Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[uttaku]

nah, they just pull back the drawstring with their hands.

I'm pretty sure crossbow operating was a lot more complicated than that, hence why they didn't really replace archers fully.

I am also conscious of the fact that I may be sparking a debate on a subject I am fairly unfamiliar with. Do forgive me if I make mistakes here.

Nah light crossbows could be reloaded by hand the cranks were necessary on heavy ones. Even light crossbows tended to hit harder than a regular bow though.

Not quite true actually, a decent longbow could have a draw weight of 60 pounds but a light crossbow would be unlikely to get above 30pounds, while i admit that a hevay crossbow could reach up to 150 pounds by the 1400's these had a supremely slow rate of fire, as they required a complexe and slow winching mechanism.

[Safe-Keeper]

They're using homing Patriot Bolts (see Robin Hood: Men In Tights). Bonecarvers, working with the dead as they do, naturally develop an affinity with necromancy. A decent bonecarver can infuse their bolts with the souls of their masters, which causes the bolts to seek weak points and dodge shielding; this is why masterwork bolts are so much better than no-quality ones.

Aye. Dwarven *steel bolts* are notorious for their ability to locate and home in on the enemy's chakras, but only if the enemy's decilitres are balanced with the litres and the energy field has not been weakened by toxins from synthetic foods produced by Big Cheese. You also have to take the negative length from nearby doubters into account. Oh, and don't bother looking for this in the raws, because none of it can be proven scientifically.

I love New Age jargon .

[The Architect]

nah, they just pull back the drawstring with their hands.

I'm pretty sure crossbow operating was a lot more complicated than that, hence why they didn't really replace archers fully.

I am also conscious of the fact that I may be sparking a debate on a subject I am fairly unfamiliar with. Do forgive me if I make mistakes here.

Nah light crossbows could be reloaded by hand the cranks were necessary on heavy ones. Even light crossbows tended to hit harder than a regular bow though.

Not quite true actually, a decent longbow could have a draw weight of 60 pounds but a light crossbow would be unlikely to get above 30pounds, while i admit that a hevay crossbow could reach up to 150 pounds by the 1400's these had a supremely slow rate of fire, as they required a complexe and slow winching mechanism.

Well, I thought you were totally full of it because the little harmless toy practice bow I had as a kid has a 20 lb draw weight, and it doesn't even put an arrow through an archery target. So I guess I'm saying I knew you were totally full of it. Don't get too offended, it's a forum <disclaimer statement>

The weakest bow I've drawn was a recreational hunting bow with a 50 lb draw, and I was 13. It had a little power, nothing special, just a normal recurve bow. Just so you know: A 30 lb draw crossbow would perhaps be able to kill a fowl. A larger animal if you hit them in the eye or other soft tissue with a very sharp bolt fired from close range. Any military crossbow (as in, not a training weapon) would have a minimum draw of 50 lbs and probably much more, considering the lack of a need to draw and suspend the weight with the strength of the arm. They could be placed with one end on the ground and drawn with the full strength of the back and both arms, then held in place by a trigger, or in some cases cranked (which is where the heavy crossbows come in).

So any bow of military purpose would need a minimum 50 lb draw to be deadly against opponents even using nothing but leather for protection. According to Wikipedia, the standard English longbow is thought to have had at minimum an 80 lb draw, and in some cases as much as 180 lbs. The period relics recovered from the Mary Rose are estimated at 150-160 lb draw weight.

This power, combined of course with the longbow's projectile size and weight (long range and high damage!) are the reasons it's legendary. Unlike a standard 60 lb hunting bow. You don't make a complicated machine to apply 30 lbs to a bolt (a male child can do that ), nor do you make a 6' bow to fire with the power of a standard hunting bow :-P

[Cheddarius]

Maybe he meant foot-pounds or something? I don't know, I don't know much about bows.

[The Architect]

Draw weight is measured in direct force. Thus the use of the word "weight", which is a little archaic of course. Foot-pounds are units of torque, which isn't really useful when describing bows.They don't have a pivot point.

[Sir Reginald Bathwater]

Well, maybe he means Kilograms of effective mass at full draw. What I think is needed for balance of crossbows is for them to have a longer range and slower fire rate, because that way they will be nerfed indoors. Also, rather than having a 'hit-check', maybe they should all use physical projectiles which tend to go awry. Or even just a general ruling that they don't get to hit multiple organs. But it seems that they will be knocked down a few pegs in the next release anyway.

[The Architect]

Yea, Toady's reporting significant improvements in the new version in that regard. I would personally like to see their damage (the force component of the new calculation, I guess) decrease over range and increase/decrease as z-levels are crossed. Of course it would be great if the game could use projectile mapping to increase range from a height advantage as well, and take into accound a need to travel in upper z-levels to shoot longer distances.

[CobaltKobold]

Well, maybe he means Kilograms of effective mass at full draw.

grams are not a measure of force. pounds and newtons are.

I read some fantasy where there was a legendary longbowman with a 400#-draw bow, but...yeah.

[vhappylurker]

I enjoy that "meh damage" and "OMFG WHAT" are perfectly understandable units of injury. All hail the Internet!

Sigged so hard.

[Reese]

The weakest bows I've dealt with are the 35 pound draw bows used at the local Ren Faire's archery booth.  Those boys are capable of putting a target arrow a few inches into a bale of hay at 30 feet (the range of the range we used when I worked at the booth)

I have a light crossbow that is capable of putting a bolt half way through a couple sheets of cardboard (from a box an built yourself desk came in)

It takes barely any effort to put that bow agaisnt your gut and quickly pull the string back.

The important distinction is that the force of the light crossbow is applied to the string quickly and not held by muscles where a bowstring is pulled back at a slower rate and must be held by muscles until fired.  It's also notable, as previously mentioned, that a crossbow can be drawn using the best positioning for leverage to draw it back where a bow must be pulled back using just the muscles of the draw arm and shoulders.

I know there's a technical term for the quick application of force from muscles as opposed to the slow application of froce from muscles, but I can't recall it off hand.

however, the crossbow should still be slower than a bow because to draww it back you need to take it out of firing position and they return it, where a bow can be held close to the correct position.

[Hagadorn]

I'm just waiting for toady to put chemical reactions into DF...
Then.
Guns!

Just imagine, a group of goblins sneaking around with their dirty dirty bows as a single dorf with a 'M1 Garand' sits at 400 yards chuckling softly to himself.
Dwarves in Grey and Black uniforms rushing into elf retreats, murdering all the elves.
The remaining Elf, human, goblin, orc and kobold civs all band together to wipe out the dwarvish imperium.

Anyway...

I think that it has been laid down WHY crossbows are so dangerous...

Its the multiple crit chance, meaning that a single bolt (out of the 200 flying towards the poor bastard) has a chance of piercing 2 organs... or the same organ twice!
That combined with a fire-rate similar to a bolt action rifle is rather impressive. But teh fire-rate is because of, as someone pointed out earlier, the screwed up way DF time works.

[Cheddarius]

I remember something about "twitch" muscles... is that what you were looking for?

[The Architect]

I would say that the biggest hindrance to all relations such as "fire rate" is the unknown measurement that a tile or z-level represents. We can't even tell how far bolts are flying in a given time frame, and thus making judgements about relative time is impossible. Are dwarves traveling 10 meters at a time? A single meter?

Liked your comments, by the way, Reese. I think you raised a very good point about the relative ease of drawing and aiming a bow quickly (or even simultaneously) as opposed to a crossbow which must be raised and brought to bear after loading. An apropriate analogy might be a pump-action shotgun to a breach loader. The analogy isn't useful beyond comparing loading and aiming from a ready position.

[Jacob/Lee]

Crossbows aren't crossbows.

They are belt-fed homing vectors that shoot miniature rockets and can pierce rock, they aren't much for being messed with