Print

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

[Idiom]

Crossbows were overpowered in RL. They should fire slower though.
[/thread]

Now move along to the next suggestion.

[Neonivek]

Yes but you were more likely to survive a Crossbow bolt then a giant axe held by a legendary superhuman if you had no armor in real life

Crossbows even if they fire slower... take the real life overpoweredness... Tosses it out the window... and says "You think your THAT overpowered?"

Afterall, Crossbows didn't ignore armor... Crossbows didn't home in on organs... blaw blaw blaw... repeat repeat repeat

People are confusing the ability to... with absolute power...
1) Yes Crossbows could peirce Armor... Yes Crossbows did improve... But Yes Armor was effective... and Yes Armor improved as well.
2) Yes Crossbows could kill you... However Crossbows weren't more deadly the a lot of other weapons if the hit went through

[Tormy]

Actually it wouldnt be hard to balance ranged combat.

1. Rate of Fire must be toned down a lot for bows and for xbows also.
2. Damage is absolutely ok for ranged weapons.
3. Shields need to have an important role vs. ranged weapons. Tower shields for example should deflect at least 65% of the incoming arrows & bolts.

No we established that Damage is too powerful for Ranged weapons... Can we go beyond Damage arguements now?

I dont think that ranged weps have OP dmg. The problem is the rate of fire, and that shields aint working properly vs. missiles. If we tone down the RoF + damage also + make shields useful vs. missiles...probably ranged weapons will be useless.
Also if you think a bit...if 1 arrow pierces the [upper] body of a human sized creature [example his chest], its pretty much game over. Ranged weapons must be as realistic as possible. The problem is that 1 missile can kill a megabeast also as it is now. That must be balanced, and not the damage itself.

[irmo]

Also, High Boots, Plate, and high level armour should be bad against Ranging. Best Protection is Chain Armour Plus maybe metal Trousers.

Um, what? Chain armor is not very effective against arrows--it's made mostly of holes.

The best defense, by far, is a shield. (And no, you don't "block the arrows". It's a piece of cover that you can carry around and position between yourself and the shooter. It makes you a smaller target.) After that, there's plate, which is not bad.

After that, yeah, leather or something similar to slow down the arrow and make the wound less serious, but it's still going to penetrate. (I've read that the Mongols wore silk under their armor, which wouldn't stop an arrow but would trap it and keep it from splintering inside the body, making removal easier.)

[Idiom]

Um, what? Chain armor is not very effective against arrows--it's made mostly of holes.

Depends on the arrow head I should think.

[Chthonic]

I think ROF is the main problem, with shields a far second.  Maybe make it so that crossbows can't reload or fire on the move.  Take those away and add some other elements for opponents--for example, siege engines to break fortifications and cavalry charges in the open--and the playing field will level a bit. 

As far as lethality goes . . . crossbows are pretty lethal.  So are axes and swords and spears . . . combat in dwarf fortress is brutal and splattery no matter the instrument, and I don't think that should change.

[Neonivek]

Also, High Boots, Plate, and high level armour should be bad against Ranging. Best Protection is Chain Armour Plus maybe metal Trousers.

Um, what? Chain armor is not very effective against arrows--it's made mostly of holes.

The best defense, by far, is a shield. (And no, you don't "block the arrows". It's a piece of cover that you can carry around and position between yourself and the shooter. It makes you a smaller target.) After that, there's plate, which is not bad.

After that, yeah, leather or something similar to slow down the arrow and make the wound less serious, but it's still going to penetrate. (I've read that the Mongols wore silk under their armor, which wouldn't stop an arrow but would trap it and keep it from splintering inside the body, making removal easier.)

Chainmail is a great defense against Arrows in real life at the time.

if 1 arrow pierces the [upper] body of a human sized creature [example his chest], its pretty much game over

Ignoring it being blocked by their bones, missing an organ, Minor internal damage, or being stopped short by armor.

combat in dwarf fortress is brutal and splattery no matter the instrument, and I don't think that should change

The problem is that Crossbows and Bows are a lot more Brutal and Splattery then a lot of other weapons even without its rate of fire and will STILL be capable of killing Superman. The only reason Spears don't top Crossbows and Bows is because they get stuck like CRAZY and do less damage. Axes simply don't top bows. (Ive never got a Superfluous Arrow hit... The least damaging hit I ever recieved was it breaking my wrist)

Only Siege weapons top them in terms of just raw damage and they are on their own level outside of combat. (I do consider them to do too much... However that is only because I kinda picture them as the first line of defense against Megabeasts... in which they would just plain decimate one)

[motorbitch]

all depends on skil.
with higher skills, at last swords never stuck and all slashing weapons will cut off a  limb with (almost) every single strike. if its a hit into the upper or lower body or head, its alwas a  instant kill.
i think cb damage will not scale up with skill and never cut of limbs, so it balances much better at high training levels.

[Paul]

Crossbows at lowish skill aren't quite so overpowered, the firing rate is much more reasonable. All weapons are super fast at high skill, send a legendary swordsman into a fight and within 3 seconds he's cut 6 goblins to pieces, with heads hands legs and arms flying everywhere.

As for balancing crossbows, one big thing right now is that they can be used with a shield due to the settings in the raws. They are set to [TWO_HANDED:0], which means that no matter what size character uses them they are one handed weapons. If you set them to [TWO_HANDED:10] then everyone must use them two handed. This goes for bows and crossbows. Making them use both hands just makes much more sense than currently, and the inability to carry a shield is a big balancing factor for them. Right now shields make you practically invincible with good skill, so 2 handed ranged weapons would require you to seriously sacrifice defense. And when the enemies get to you or if you get fired upon by enemy archers you might wish you had a shield and sword instead.

[Neonivek]

Well the ability to block without a shield DOES need improvements...

Anyhow... as for Crossbows and Shields...

Some Crossbowmen did carry shields (even Tower Shields), in fact I am specifically thinking of the Pavise Crossbowmen (Dang they are awsome!) however generally speaking they used them while reloading or when to take blows when not firing.

So perhaps there should be a window of opportunity where they don't get the benefit of their shield such as after they fired an arrow.

[Paul]

The pavise wasn't used like a DF shield, though. It was basically a mobile barricade. They put it up in front of them before the battle started and used it as cover, mostly to reload since you're completely vulnerable while reloading a crossbow. They didn't actively block with it or anything, just hid behind it. They actually used them to build barricades in some cases. AKA "Pavisade."

In DF terms, you can do a similar thing with fortifications. Possibly fortifications could be improved, and crossbows/bows could be made 2 handed. This way they're great defensively, but in an open area you might wish you had a shield.

The pavise is a nice tool, but it was big enough to completely hide beyond while you reload - a bit too large to be running around with. You could carry it with you, but it'd slow you down, and it would take a moment to set it back up again. If this was implemented not only would it need to slow you down, it would need at least some deployment time before they could fire and then have them immobile until they either abandon it or pick it back up.

[vanarbulax]

Crossbows:
+Can be used by Urist Mcstupid (Point and shoot)
+Can be used by the fairly weak
+Accurate in short range
+Capability to pierce armour if hit at the right angle and distance

-Long reload times (Winding it back)
-Mechanisms unreliable (Chance of something jamming)
-Inaccurate at long distance
-Heavy
-Damaged much more easily

Longbows (Presumably the elves would make some damn good bows):
+Light
+Very accurate even at long range
+More power and better piercing power
+Fast firing
+More sturdy and reliable

-Almost all advantages relied on skill
-Needs a large amount of strength to pull back and hold bow
-Lots of training needed

This is depending on the time period, obviously crossbows improved but this is generally the state of affairs in the 100 years war 1337-1453 which seems to be around the technology of the time DF was set in (This is also a war where cannons and early guns were trialed)

So crossbows only real advantage is that Urist Schmo can use them. So what makes sense is for crossbows to have a very slow RoF which can only be improved slightly by higher skill (It still takes lots of time to wind up). It should be one of the weakest weapons on unarmoured (Sure you might hurt me if you hit me near a vital organ but if I swing a sword through you I'll rip the whole organ out). It should be one of the easiest wounds to recover from (Unless the bolts/arrows have been specifically designed to stick. Crossbows should be able to be wielded by anyone. They should have a chance of jamming or breaking. They should have a chance of piercing plate at short range but only at short range (within 3-4 squares maybe) and have a chance at getting stuck in chain mail in a similar way to firing through fortifications.

Longbows should be more powerful in almost all aspects but only in the hands of an experience user (anything below skilled should have the user being highly inaccurate). They should have a fairly long range with diminishing accuracy over distance. They should be limited to strong and tall creatures. They should need skill to make but cheap (well cut wood instead of cheaply made mechanisms). They should have a RoF highly dependent on skill level.

Most crossbow bolts over a distance should glance off plate unless they get lucky at hit a vital spot (gaps in the armour). Arrows should glance off armour at long distances, be able to hit weakpoints at medium distance and pierce at short distance. Both bolts and arrows should have a high chance to knock over but not damage armour wearers because of the force behind the projectile. Shields should relatively affective (heighten the probability of a hot glancing off) at long and medium ranges but should be able to be shot past at close range (Unless they are tower shields)

[motorbitch]

If you set them to [TWO_HANDED:10] then everyone must use them two handed

will this still work after wolrdgen or do i have to start a new world for this?

[Paul]

I believe it works after worldgen.

Note that due to the way the game handles 2 handed weapons, you need to make sure that you assign the dwarf to use 2 hands if you give them a 2 handed weapon. If you don't they'll be unable to pick it up.

To assign them to use 2 hands you just click the little #1 and change it to #2. This is the same thing that makes them carry 2 weapons for 1h weps, but for 2h ones it's required to carry one. If you don't they'll be stuck in a loop trying to pickup equipment but not able to.

[irmo]

Longbows (Presumably the elves would make some damn good bows):
+Light
+Very accurate even at long range
+More power and better piercing power
+Fast firing
+More sturdy and reliable

-Almost all advantages relied on skill
-Needs a large amount of strength to pull back and hold bow
-Lots of training needed

-Can't be used by dwarves, because they're too short.