Another issue that occasionally comes up when people discuss ranged weapons is the difference between rolling to hit with a bow versus rolling to hit with a mêlée weapon like a sword. The attack roll in OD&D, as most of you already know, does not represent a single swing-and-miss with a weapon; it represents the chance that one or more of many attacks during a one-minute round turned out to be a deadly blow. However (the complaint goes,) this creates a disconnect between mêlée weapons and ranged weapons, since each attack with a bow, crossbow, sling, or any other weapon that uses ammo uses up one arrow, quarrel, slug, or bullet.
Thus, many people switch to short rounds of six-seconds each, and thus get bogged down in converting the original abstract combat to a more detailed blow-by-blow system. And, since no one can agree on what the details of detailed combat actually *are*, we pretty much get one combat system per GM.
But there's another option: keep the one-minute rounds and treat ranged weapons as one roll for multiple attacks, same as for mêlée weapons. At the end of the combat, roll 1d6 per volley to determine how many arrows were used. This has the bonus effect of making ammo a more important resource, and bundling all the bookkeeping together at the end of the combat. Seriously, how many players have ever run out of arrows under the "one arrow per attack roll" system? This way, they'll scramble to retrieve more arrows and weigh the benefits and costs of bring more arrows to begin with.
If you feel 1d6 per volley is too much, you could change it to two volleys. On the average, each archer will only lose about three arrows per combat.