Print

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

[Foggy Dweller]

I've lost count of lost heroes who tried to use bows and crossbows in a battle. I just wanted to make a single shot and then to start chopping enemies with a short-range weapon, so I didnt intend to reload a ranged weapon after making a shot. But the reloading process took place regardless of my following intensions. My suggestion is: could you make reloading optional or a separate command?

[Helari]

Using F to "fire" a ranged weapon a second time after it's been fired could reload it. Maybe a combat option to toggle automatic or manual reloading if you want to fire more arrows with fewer key presses and without the finer control.

[peasant cretin]

The delay after firing has little to do with reload. Whether you have 1 arrow or 10 arrows, the delay after firing will be the same for a dabbling bowman. Delay drops as skill increases. Delay is cut in half by the time a bowman is legendary, but that delay is still high.

Using melee as a comparison: a dabbling axe user and a legendary axelord can both run the fastest attack possible costing 4 ticks. The cost of firing one shot as a legendary bowman is likely around 40-50 ticks (an attacker will get to attack you 8 times: 32-80 ticks).

I guess the question is how many ticks should it cost a legendary bowman to fire 1 shot? How many should it cost a dabbler? Also, from the flavor perspective, is a bowman more like an English longbowman or more like Legolas with his elvish quickbow skill?

[Catmeat]

I was about to search for this or suggest it myself.
Sure loading a xbow and notching an arrow takes time to do for a begginer. Go get your bow now and try it.
But im sure a pro with smooth muscle memory could shave it down to 15 seconds or quicker. A compound bow may be slower.
Sure you would able to be charged and attacked a few times in the loading span. But you would recoil and stop loading to defend yourself, as of now using bows in adventure mode because of fort mode. just throw stuff because Toady prefers to add irelevant features over streamlining actual play

[Bumber]

I think the most important part is that it be interruptible. Who can keep reloading while they're being hacked at with a weapon? You should get the opportunity to dodge away or manual block when someone attempts an attack against you.

[Deboche]

Once the projectile is loose, it should only take as long as dropping the bow and drawing the other weapon, which can be on the floor next to you or stuck upright on soil.

[Trappington]

Just to give an idea of what the realistic reload times for a crossbow and a longbow are...

A crossbow generally takes about 30 to 60 seconds to reload, aim, and, fire.  On the other hand, a longbow takes around 10 seconds to do the same for an experienced marksman.

And just for some history on the subject...

Crossbows, as oddly as it sounds, were actually much more common than the longbow during medieval times, in spite of their long reload time.  This is due to the fact that crossbows were easier for the common soldier to load, aim, and fire, and since most armies during the middle ages were composed of irregular soldiers, it was simpler to equip troops with crossbows.  However, this did come at the cost of range, fire rate, and projectile penetration (most good suits of armor could withstand or deflect bolts at relatively long range).  Longbows were mainly used in warfare by the English and Welsh, and were wielded by professional bowmen.  As a result, though a lifetime of training was required, the English armies had at their disposal long-range, rapid-firing, high-penetration weapons that allowed for crushing defeats of their foes such as at Agincourt.

[GoblinCookie]

Just to give an idea of what the realistic reload times for a crossbow and a longbow are...

A crossbow generally takes about 30 to 60 seconds to reload, aim, and, fire.  On the other hand, a longbow takes around 10 seconds to do the same for an experienced marksman.

And just for some history on the subject...

Crossbows, as oddly as it sounds, were actually much more common than the longbow during medieval times, in spite of their long reload time.  This is due to the fact that crossbows were easier for the common soldier to load, aim, and fire, and since most armies during the middle ages were composed of irregular soldiers, it was simpler to equip troops with crossbows.  However, this did come at the cost of range, fire rate, and projectile penetration (most good suits of armor could withstand or deflect bolts at relatively long range).  Longbows were mainly used in warfare by the English and Welsh, and were wielded by professional bowmen.  As a result, though a lifetime of training was required, the English armies had at their disposal long-range, rapid-firing, high-penetration weapons that allowed for crushing defeats of their foes such as at Agincourt.

I was under the understand that the crossbow carries far more force than the longbow, penetrating armour better with better accuracy.  The only real advantage of the longbow is the sheer number of arrows that can be fired which on an open field battle is an important thing, since you can simply swarm the enemy with an endless barrage of arrows.  The reason that the crossbow was so prevalant was mostly because in many contexts (sieges for instance) ammunition is quite limited and the range is often short enough that accuracy and penetration is everything since if you miss or fail to bring down the opponant you may simply be skewered before you have the time to reload.  Relative reloading time does not matter so much if you can simply duck behind cover as soon as you have fired, something not an option on the open field. 

So really it is a question of sieges vs field battles, hence why the English despite their skilled longbows did not simply take over Europe as a result; having beaten their opponents on the battlefield with longbows said opponants simply fell back to fortified points where crossbows gave them the upper hand.  That said Agincourt was not due to the immense armour penetration capacities of longbows but more due to the weather, if the ground had been dry the archers would all have been slaughtered. 

[NW_Kohaku]

I was under the understand that the crossbow carries far more force than the longbow, penetrating armour better with better accuracy.  The only real advantage of the longbow is the sheer number of arrows that can be fired which on an open field battle is an important thing, since you can simply swarm the enemy with an endless barrage of arrows.  The reason that the crossbow was so prevalant was mostly because in many contexts (sieges for instance) ammunition is quite limited and the range is often short enough that accuracy and penetration is everything since if you miss or fail to bring down the opponant you may simply be skewered before you have the time to reload.  Relative reloading time does not matter so much if you can simply duck behind cover as soon as you have fired, something not an option on the open field.

Compare this hand lever crossbow to this windlass crossbow.  One takes seconds to pull, and the other takes a full minute or more.  One has a pull force barely above a child's throwing strength, the other can shove a bolt through a sheet of steel, at least at close range.  One was used on the field, the other solely for sieges when you could be assured of a battlement or pavise covering you.

The problem is that there is no differentiation in DF or in this thread between them.

Hand crossbows are dead simple to use, which is why the are given out to the conscripts, as Trappington mentioned, but the pull strength of those crossbows are too weak to penetrate any armor, so they were generally only effective against other hardly-armored conscript troops.

That said Agincourt was not due to the immense armour penetration capacities of longbows but more due to the weather, if the ground had been dry the archers would all have been slaughtered.

Incorrect.  It was due to cunning use of the land and the impatience of French commanders.  The English archers at Agincourt positioned their archers behind a dip in the land that was small enough to be nearly impossible to see from a distance so that the French would charge them not knowing it was there, but still large enough that a fully armored charger could not jump the drop without snapping its legs.  The French's own crossbow mercenaries, meanwhile, were forced to abandon their pavises to keep up with the French march to reach the battle, and when faced with longbow volleys and no cover when they had crossbows, they retreated.