Bay 12 Games Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

Author Topic: Better weapon mechanics?  (Read 2593 times)

Sefzaps

  • Escaped Lunatic
    • View Profile
Better weapon mechanics?
« on: February 13, 2015, 12:19:25 pm »

I really like the level of detail that the wound system has currently, but I think the combat could be even better if reach and distance between opponents were taken into account. Spears could cover a longer distance, but would be less effective at shorter ranges. Swords could have a shorter range than spears, but be more effective at very short distances.

(what'd be really great is if dwarves could be assigned a side-arm. They either lose their spear or get too close, so they draw their sword. Although there would have to be a method of training both weapons that isn't tedious.)
Logged

Vattic

  • Bay Watcher
  • bibo ergo sum
    • View Profile
Re: Better weapon mechanics?
« Reply #1 on: February 14, 2015, 09:58:15 am »

Two tile reach for longer weapons has been suggested before.

With the dimensions of tiles becoming better defined in later versions this seems more likely now. Especially with the multi-tile creatures and the talk of not being able to reach to hit a giant in the head.

The sidearm bit has also been suggested before, just search for sidearm if you are interested.

Logged
6 out of 7 dwarves aren't Happy.
How To Generate Small Islands

AceSV

  • Bay Watcher
  • [SUPER_VILLAIN]
    • View Profile
Re: Better weapon mechanics?
« Reply #2 on: February 14, 2015, 10:38:52 am »

Two tile reach for longer weapons has been suggested before.

I think Dwarf Fortress could go beyond simple 2-tile reach and actually calculate advantages down to cm distance.  There is an old saying in the kung fu world, that One inch longer is one inch stronger and One inch shorter is one inch trickier.  DF is exactly the kind of game/simulation that should capitalize on that philosophy.  A short spear and a dagger might both have 1 tile of reach, but a fight between the two weapons is not that simple. 

Calculating reach would definitely be more realistic, and I think you could achieve range effectiveness with some simple numerical calculations.  This could make Wrestlers more useful.  If a Wrestler gets close to an opponent with a weapon like a spear, the spear becomes almost useless while the wrestler can do whatever. 

You should weave this into DF's multiple attack possibilities.  A spear's thrust might be long reach while a pole bash could be short reach. 

If you are truly interested in realistic weapons, many ancient and medieval weapons (especially by the 1400s, DF's tech cap date) had some kind of extra hurty part on the handle for dealing with the eventuality of close combat.  For example, Greek "Dory" spears had a spike on the weilder's end known as a sauroter or styrax for offing people on the ground; Japanese naginata and Chinese guandao had heavy counter weights on the wielder's end which could be used for bash attacks; The counter-balanced pommel of long swords were used to "pummel" when too close to slash;  The pommels of Indian swords had spikes;  Chinese hook swords also had bladed hand guards for close combat; 

In GURPS, switching from attack to attack sometimes requires the wielder to spend time changing his grip on the weapon. 

Assuming all weapons are capable of some form of close attack, you might split Wrestling into Unarmed Combat and Close Combat. 

If there's an ideal attack distance, there should also be an ideal parrying distance.  A spear or axe can parry attacks at the distance of their metal parts, but not their shafts, assuming the shafts are wooden, which I guess they might not be for dwarves. 



I would assume there'd be different types of weapons that specialize in long reach, medium reach or close combat.  I've always thought of the Dwarven spears we have now as relatively short spears like the ones that the Spartans use in 300, and not like the Viking Age or late Medieval long spears. 

Reach Weapons
Lance (spear-like polearm)
Flail (mace-like polearm)
Halberd (axe-like polearm)
Pole-Hammer or Quarterstaff (hammer-like polearm)  (note that unlike the crappy quarterstaffs of fantasyRPGland, real military quarterstaffs and similar weapons often had metal parts, and authors like George Silver of the 1600s considered quarterstaffs to be the best of weapons) 

Close Weapons
Dagger
Knuckle Duster
Hand Claw
Spiked Gauntlet
Punching Axe
Lùjiǎodāo (I've heard this named Deerhorn Knives, Meridian Axe, Duck Axe and other things) 

Sidearms could easily be selected from the equipment page on the military screen.  Dwarves would bring one weapon of each reach category.  In combat, they'd start with longest reach and move down to medium or close reach as needed.  Dwarves without sidearms would use their weapon's close range attack variation. 

Logged
Quote
could God in fact send a kea to steal Excalibur and thereby usurp the throne of the Britons? 
Furry Fortress 3 The third saga unfurls.  Now with Ninja Frogs and Dogfish Pirates.

Urist Tilaturist

  • Bay Watcher
  • The most dwarven name possible.
    • View Profile
Re: Better weapon mechanics?
« Reply #3 on: February 14, 2015, 10:43:07 am »

See this discussion here trying to improve things:
http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=146737.30
Logged
On the item is an image of a dwarf and an elephant. The elephant is striking down the dwarf.

For old times' sake.

Vattic

  • Bay Watcher
  • bibo ergo sum
    • View Profile
Re: Better weapon mechanics?
« Reply #4 on: February 14, 2015, 12:28:11 pm »

AceSV: While certainly not as detailed the link you quoted includes mention of penalties when using weapons outside their ideal range.

I guess the problems with having distances in units smaller than tiles are displaying this to the player, and controlling this yourself (especially in adventure mode). We could have similar to wrestling grabs and have distance change the tile colour (this wouldn't work as well in fort mode as it's not centred on one dwarf). Would you be able to move within a tile with "close in" and possibly "back away" actions both taking a direction or a target creature?
Logged
6 out of 7 dwarves aren't Happy.
How To Generate Small Islands

AceSV

  • Bay Watcher
  • [SUPER_VILLAIN]
    • View Profile
Re: Better weapon mechanics?
« Reply #5 on: February 14, 2015, 11:26:02 pm »

AceSV: While certainly not as detailed the link you quoted includes mention of penalties when using weapons outside their ideal range.

I guess the problems with having distances in units smaller than tiles are displaying this to the player, and controlling this yourself (especially in adventure mode). We could have similar to wrestling grabs and have distance change the tile colour (this wouldn't work as well in fort mode as it's not centred on one dwarf). Would you be able to move within a tile with "close in" and possibly "back away" actions both taking a direction or a target creature?

I didn't really think of that. 

If it was me, I would probably cheat and just store a distance-from-that-guy variable for each combatant that is not checked against anyone else's.  So for example, Dwarf1 might be 50inches away from GoblinA and 20 inches away from GoblinB, even though GoblinA is 2 inches away from GoblinB.  I would probably even only keep that variable around if one of the two is making a direct attack against the other and default to a far distance.  I think it would be difficult to get into a situation where the laziness would be noticeable.  The player would see GoblinA (50in) and GoblinB (20in) and it would either show the ideal range for your attacks or show a good idea/bad idea graph, like it does with aimed attacks.  or something like GoblinA (50in) (|||||..); GoblinB (20in) (||.....)

I always fortress mode, so this next bit may display my utter ignorance of the way combat is executed. 

I think closing in or backing away should be a part of the attack you select.  The attacker should try to get to the right distance when they decide to attack.  For example, let's say your dwarf has a spear with a thrust attack with an ideal reach is 60-72 inches and a bash attack with an ideal reach of 6-24 inches.  Your dwarf's combat speed allows him to move 10 inches per time unit.  You are fighting a goblin with a sword that has a slash attack with the ideal range of 20-48 inches and a combat speed of 12 inches per time unit.  If your current distance is 50 inches and you select the thrust attack, your dwarf will automatically try to move 10 inches away from the goblin to make his attack.  If the goblin and the dwarf are both attacking each other at the same time, the goblin will try to move forward his 12 inches while the dwarf will try to move backwards 10 inches.  You are now 48 inches away from each other, too close to strike with the spear and too far to slash with the sword, and you get a message like "The dwarf thrusts with the spear, but the goblin closes in."  and "The goblin slashes with the sword, but the dwarf steps back."  If you select the bash attack from 48 inches away, your dwarf will try to move forward and the goblin will try to move forward, so you are now 22 inches closer, 26 away total, close enough for the slash, but just out of range to bash, so the goblin gets a free attack in (which might be parried or dodged or whatever)  Next round, you go for the bash again.  The ideal situation is that you move in below the goblin's reach, while the goblin wants to stay just out of your reach.  And again, he's faster than your dwarf, so he just keeps the gap 2 inches away. 

You should probably create some kind of a time penalty for actually making a successful attack, or just add some RNG to the results of the match. 

You could even use distance to do something exotic like a spinning slash, where each enemy in your ideal reach gets attacked. 

I think if you are in melee with multiple opponents, you could just assume that you are trying to strategically move away from whatever targets you are not attacking.  So let's say you are the dwarf from before and now you're fighting GoblinA and GoblinB.  If you move in to attack GoblinA, you get 10 inches closer to GoblinA and 5 inches away from GoblinB.  If you move away to attack GoblinA, you are now 10 inches further from GoblinA and 10 inches further from GoblinB, never exceeding your maximum combat speed. 

Moving around like this would have no effect on your tile, with the abstract assumption being that you're just moving around within your tile.  I would call this a "tactical move" when you're just closing distance and a "strategic move" when you move into another tile.  These could be mechanically different. 

I think that kind of system would give you all the stategery of a two-panels-away system and more, without the mess of calculating things two panels away or needing to do away with the lovely abstract sense of distance that exists now. 
« Last Edit: February 15, 2015, 11:01:11 am by AceSV »
Logged
Quote
could God in fact send a kea to steal Excalibur and thereby usurp the throne of the Britons? 
Furry Fortress 3 The third saga unfurls.  Now with Ninja Frogs and Dogfish Pirates.

Sefzaps

  • Escaped Lunatic
    • View Profile
Re: Better weapon mechanics?
« Reply #6 on: February 17, 2015, 10:34:35 am »

Being able to move in while a attacking makes perfect sense, and dwarves and npc's would always try to maintain an optimal range. In adventure mode you can use various modifiers with an attack (quick, heavy, charge, and then choosing multiple attacks in series). It would probably be easy to have modifiers for moving forward and back.

This could also give more specific purpose to the spacial sense attribute by making dwarves either good at judging distance or hilariously bad at it. (a dwarf could know exactly how far away an opponent is or could have some margin of error)

If DF tracked relative position for body parts instead of a creature as a whole that means that having sensible aimed attacks is one step away, as well.
Maybe with better aimed attacks we could aim for gaps in armor as opposed to just mashing pieces of metal against each other (although hammers would still do that).
Logged

AceSV

  • Bay Watcher
  • [SUPER_VILLAIN]
    • View Profile
Re: Better weapon mechanics?
« Reply #7 on: February 17, 2015, 10:44:56 am »

Quote
In adventure mode you can use various modifiers with an attack (quick, heavy, charge, and then choosing multiple attacks in series).

I like that.  Let's say you have a Power Attack, stand completely still, and attack at 200% power, Normal Attack, 1x combat speed, 100% attack power, and Lunge Attack, 2x combat speed, 50% attack power.  Maybe other styles of attack that are time-dependent, like move x2 and attack at 200%, but there's a long build up or recovery time.  I don't know how those mechanics work. 

It could check if you have moved strategically (tile to tile) on a previous turn and give you a momentum bonus. 



By the way, I used inches in my movement example, but I think it would be better to use an abstract unit of measurement.  I like that DF distance is mostly abstract and I think it should stay that way. 
« Last Edit: February 17, 2015, 10:48:00 am by AceSV »
Logged
Quote
could God in fact send a kea to steal Excalibur and thereby usurp the throne of the Britons? 
Furry Fortress 3 The third saga unfurls.  Now with Ninja Frogs and Dogfish Pirates.

Floppypig

  • Bay Watcher
  • looses a roaring laughter, fell and terrible!
    • View Profile
Re: Better weapon mechanics?
« Reply #8 on: February 21, 2015, 11:08:51 am »

Here's some imput take a look at the runequest combat system here's a bit from it " In the converse situation where the fighters
are engaged at the Reach of the shorter
weapon, the user of the longer weapon will
find he cannot parry the attacks of the shorter.
The user of the longer weapon can
still attack with the haft or hilt of his now
encroached weapon, but its efficacy is significantly
reduced. In this circumstance the
weapon’s Size is reduced as many steps as the
difference between the two weapons’ Reach,
and only inflicts 1d3+1 damage due to the
necessity of striking with the haft, pommel,
guard from an awkwardly cramped position.
At this point the best option for the user
of the longer weapon is to reopen the range
between them, draw a shorter backup weapon,
defend themselves with their Unarmed skill,
or hope to win a useful Special Effect. In a
last ditch situation the encroached fighter can
attempt to Evade instead."
Logged
“All that is gold does not glitter,
Not all those who wander are lost;
The old that is strong does not wither,
Deep roots are not reached by the frost.

Insanegame27

  • Bay Watcher
  • Now versio- I mean, age 18. Honestly not an AI.
    • View Profile
    • Steam ID
Re: Better weapon mechanics?
« Reply #9 on: February 21, 2015, 06:49:15 pm »

Reach Weapons
Lance (spear-like polearm)
Flail (mace-like polearm)
Halberd (axe-like polearm)

a flail is a mace head on a chain attached to a handle. NOT a polearm
Logged
Power/metagaming RL since Birth/Born to do it.
Quote from: Second Amendment
A militia cannot function properly without arms, therefore the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
The military cannot function without tanks and warplanes, therefore the right of the people to keep and bear tanks and warplanes, shall not be infringed.
The military cannot function without ICBMs, therefore the right of the people to keep and bear ICBMs, shall not be infringed.

Dyret

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Better weapon mechanics?
« Reply #10 on: February 21, 2015, 07:27:08 pm »

Yeah, there were two-handed flails, but I don't think they ever reached polearm length or reach.
Logged

AceSV

  • Bay Watcher
  • [SUPER_VILLAIN]
    • View Profile
Re: Better weapon mechanics?
« Reply #11 on: February 22, 2015, 07:13:34 am »

Reach Weapons
Lance (spear-like polearm)
Flail (mace-like polearm)
Halberd (axe-like polearm)

a flail is a mace head on a chain attached to a handle. NOT a polearm

Huh, I agree, but what was I thinking?  I probably meant weapons like the meteor hammer, kusarigama, peasant flail or farming flail and just shortened them to "flail". 
Logged
Quote
could God in fact send a kea to steal Excalibur and thereby usurp the throne of the Britons? 
Furry Fortress 3 The third saga unfurls.  Now with Ninja Frogs and Dogfish Pirates.