Print

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

[Diablous]

I bet DF Release right before we hit 1000.

[Orkel]

What will come first, DF release or 1000 pages of this thread?

DF release. There's no way we'll be able to fill this with discussion so fast to get 220 more pages in under a month.

[Protactinium]

What will come first, DF release or 1000 pages of this thread?

DF release. There's no way we'll be able to fill this with discussion so fast to get 220 more pages in under a month.

WHAT

HAVE

YOU

DONE?



You have just issued a challenge.

[Sean Mirrsen]

I only see 467 pages. I am faithful to the old forums.

[Totaku]

I'm still riding on the release coming around late February to Early March based on what I have estimated, but I'm still mainly concerned about 40d# stuff since we haven't heard about it in the first couple of days. Because I'm still waiting to hear of 40d17's release which will be the first step towards the final component for the 40d merge.

Cause well, like I said, we're going to need enough time to test that and pick out any small errors down the road. Course if there is a change of plans for this then maybe I should ask a question about it. But I'll save that for later.

Yeah I may be paranoid, but it's mainly because I want to make sure png support will be avaliable with the new version's release. (being a Mac user who lacks a decent MS paint program)


Asides from that though, hearing about Threetoe's bug finds is rather amusing. At least we can say that the remaining test can be slowing being fixed.

[Footkerchief]

Is it just in Dwarf Mode, or will AI in adventure mode grow attachments to their weapons, and maybe try to pick them back up when lost?

If you meant adventurers themselves:

Is it possible for my adventurer to become attached to an item? Would it be possible for, say, a rock, to get it's own mention in legends that way?

Adventurers don't form attachments, because I think that's getting inside your head too much...  well, it's sort of a can of worms topic that has come up before.  In any case, this should be mitigated at some point by having objects be nameable by you at any time, which is your way of saying you are attached to the object.  It'll start recording events for them then, but it would still be able to judge the ones that are actually important by looking at the events, so you shouldn't be able to game the system this way, just get the information that you want.  It's one of those things that didn't make it in this time.

If you meant Adv. Mode NPCs, then I don't know. 

[jamoecw]

So, in essence, an adamantine axe would still be worse than a sword - the mass difference is negligible, and the axe can't stab.

in real life most longswords were weighted towards the hilt, while the axes were weighted towards the head, this meant that if both weighed the same the axe would have more force in a swing.  a falcion though was designed with weight towards the head, which meant it performed very much like an axe, it also wasn't good at stabbing as well, however there was a weapon called a falcata, which performed like a falcion but was also good at stabbing as well.

in game a harder material should hold a sharper edge, and thus improve the penetration value (i would guess), thus with long swords being falcatas, i would say that adamantine axes would perform very similar to adamantine long swords, which if hardness is taken into account would make them better than steel ones.  just look at ceramic knives over cheap steel ones, the ceramic cuts much easier than the less sharp steel ones, and thus the weight difference is more than made up.

That's a shortsword, with weight 30 vs the axe's 80(actually volume, as noted by Toady). The longsword is closer to it, at 70. Still, in adamantine's case, having an axe twice as large is like having a weapon consisting of two blocks of styrofoam instead of one - the weight difference is too small. The larger contact area also means less penetrating force, so less useful against armor.

I'll take high-quality steel instead of adamantine for all my dwarves' normal weapons, thank you. Arrows and armor, on the other hand, are perfect for the metal, especially when I mod in superheavy arbalests with a greater maximum fire velocity.

suit yourself, steel hammers would be better, and steel is most likely much easier to get.

Also, the SHOOT_FORCE and SHOOT_MAXVEL properties are interesting.  It might be cool to play around with weapons with a relatively low MAXVEL that need heavy projectiles to get the most out of the shot -- I think slings would fall into this category, since lead was the favored material for sling bullets (Xenophon apparently said lead bullets went twice as far as stone ones).

SO what's the ideal metal for ballista arrow heads?

it's edged, so adamantine, unless hardness doesn't play into it.  even more so if the weight comes from the log used, fully steel or lead would increase range if that is in effect (i don't think it is though).

[SirPenguin]

I bet DF Release right before we hit 1000.

I'd hope so for the sake of the people with the 50 posts/page setting...like myself

[Julius Clonkus]

I'm taking a bet on: The first post on the 1000th page WILL BE someone going "FUCK YES IT'S RELEASED".

For real now. I don't care what's coming first.

[Footkerchief]

What exactly do the impact/shear yield/fracture/elasticity in the material raws do?

The impact stuff had to do with blunt stuff and the shear stuff had to do with cutting stuff (which makes sense), according to an old raw preview, but it didn't go into detail.

I missed this question yesterday, but here's a bunch of quotes that go into much more detail:

Spoiler: long (click to show/hide)

http://www.bay12games.com/forum/index.php?topic=21498.msg368028;topicseen#msg368028

Does bludgeoning damage transfer?  (AKA is unlikely to do damage to skin or fat but will bruise muscle and break bone)

Yeah, though it's sort of cludged since there's a lot going on and I wasn't quite wrapping my head around everything.  Right now it'll check the impact elasticity (which I guess is actually impact yield strain or something) of the outer layer, and that'll let it bypass impact fracture after a certain point (while still allowing bruises and ruptures without the layer eg skin actually breaking) even if the force is high enough (as the layer is assumed to have made way for the moving object in a sense).  So if you make a michelin man style creature that's just a purely elastic material, a mace will be unable to harm it unless it has blood flow and can bruise and so on, while relatively inelastic materials like bone will fracture, even through skin.  Skin has a lesser shear fracture than bone on the other hand, so a knife will cut through skin more easily than bone.

So we'll also have armor acting like a pseudo tissue layer for purposes of transmitting bludgeoning damage and so forth?

If an iron sword strikes some steel plate armour and fails to penetrate it, and the damage is converted to bludgeoning (AKA the force of the blow is spread out over the plate), will bludgeoning damage be inflicted to the creature beneath the armour?

Additionally, if we're talking about a steel-skinned creature (Giant Magma Ants?) instead of a steel-armoured creature, is the force transfer handled differently?

Yeah, that's basically how it works.  The armor is all checked in order from outer to inner, then it gets at the tissue layers, altering the character of the attack as it goes.  There's a little left to do there, so it's not completely clear to me which way it'll go as far as how much force is transferred (or if it matters if it's skin or armor -- it doesn't currently, though yeah, there is a difference in real life).  It has to be enough that skin doesn't stop bones from being broken, but not so much that armor is useless against impacts, depending on the mats and nature of the armor/clothing.

Obviously, from what you've said, it will be difficult to cut through, say, steel with iron. But HOW difficult?

I've only whacked the poor dwarf with the hammer.  Haven't tested armor yet, and all of this is very number dependent.  Ideally, there would be a point to upgrading equipment without making the prior equipment worthless.  A softer material can break a harder one with impact force currently if it's swung hard enough, but it would suffer itself in the process (though not so much if it is against something that just isn't as massive as it is).  There's a sort of mid-range spot I'm missing right now with wedge effects (like a dull axe), but I'll get at that at some point -- I have a contact area variable in the attack definitions that should make the pressure increase, but there are many things to balance.  There's a sweet spot we'll find eventually as long as everything is placed correctly.  Skill is probably still going to be the most important thing, unless you've got really really tragic atts or something (you can't be strength 0 unless you wait for your atts to rust for a long, long time, but if you theoretically did get down there, you wouldn't be able to cause any damage at all).

How do the strength values for metals interact with their effectiveness as weapons and armor?

Currently shear yield/fracture is used to determine edge effectiveness and the effectiveness of a material against a cut.  Impact yield/fracture is used to determine resistance against impacts.  Solid density will increase weight and therefore the impact of attacks.

Does it figure out a sense of dimension for bodyparts like limbs and extremities, or is it just a matter of part size?

It sounds like bludgeoning damage hasn't been merged with slash/pierce, even though contact areas are being tracked now.  Is it being kept separate just for combat text purposes or something?

Well, there's contact areas and contact areas, he he he, and edges are assumed to be at a small enough scale that my numbers don't resolve well there.  Edges move partially over to different calculations, using the shear value differences and their "edge" numbers without worrying so much about the particulars of the vanishingly small surface area of the slice, whereas bludgeoning weapons use the overall contact areas and do more actual pushing around in a more straightforward way.  It's sort of crappy and cobbled together, but hopefully it'll work out.  The edges still keep track generally of how much they are slicing through and how much momentum is behind them, so slashes are different from thrusts in that respect.  There's nothing here that wouldn't make an engineer vomit though.

In general, I don't have enough dimension information to do a really good simulation.  Critters parts have weird shapes, so I haven't fussed that much.  It oftentimes conflates total surface areas, volumes and depths, in ways that don't necessarily scale realistically, but it's not like I can do much about what these things look like.  As long as the results are good over the range of sizes and actions in the game, it doesn't matter as much, but some extra raw variables will probably come in over time as problems arise.

What will the functional difference between a war hammer and a mace be in the new combat system aside from using a different skill?

Yeah, the difference I've got right now is the contact area.  So a mace will have larger wound areas but won't concentrate the force as much.  It may be that this indicates one weapon is superior to the other in most normal applications, but I haven't had a chance to test that sort of thing carefully. 

The other mechanical properties apparently come up in wrestling, but there haven't been many details about that:

Are you going to give us details about how all the numbers work in the raw files?

There are some details in the material template preview.

As a note, some of those "unused" ones have uses now -- all of the things like compressive/tensile/bending/torsion get used during wrestling, but that's about it I think.  They are around if we need them now though (not that it was easy to find any numbers, so most of the numbers are copies of ones I found for other materials or types of force...)

[LordNagash]

The 'water washing off contaminants' crash bug seems to be a good indication that the whole contaminant system is pretty well modeled.

[Neonivek]

Goodness I still remember that Roguelike I played where your character could be plagued with constant depression.

There is such little indication of what in the world depressed you that it drives you, in real life, insane.

[Mel_Vixen]

Such Bugs are the reason why programmers invented "try" and "catch" commands. Its defenitley better to have some of these arround in more complex programm parts that only get used once in a while. edit: Lets face it i have the tendency to loeave them out too.

Regarding spatters. A way to determine quickly how much spatters you have acumulated should be in the game. Like "You are very Filthy" in the description if you hit look on your self. Hehe i wait for the time when a massivly spatter-encrusted item is less worth then a clean one.

[dragnar]

Hehe i wait for the time when a massivly spatter-encrusted item is less worth then a clean one.

Or better yet, worth more! Not with all contaminants, but what would you pay more for: a sword, or a sword covered in super-rare/expensive dragon's blood?(As BM said, dragons are living conglomerations of expensive magical components.)

[smjjames]

Hehe i wait for the time when a massivly spatter-encrusted item is less worth then a clean one.

Or better yet, worth more! Not with all contaminants, but what would you pay more for: a sword, or a sword covered in super-rare/expensive dragon's blood?(As BM said, dragons are living conglomerations of expensive magical components.)

They'd have to prove that its dragon blood first, otherwise they could be scamming you.