry but worse vs cavalry.
Looking at Sengoku Jidai manual, it seems that bows have the same advantage over firearms vs cavalry (although they do not ignore armour, so this is more complicated)

Does it have some historical reasoning behind? I am okay with it being there just to spice things up, just curious.

[SnuggleBunnies]

Namely the greater rate of fire of archers being useful engaging moving targets. But as you say, it can be somewhat evened out by the armor penetrating of arquebus/musket.

[gribol]

Namely the greater rate of fire of archers being useful engaging moving targets. But as you say, it can be somewhat evened out by the armor penetrating of arquebus/musket.

Rather, I would say that the fire of crossbows and bows was aimed mainly against horses. Easier to hit and the horse panics or dies.
As one chronicler wrote about the Battle of Vienna (1683): “So many good horses fell.”