not true. For example - Celts, had access to bows, slings and javelins, yet their field armies only deployed javelins... Celtic Slingers were typically only present to defend their cities as sling was something young guys could use.. bows were very weak, women usually used them, Javelin at the other side was considered weapon of honor... this btw was true also for Germanic tribes, Engles and Jutes kept using Angon way longer than anybody else and they even forbade their kids to even touch the bows, because it would make them weaker warriors..You are just flat out wrong... javelins was NOT the best or most effective ranged weapon of the ancient times. Every weapon served a role and were useful in their own right. It also is rather strange that generals tended to favor bows over javelins if they had the option to use them. It was far easier to train javelin throwers as is evident by normal Roman training methods to that of normal archery training. Every evidence show how expensive archers was for professional armies and the cost of mercenary archers.
And for Hellenic states, even Cretans are commonly mentioned to use both bow and javelins on multiple occasions.. yet while bow was used widely, It were Peltasts who dented Hoplite superiority on the battlefield, not archers... Only ancient nations who preferred bows were actually far eastern factions.. so your overgeneralization towards bows is false.
Roman Legion had same number of Velites as it had Hastati or Principes.. They didnt disappeared because they would not be effective, they disappeared, because around year 106 BC Rome was in dire situation and didnt had enough of citizens willing to serve in legions... therefore census requirements were dropped, and everybody was accepted to heavy infantry and equipped by the state... yet role of Velites didnt disappeared and legionaries were commonly assigned to skirmish duty, this time they were called ANTESIGNANI - those fighting in front of flags.. therefore in open order with lighter shield ( flat thureos) and light javelins...It also is not very strange to you why the Roman sought to replace their light Velites with more archers and cavalry?!?
not even close.. archers were the worst, as they couldnt defend themselves at all. Javelinmen could at least use their javelins in close combat, bowmen usually had just a dagger, and sometimes not even that. Scouting was always role of Roman Cavalry.. Velites were just added to them during second Punic war, to give badly beaten Roman Equites at least some chances when facing nimble Numidian light cavalry.. Velites were perfectly capable fighting in the melee, Rorarii/Leves for example under famous Marcus Claudius Marcellus supported his cavalry unit when facing superior Gallic infantry force and thanks to good cooperation between light infantry and cavalry, MCM managed to rout them.. at that battle he actually achieved highest Roman prize - "Spolia Optima" for killing enemy general in open combat.. no other Roman general managed to achieve that btw... MCM was also first Roman General who managed to defeat Hannibal right after Cannae..Skirmishers main job was NEVER the actual battle... they were deployed and tactics built because they had them. As soon as they could they gladly replaced them with archers and cavalry who performed their role more efficiently. Archers provided good support fire and where excellent in defensive positions while true cavalry provided good battlefield performance as well as scouting, foraging and raiding capabilities. These were roles previously given to the Velites. An army could ever just be so big so the Generals always had to make pragmatic decisions what troops they brought if they had a choice. If these javelin troops had been so extremely effective as you make them out to be they would not reduce their numbers and eventually abandon them altogether and only bring them in small numbers as mercenaries. In eastern Roman armies they often replaced them entirely with archers and light cavalry with bows. Roman western armies also tended to use them less and less
Role of Velites after initial skirmish was to withdraw behind heavy infantry and move to flanks to support the Equites. They commonly got themselves into close combat, otherwise they would not get large 90cm wide oval shield and gladius... if anything, they were closer to Thureophoroi (who also were tasked with skirmish duty sometimes) than to Psyloi.
to effectively throw javelin from horseback you need to have horse running as fast as possible for best effect. speed of the horse adds to release speed of javelin, which if stationary would be even less than if you throw it from standing still - there were no stirrups, you couldn't get that much support by just trying to holding yourself on the horse by the knees - and Numidians, didnt even use saddles.. yet still, were renowned for best skirmishing cavalry of ancient era.. So having them doing 0 damage sometimes, is quite laughable.. they were fast, nimble and very dangerous because of their javelins..In regards to moving penalties I think of that as more of an act thing and timing... you just have less time to attack and that will make it less effective. It has nothing to do if the person using the weapon is moving while using it or not.
