Print

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

[Urist Da Vinci]

...

I don't even...A wooden bolt shatters a hole using blunt force but still manages to stay sharp and cut the dwarf underneath? what? Maybe I'm just misunderstanding real life/DF mechanics, but that seems really weird. It seems blunt force acts like a bullet instead of actual blunt force?

The last time I checked, blunt force was spread over an area while penetrating/cutting force was concentrated.

Read this part of the wiki, plus the flowchart on the right: http://dwarffortresswiki.org/index.php/DF2012:Material_science#Effects_on_Combat or read this thread: http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=116151.0

Weapons in DF challenge each layer of armor/tissue one at a time, losing some momentum as each layer is defeated. The contact area over which the blunt force is spread is limited by the contact area of the weapon and that of the body part being struck (body parts have hidden calculated contact areas). If an edged weapon can't cut an armor material due to not having high enough shear properties, but the edged weapon has more than enough momentum to shatter the armor, it will have the opportunity to use its edged properties against the layer beneath the shattered armor. Damage to weapons and armor isn't tracked by the game, so armor in DF is functionally identical to instantly regenerating metal skin. Flexible armor (mail) or weak blunt attacks can lead to blunt damage being passed to lower layers because the armor is not shattered.

There is also a check to see if the bolt breaks when hitting the armor, and this check depends on the bolt material's impact strength and the armor's density. So wood bolts break on steel armor, but not when hitting adamantine.

[Centigrade]

Maestro Da Vinci,

Could you confirm the effectiveness of the non-metal clothing materials and whether they have any effect on optimal armour layering?

Right now from what has been said in the thread I believe the optimal setup is to use all adamantine, except a steel breastplate, and plant fiber cloth for extra layers. Yes?

[KroganElite]

Ok that clears it up for me, but it still seems weird how those mechanics are handled.

edit: also the links you posted seem to only refer to bolts? I'm guessing weapons are handled the same way too? It just seems odd that they mention only bolts.

edit2: seems by that logic, steel mail is also preferred than adamantine mail since you said it never breaks on adamantine. So really...adamantine is only useful for edged weapons...Seems to be getting less and less useful.

edit3: looked at adamantine and steel raws again. Adamantine has much higher fracture and bending yeilds. That doesn't explain how candy armor can be shattered while steel doesn't...If the game doesn't make use of those values, why include them in the first place...It just serves to confuse people trying to understand game mechanics by looking at how it works in real life.

edit4: I can't wait for all those values to actually be used in combat calculations. It seems that would bring adamantine to the top and actually be worth using for armor and maybe even bolts.

[Centigrade]

Why do you want adamantine to be the best at literally everything? It is already eight times more valuable than any other material, which makes it the best for wealth generation; and, it is already ten times sharper than any other metal, which makes it the best for quickly killing enemies with battle axes or spears. What is so wrong with steel being a better material for armour, and silver being a better material for blunt weapons?

[KroganElite]

Why do you want adamantine to be the best at literally everything? It is already eight times more valuable than any other material, which makes it the best for wealth generation; and, it is already ten times sharper than any other metal, which makes it the best for quickly killing enemies with battle axes or spears. What is so wrong with steel being a better material for armour, and silver being a better material for blunt weapons?

Well for one, because of the possible dangers!FUN! it comes with. Another would be the relative scarcity and finiteness(You can always trade for all other metals). It just doesn't fit in with all the other metals. Steel is second best in everything, iron/bronze is third best in everything, etc. Yes it increases wealth, but I can already generate wealth with relative ease like I'm growing plump helmets or breeding cats. Bottom line, it just doesn't seem worth it. Is it too much to ask to have full candy equipment and it being actually effective? For all the trouble going through to get it, it sure is useful being decorative cabochons on a scepter.

[Mr S]

The issue with wooden arrows passing through adamantine armor and still doing damage has to do with a couple of outstanding "features" with arms and armor in game.  First, wear is never considered.  The armor has invisible holes punched through it for the arrows that never affect it again, and the arrows, upon successfully passing through, are still the same rail gun ammo that left the craft table pencil sharpener.

The differences in blunt force damage for different materials, however DOES correlate fairly well to RL physics.  The Iron breastplate has more mass than the Adamantine breastplate.  This is because the density of Iron is much higher, but the volume of material used is the same.  DF does not consider plastic deformation vs. elastic deformations.  That would still make Iron a good choice vs. a perfectly rigid material as it could "bounce back" from a hit, to a certain extent.  But we'll disregard that, as it is not modeled.  What IS considered, however, is calculations involving the mass of the armor layer.  The combat mechanic does a sort of energy moment calculation using this.  Since the mass of Iron is high, its moment is high, more of the energy of the striking blunt instrument is used to overcome the moment of the armor piece resulting is less energy being absorbed by the soft, blood and vomit filled bag of beard hair within.

Extreme Example:

Setup:
1 Regulation Softball, placed atop a T-ball post
1 Ceramic Ball, same VOLUME as the Softball, placed atop a T-ball post
1 Steel Ball, same VOLUME as the Softball, placed atop a T-ball post
3 Ash Softball Bats
1 Force measurement guage affixed to a vertical plate, 2 ft. distant, horizontally, from target objects above

Process:
Strike each of the target objects with one of the bats with equal force.  Observe the force applied at the force measuring guage by the target object when it collides.

HypothesisTheory:
The force imparted at the force measurement guage by Ceramic Ball will be greater than that of the Regulation Softball which will in turn be greater than that applied by the Steel Ball.  This assumes that all test objects survive the test process.

Edit: Corrected terminology

[Centigrade]

That is a hypothesis, not a theory.

[Mr S]

Thanks, I was drawing a complete brain fart for the proper word.  I'll edit it presently.

[Urist Da Vinci]

Maestro Da Vinci,

Could you confirm the effectiveness of the non-metal clothing materials and whether they have any effect on optimal armour layering?

Right now from what has been said in the thread I believe the optimal setup is to use all adamantine, except a steel breastplate, and plant fiber cloth for extra layers. Yes?

Just looking at raw values, silk is probably the best cloth. The extra weight of the plant fiber cloth probably isn't providing any benefit. That said, the tokens on "clothing" items as opposed to armor items appear to let weapons easily penetrate the clothing. There was a bug back in 0.31.1 where wild animals couldn't hurt people behind silk cloaks because the cloaks were being treated as a solid, stiff layer of silk.

Ok that clears it up for me, but it still seems weird how those mechanics are handled.

edit: also the links you posted seem to only refer to bolts? I'm guessing weapons are handled the same way too? It just seems odd that they mention only bolts.

edit2: seems by that logic, steel mail is also preferred than adamantine mail since you said it never breaks on adamantine. So really...adamantine is only useful for edged weapons...Seems to be getting less and less useful.

edit3: looked at adamantine and steel raws again. Adamantine has much higher fracture and bending yeilds. That doesn't explain how candy armor can be shattered while steel doesn't...If the game doesn't make use of those values, why include them in the first place...It just serves to confuse people trying to understand game mechanics by looking at how it works in real life.

edit4: I can't wait for all those values to actually be used in combat calculations. It seems that would bring adamantine to the top and actually be worth using for armor and maybe even bolts.

We only tested bolts. Melee weapons probably follow similar logic, but there are extra combat variables to consider, so melee combat can be more complex.

Adamantine is stronger than steel against blunt attacks that aren't removed by the "weapon breaks" check. The game does use those values.

...  DF does not consider plastic deformation vs. elastic deformations.  ...

Just a minor note - DF does consider plastic vs elastic. Purely elastic deformations tend to lead to at most bruising under the layer, whereas plastic deformations in the layer will give it the "dented" description if it is a tissue. Technically armor can be dented, but it instantly heals back to normal before the next strike hits.

[Mr S]

Good to know.  Thanks.

[Centigrade]

So it's looking like you would want adamantine for everything but the breastplate, and silk for any non-armour pieces?

[DWC]

So it's looking like you would want adamantine for everything but the breastplate, and silk for any non-armour pieces?

Gauntlets, greaves, helms and high boots are also all rigid plate armor pieces like the breastplate, so I'd say those should all be steel too.

If you wanted to be really optimal, you might use steel for everything but chain shirts and use adamantine clothing. Or at least a few adamantine cloaks.

I'd still hypothesize that plant fiber is somewhat superior to silk, because the increased density and weight is more important for the kinds of weaker attacks that clothing can stop, has more of a cushion effect absorbs the energy of against attacks converted to blunt damage, from silver or wooden weapons and copper large daggers, animal attacks, ect. The difference between cloth types is probably too marginal to really matter anyways, however, but some clothing protection is significantly better then being naked against lower-end attacks.

[KroganElite]

derp. Double posted again. Is there a way to delete this?

[KroganElite]

We only tested bolts. Melee weapons probably follow similar logic, but there are extra combat variables to consider, so melee combat can be more complex.

A good scientist never assumes, they test and test until they find the actual answer. It's fine to have hypothesis but taking it as fact isn't good.

The issue with wooden arrows passing through adamantine armor and still doing damage has to do with a couple of outstanding "features" with arms and armor in game.  First, wear is never considered.  The armor has invisible holes punched through it for the arrows that never affect it again, and the arrows, upon successfully passing through, are still the same rail gun ammo that left the craft table pencil sharpener.

The differences in blunt force damage for different materials, however DOES correlate fairly well to RL physics.  The Iron breastplate has more mass than the Adamantine breastplate.  This is because the density of Iron is much higher, but the volume of material used is the same.  DF does not consider plastic deformation vs. elastic deformations.  That would still make Iron a good choice vs. a perfectly rigid material as it could "bounce back" from a hit, to a certain extent.  But we'll disregard that, as it is not modeled.  What IS considered, however, is calculations involving the mass of the armor layer.  The combat mechanic does a sort of energy moment calculation using this.  Since the mass of Iron is high, its moment is high, more of the energy of the striking blunt instrument is used to overcome the moment of the armor piece resulting is less energy being absorbed by the soft, blood and vomit filled bag of beard hair within.

Extreme Example:

Setup:
1 Regulation Softball, placed atop a T-ball post
1 Ceramic Ball, same VOLUME as the Softball, placed atop a T-ball post
1 Steel Ball, same VOLUME as the Softball, placed atop a T-ball post
3 Ash Softball Bats
1 Force measurement guage affixed to a vertical plate, 2 ft. distant, horizontally, from target objects above

Process:
Strike each of the target objects with one of the bats with equal force.  Observe the force applied at the force measuring guage by the target object when it collides.

HypothesisTheory:
The force imparted at the force measurement guage by Ceramic Ball will be greater than that of the Regulation Softball which will in turn be greater than that applied by the Steel Ball.  This assumes that all test objects survive the test process.

Edit: Corrected terminology

What about the law of conservation of energy? Yes the initial amount of force required to overcome inertia is greater, but as long as that required force is reached, the force is retained.

Values not exact, just example:
A regulation softball(200g) with an acceleration of 10m/s^2. F=ma . 2 Newtons= (0.2kg)(10m/s^2)
A steel ball(800g) with an acceleration of 2.5m/s^2. F=ma. 2 Newtons = (0.8kg)(2.5m/s^2)

The force applied to both balls is 2 newtons. Taking into account conservation of energy, yes they have different mass and acceleration, but the energy remains the same. Again, I haven't taken a physics class in ages, but i'm pretty sure that's right. Physics majors out there, feel free to correct me.

[Mr S]

That's true.  I'm definately misusing the word "force" to express what I mean toward the end of that explaination.  I should come right out and say "trauma".

Force is defined, as we've covered, as:

F=ma

Therefore, the amount of Force being applied is the same.  HOWEVER, the way that the underlying tissues result to that varies because of things such as elasticity, pressure, knock-back, etc.

What I'm getting at is this.  If you are hit in the stomach by a 10000 lb steel block from the front at 1 ft/s, you'd get bumped out of the way, but not hurt (let's assume you're not backed against a concrete wall, for safety sake).  If you got hit in the stomach by a 1 oz. steel block from the front at 160000 ft/s, most of your torso would vaporize through the exit wound.  The objects would have had the same amount of FORCE, but would impart wildly different amounts of TRAUMA.  Sadly, however, I am not a kineseologist and am lacking in terms to accurately define this situation.  As usual YMMV.