Print

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

[Proteus]

Well, if I remember correctly there were several strength...
which also used different mechanisms to cock their string.

Weaker models, where the string could be drawn by hand or some kind of lewer (and therefore had faster reloading times)
and stronger crosbows like the Arbaleste, which had to use a winch to get cocked (therefore much slower reloading times).

Would nice if Toady would introduce this
(as well as, of course, the rather fast reloading times for bow & arrow

[bombzero]

ah you mean like the difference between hand crossbows, (small, cocked back by a small handcrank, could be fired while prone/crouched)

and larger crossbows/arbalestes (large, had to be placed on ground then have the wire pulled back by a 2 handed crank similar to a bicycle's pedals, could only be fired standing.)


i think DF crossbows are more towards the large size judging by reload times.

[Proteus]

Yep, exactly.

So, what about the reloading times of bows vs. crossbows in DF ...
if I understand it correctly in this thread bows and crossbows take about the same time to load?
(I for my part havenīt used them in adventure mode till now)

Would be strange, considering the fact that bows should be much faster than crossbows
(especially, several times fastern than an arbaleste)

[Montague]

I don't even think bows should have a reloading time, since you only pull back the string when you are about to fire it, you don't notch an arrow, pull the string back and run around the battlefield like that. Having the weapon ready to fire instantly it's one of the benefits of a crossbow over a traditional bow.

A bow's 'reload time' would occur before you fire and I'm not sure how that would work with the game mechanics the way they are.

[tfaal]

It would require a new game mechanic, but not an impossible one. The main problem is in targeting; if you shoot for a creature's square, and it takes a palpable amount of time to draw the bowstring, then a creature may have moved from its square by the time you shoot. Perhaps three actions are in order; one to unquiver and nock a new arrow, which can be kept in that state for however long you desire, one to draw the bowstring, and a final, instantaneous action to loose the arrow at a target of your choice. As long as these actions were done in order, there could be any amount of delay in between, but keeping a bowstring drawn would take a *ton* of endurance, and should realistically give an accuracy penalty.

On an unrelated note, I'm rather skeptical about the way DF handles pain; from what I understand, the body is generally quite cooperative about doing away with pain in life-or-death scenarios. The reports of people not feeling pain until the end of a stressful situation seem to outnumber those to the contrary. In one case, which you'll have to take as a mere anecdote, a hiker with two broken legs felt next to no pain at all as she dragged herself through the wilderness until the moment of her rescue.

[Proteus]

In would add that the second action (drawing the bowstring and aiming) is easily interrupted by successful enemy attacks
which might (with a high probability) cause the arrow to get released in a random direction

[Montague]

To further complicate matters, realistically you can notch and draw a bowstring while walking or trotting along only stopping to aim and release the arrow.

[truckman1]

What about composite bows? I don't know much about bows or crossbows, but shouldn't those be somehow addressed in the game?


Also on an entirely different note,MY ADVENTURER'S HAIR IS FALLING OUT   

I started with my golden blonde hair being very long, and now it is merely sparse. Is this related to stats? Also, my adventurer is female, so this can't be male pattern baldness.

[Moddan]

I firmly believe that a hand-spanned crossbow launched copper bolt can not defeat an iron breastplate-maille(x2) armor combination and then still has enough power and penetration for a mortal injury. Windlass or cranequin crossbows with steel bows maybe, but they would take a lot longer to reload than the DF crossbows.

[miauw62]

ah you mean like the difference between hand crossbows, (small, cocked back by a small handcrank, could be fired while prone/crouched)

and larger crossbows/arbalestes (large, had to be placed on ground then have the wire pulled back by a 2 handed crank similar to a bicycle's pedals, could only be fired standing.)


i think DF crossbows are more towards the large size judging by reload times.

Who needs crossbows? i just throw the damn arrows, and i still get one-shot-one-kill headshots.

[dirty foot]

I firmly believe that a hand-spanned crossbow launched copper bolt can not defeat an iron breastplate-maille(x2) armor combination and then still has enough power and penetration for a mortal injury. Windlass or cranequin crossbows with steel bows maybe, but they would take a lot longer to reload than the DF crossbows.

I've actually done a lot of research into this over the past year (entirely because of DF). There are all kinds of data out there that proves your hypothesis unlikely.

In terms of anecdotal evidence (purely to add flavor to this discussion), there's a video of a Lego crossbow penetrating 5 inches into ballistics gel from four feet, and 2 inches from 7 feet away. I know that doesn't seem like a lot, but we're talking a plastic crossbow, runner bands, and a plastic bolt.

A pistol crossbow (the one in question) ranged between 50 and 200 lbs pull weight. Longbows at the time were between 80 and 130 lbs.

This study (http://www.currentmiddleages.org/artsci/docs/Champ_Bane_Archery-Testing.pdf) was done against all kinds of armor, and with "110 lbs pull longbow at 250 yards." Many things were found out in the study:

1.  Full plate was less effective against arrows than a coat of plates. It wasn't discussed in the study, but I assume that had to do with the suit's ability to "give" a little.
2.  Jack coats were amazing at slowing arrows.
3.  Even at 250 yards and with 110 lbs of draw, some arrows could pierce plate. Steel plate.

I know this is a jump from this study to assume what a crossbow can do. However, most people that have looked into the difference between bows and crossbows can tell you that a crossbow wins in strength, while a longbow will win in speed. That said, a pistol crossbow runs at only a fraction of the cock speed of a much large crossbow, has a much lighter pull weight (some heavy crossbows have 600+ lbs), yet still has the same kill range and penetration as a longbow.

If anything, what this means is that there should be more types of bows and crossbows in the game. As it stands, crossbows aren't nearly as strong as they should be if we assume them to be heavy crossbows, OR they're not reloading nearly fast enough if we assume them to be pistol crossbows.

[Moddan]

Those tests show from my point of view that a combination of plate and 2(!) maille armors would never be defeated to a degree that leads to lethal penetration(copper arrow) - at least not by the (long)bow. I have done some research as well in a team for a Warband mod and we used the same research along with others. What always meets the eye to a sickening degree is that research done by longbow/crossbow enthusiasts lead to postive results for the weapons while studies done by armor guys favours the armors.So a grain of salt is always advisable.

I picture DF crossbows as hand-spanned versions and the bows as something between short and longbows. Those should have a lot of problems penetrating combined layers of metal armor - especially with lower level ammunition material. Which is not the case in DF at the moment. I agree that more diversification is needed so military archers/crossbowmen could use longbows/heavy crossbows that can at least defeat maille while kobolds have to use short bows that can't defeat metal armor unless they find a gap(face).

[Angel-of-Dusk]

In reality, its extremely unfair to even think of a crossbow in any likeness to a normal bow.

Crossbows are to bows in a way pistols are to bows. Crossbows have a helluvalot more punch.

I personally have a COMPOUND bow, which I understand is itself something different, but I can see that alone peircing steel plates easily. metal plate loses when something that has a really tiny point flies really freaking fast.

In contrast, if you have something about half an inch or greater, pistols and some rifles won't peirce it, unless its a large, FMJ round. But if you wear plate that thick, you won't be able to move.

[nenjin]

Which is why crossbows (among other technologies) pretty much killed the armored knight. They could have probably made armor capable of withstanding a crossbow bolt...but it would have been un-useable on foot or on horseback. And real knights were freaking conditioned to wear armor, so that speaks to the amount of material it would have taken.

[bombzero]

Which is why crossbows (among other technologies) pretty much killed the armored knight. They could have probably made armor capable of withstanding a crossbow bolt...but it would have been un-useable on foot or on horseback. And real knights were freaking conditioned to wear armor, so that speaks to the amount of material it would have taken.

their were several sqauds in the scottish army based around defeating heavy ranged weapons. scots had some big ass people so they field tested employing troops armored extremely well, turns out it worked. just took a few minutes for the soldiers to reach the marksmen.