Print

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

[zx.pr0jk#]

tl;dr | Looking for a concise damage algorithm weapons use, and how it fills in gap in the raws. Barring that, a pieced together approximation will have to suffice.

How is damage* calculated if a weapon is made from a non-traditional material lacking relevant tags in the raws? Highwood Long Swords, Garnet Battle axes, Hematite Whips.

All traditional weapon materials possess the needed tags to vaguely calculate penetration, impact force, and sharpness, but things like wood and stone, which both can be made into weapons either by other civilizations or obsidian, do not have the appropriate information. One person mentioned ages ago that these materials, if made into actual weapons, have the potential to be duller than the dullest material or sharper than the sharpest material because of this deficiency. Afterall, such is the nature of an undefined variable.

Does anyone know more confidently how these absurd weapons get their damage potential resolved? I've had cut gem axes in the past, but they were theorized to be as useless as weapons since their density, even at the hardest, was half that of a relevant metal. Do they inherit the needed tags from a default object? I'd assume that would need to be the case otherwise the wild values could cause reality to unmake itself every time an elf attacks something.

I also can't find the raws for bones on the wiki. Are these values adjusted by which creature's bones they belong? I haven't checked the actual raws myself yet, just wanted to know if they aren't there for a reason before I go searching.

*I use this word loosely to describe the weapons effectiveness before comparing it against an armor type.

[Sutremaine]

All traditional weapon materials possess the needed tags to vaguely calculate penetration, impact force, and sharpness, but things like wood and stone, which both can be made into weapons either by other civilizations or obsidian, do not have the appropriate information.

material_template_default.txt

[zx.pr0jk#]

Thank you very much. That certainly takes me a step closer to what I need.

[katana]

Are gem weapons still possible?

[AutomataKittay]

http://dwarffortresswiki.org/index.php/Weapon#Material

This can help with working out relative efficiency. I think there've been a couple threads, with the latest bolt testing thread and a couple over in modding forum, could help with some work.

Rule of thumb of non-weapon metal stuffs not being as good as weapon metal stuff's pretty much it. I think most gems aren't even as hard or have as good physical properties as metal, so it'd not be too effective. However weird artifact weapons still worth it as weapon trap value boosters

One exception seem to be material density, particularly for blunt weapons, though blunt weapons are generally not too good for rapid kills.

[zx.pr0jk#]

In retrospect, I believe what I'm asking has been addressed before whenever describing the combat in dwarf fortress. Not sure why it never occurred to me until now. I believe the process is to run some form of one dimensional collision, and then run some formula for (if its edged)penetration depth using the Newtons derived from the collision equation. Which seems obvious and silly to ask now.

Then run a counter formula for armor resilience and compare the figures. If the blunt attack is far favored to the resilience and the creature's size, it will propel the defender. Within a certain bound does damage, and beneath a certain bound will bounce off. If the attack is edged and far favored sever the limb, cause damage, or bounce off respectively.

I guess the specifics rest on the size and strength of the attacker, size of the defender, and how armor value relates to resilience. Pretty much got everything I needed from the second post. Thanks again.

Are gem weapons still possible?

Assuming your home civilization has no access to trees, they can craft training weapons from gems, and presumably other things. At least this was true of the last version and may have been corrected since.