Print

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

[Fedor]

[Savok]

...I don't really get the point.

[Kjoery]

quote:Originally posted by Savok:
<STRONG>...I don't really get the point.</STRONG>

Sarcasm is the point.

[ September 21, 2007: Message edited by: Kjoery ]

[John Johnston]

The elephants got the point(s).

[Turgid Bolk]

Not to spoil the funneh, but did you create a new world after changing the raws? I don't think it counts otherwise, could be wrong though.

[Jeon]

Changing the attributes of most all objects do not need a new world.  Only things made at world creation need a new world (new plants, new animals, new civs, civ changes, etc).

And the way the blood in the screenshot looks the damage could be set to like 10 and the results would have been the same since arrows/bolts are so lethal due to internal damage and what you see there is lots of bleeding.

[BurnedToast]

If you really want to make ranged weapons not so strong, set them to blunt damage.

No, it does not make sense, but it stops all the insane internal damage that makes them really, really deadly.

[Tamren]

yeah, if armour did more to mitigate missile damage then this wouldnt be a problem.

Setting crits to 0 helps a *bit*. Just reducing the damage wont help much because the crits will booste it to levels that pierce any armour, then once inside the damage goes right to the organs.

[Jeon]

I'll have to mess around with them a bit more but last time I changed around bolts/arrows all I could accomplish was changing them to either sever off body parts, shatter body parts, or barely touch you while destroying all of your internal organs.

[Tormy]

Toady should balance ranged weaponry. It shouldnt take too much time for him.

[Albert the Absentminded]

Armor should subtract before the critical multiplier is applied to damage, but after any piercing reduction(however that's done) is applied to armor effectiveness.

-Albert

[Tamren]

the problem with the armour is that its a straight reduction. If it was a % modifyer it would be less of a problem but still not quite good enough. Dflection mechanics would make it perfect, but such things are hard to randomize.

In essense, the strength, material and angle of the hit would control how much damage makes it through your armour. Plate armour in general is nearly immune to most arrows without direct penetrating hits. And yet in the game, the defence granted by even adamantine plate is not enough to keep arrows out of your spleen  

[Tormy]

Anyways what is the chance for a critical with a ranged weapon? Imho even the most skilled ranged units should have max 10% crit chance...and the rate of fire must be much much slower also! I dont think that its good to have machinegunner ranged units in DF.

[Merlon]

There's a rather simple solution to all theese problems. Make the ranged weapons have to be reloaded rather than just present to shoot bolts/arrows. The reload action could have it's own speedrating depending on the ranged weapon.

This way the ranged weapons would have different strenghts and weaknesses and be much more unique. Ie:

The bow would not be able to stay loaded for long (depending on strenght?), but be fairly rapid firing once it gets going. Useful for lots of lightly armoured opponents, but would struggle against well crafted plate armour.

The crossbow would be able to stay loaded ready to fire, but take ages to reload. Its bolts should be able to pierce plate easier than the bow however.

Combine this with a slight revisit of the woundsystem so that a single bolt fired at the torso of a person doesn't always take out both lungs, the spine, the heart and even an eye on the same shot, and there wouldn't be as many complaints on the issue.

[Aquillion]

Honestly, though, the damage for ranged weapons is pretty realistic (although, as noted above, reloading might not be).  Crossbows and longbows do really, really nasty things to people (and elephants).