Topic: Weapon balance mod, version 2 (for DF 0.40.01+) (Read 12872 times)

Sergarr · « **Reply #105 on:** January 15, 2015, 02:22:47 pm »

Well technically it falls out of the scope of this mod. It's about weapons, not unarmored attacks, or armor. It's about balancing weapons to be more distinctive from each other, having their own strengths and weaknesses. Unarmored attacks being able to break through gauntlets is not that much of an issue as, say, gauntlets not protecting fingers, or helmets not protecting any facial features.

I'd need to basically change the whole game to fix that.

Urist Tilaturist · « **Reply #106 on:** January 15, 2015, 03:00:23 pm »

Since this discussion has turned to general combat, a "combat balance mod" should be the result, even if in a separate thread. Modders cannot even change the whole game, but we have already suggested some fixes.

Gargomaxthalus · « **Reply #107 on:** January 18, 2015, 01:52:54 am »

Quote from: Grimlocke on January 09, 2015, 06:45:02 pm

I sadly cannot regulate which helmets cover what parts of the face. Oh if only I could...

And yes, you can cover facial features with body garments, the padded armours I posted do this. Sadly cloth armour alone does not protect all that much. It also sounds really weird in the combat announcement.

I tried the stepping tokens on helmets, no dice. It just gives an error. Gauntlets all stop at the upper body.

The only thing I can think of is somehow layering the facial features over the head the same way skulls are, though I'm not sure if that would make the head untargetable.

It's an unfortunate fact that most of the issues with combat stem from the fact that Toady has left things so nebulous. Armour coverage has nothing to do with body parts, it's an asinine system of overlapping regions. Body parts interestingly don't exist in separate, defined points in space.

I just spent at least half an hour trying to go into detail but, this is all so confusing that I've hurt myself without getting anything out of it. Those of you who actually understand how this stuff works to some degree are truly impressive.

Putnam · « **Reply #108 on:** January 18, 2015, 02:33:18 am »

UBSTEP, UPSTEP and UBSTEP are, in fact, based entirely around body parts. Body parts are attached to each other pretty much as described.

Bloax · « **Reply #109 on:** January 18, 2015, 07:48:31 am »

Quote from: Putnam on January 18, 2015, 02:33:18 am

LBSTEP, UPSTEP and UBSTEP are, in fact, based entirely around body parts. Body parts are attached to each other pretty much as described.

Respectively

Code: [Select]

LBSTEP - "From body part and down to (but not including) the feet"

Code: [Select]

UPSTEP - "From body part and up to (but not including) the upper (for things above the lower body)/lower body (for things below the upper body)"

and

Code: [Select]

UBSTEP - "From torso (assuming that's the only place where it works as intended >_>) out towards (but not including) the hands" (with super crazy bugs at high values)

These things make some kind of sense, since if you slash off the lower right arm it'll go flying along with the right hand that was attached to it - but not the upper right arm.

Deon · « **Reply #110 on:** January 18, 2015, 08:00:05 am »

Hey Sergarr, why does the spear have such low penetration and 250 momentum? I was never able to pierce skull of unconscious enemy with my spear.

Sergarr · « **Reply #111 on:** January 18, 2015, 08:07:55 am »

That's a bit weird. What kind of material you used for a spear? Copper doesn't cut bones IIRC.

Deon · « **Reply #112 on:** January 18, 2015, 08:34:09 am »

It was copper all right.
Tested with iron and it's much better.

Still, where does 250 come from? I just wonder

.

I am making other weapons for my mod (side swords, harpoons, bayonets, dirks etc.) and I like the overall balance of your modification a lot. However I don't understand all of your decisions, so if you have some time to clarify it would be a great help to me.

Sergarr · « **Reply #113 on:** January 18, 2015, 10:11:07 am »

The piercing attacks have more momentum per contact area, slashing attacks have more total momentum.

The spear has the same momentum per contact area as the short sword because spear is supposed to be this shitty weapon available to everyone and making it better than a short sword in stubbing doesn't feel right.

the value 250 comes because it's pretty high (to allow deep stubs), but has enough space for upward upgrade in strength to not make high-level weapons pierce through metal armor (1000 is enough to pierce through standard steel breastplate, ~600 is enough for iron one; these values are estimates for a normal human, a giant would be able to hit with much more force)

Deon · « **Reply #114 on:** January 18, 2015, 10:59:19 am »

So if I wanted to make let's say a better spear/bayonet weapon which is designed to pierce armor in melee, or better a pneumatic lance which should break shields, which momentum/piercing would it be? Do you keep it all in your head or do you have some kind of spreadsheet with values?

Urist Tilaturist · « **Reply #115 on:** January 18, 2015, 02:14:42 pm »

Small contact area should increase stabbing force. A spear should be very good at stabbing because of its point increasing pressure, and have longer reach to allow fighters to attack from further away. It should not be able to stab through plate armour unless wielded by a bronze colossus or something similar.

Spears are cheap, yes, but also decent weapons. Remember that pikes and spears were used far more than swords as primary weapons even where swords were affordable.

Sergarr · « **Reply #116 on:** January 18, 2015, 07:53:23 pm »

Quote from: Deon on January 18, 2015, 10:59:19 am

So if I wanted to make let's say a better spear/bayonet weapon which is designed to pierce armor in melee, or better a pneumatic lance which should break shields, which momentum/piercing would it be? Do you keep it all in your head or do you have some kind of spreadsheet with values?

1000 or higher.

Just look at the warhammer and the company to see what an armor-piercing weapon looks like.

Quote from: Urist Tilaturist on January 18, 2015, 02:14:42 pm

Small contact area should increase stabbing force. A spear should be very good at stabbing because of its point increasing pressure, and have longer reach to allow fighters to attack from further away. It should not be able to stab through plate armour unless wielded by a bronze colossus or something similar.

Spears are cheap, yes, but also decent weapons. Remember that pikes and spears were used far more than swords as primary weapons even where swords were affordable.

Well OK, I guess it's time to nerf the piercing an all non-spears then.

EDIT:
Version 3 is out! Changelog:
- rebalanced the stab attacks on various weapons. The spear is now twice as better at stabbing as the short sword.

Deon · « **Reply #117 on:** January 18, 2015, 08:45:23 pm »

That makes sense, you can put much more momentum using the shaft into a spear strike, that is why I was confused why swords pierce better with stabs than spears.

Urist Tilaturist · « **Reply #118 on:** January 19, 2015, 05:37:42 am »

The spear is generally better for stabbing, since that is what it is specifically designed for. The advantage of the sword is its excellent wieldiness and its versatility; it can be used to parry, cut, stab, strike with the crossguard or pommel, and even aid wrestling. It is also considerably more practical to carry around, which is why swords were popular sidearms.

Sergarr · « **Reply #119 on:** January 19, 2015, 12:26:13 pm »

Quote from: Deon on January 18, 2015, 10:59:19 am

So if I wanted to make let's say a better spear/bayonet weapon which is designed to pierce armor in melee, or better a pneumatic lance which should break shields, which momentum/piercing would it be? Do you keep it all in your head or do you have some kind of spreadsheet with values?

I do have a spreadsheet, but it's kind-of not very informative (it also doesn't format well here):
      slash   pierce   s_cont
short sword      1   500/40   20
battle axe      2   0   10
spear      0   500/20   0
pick      0   800/40   0
pike      0   1000/20   0
2H sword      3   700/40   50
long sword      2   600/40   35
halberd      3   800/20   15
2H axe      4   0   20
dagger      1   400/40   10
scourge      0.5      100

      blunt      b_cont
warhammer      1      2
mace      1      4
maul      1      10
flail      1.5      2
morningstar      1.5      1

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

News:

Author Topic: Weapon balance mod, version 2 (for DF 0.40.01+) (Read 12872 times)

Sergarr

Re: Weapon balance mod, version 2 (for DF 0.40.01+)

Urist Tilaturist

Re: Weapon balance mod, version 2 (for DF 0.40.01+)

Gargomaxthalus

Re: Weapon balance mod, version 2 (for DF 0.40.01+)

Putnam

Re: Weapon balance mod, version 2 (for DF 0.40.01+)

Bloax

Re: Weapon balance mod, version 2 (for DF 0.40.01+)

Deon

Re: Weapon balance mod, version 2 (for DF 0.40.01+)

Sergarr

Re: Weapon balance mod, version 2 (for DF 0.40.01+)

Deon

Re: Weapon balance mod, version 2 (for DF 0.40.01+)

Sergarr

Re: Weapon balance mod, version 2 (for DF 0.40.01+)

Deon

Re: Weapon balance mod, version 2 (for DF 0.40.01+)

Urist Tilaturist

Re: Weapon balance mod, version 2 (for DF 0.40.01+)

Sergarr

Re: Weapon balance mod, version 2 (for DF 0.40.01+)

Deon

Re: Weapon balance mod, version 2 (for DF 0.40.01+)

Urist Tilaturist

Re: Weapon balance mod, version 2 (for DF 0.40.01+)

Sergarr

Re: Weapon balance mod, version 2 (for DF 0.40.01+)