Print

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

[Granite26]

People are aware of this, but I figured I'd do some math.  Basically, I just made an artifact bow that's worse* than the -steel crossbow- my guys are churning out.

*Technically this isn't true for bows, but the point stands for melee weapons

Last time we heard, artifacts use the same x2 that masterworks do.  Even if an artifact were really x5, an wooden weapon would fall between a masterwork and exceptional steel weapon.  As it stands, an artifact wooden weapon is the same modifier as a normal iron weapon.
x2.0 * 50% vs x1.0 * 100%.

I think the problem is that the range of quality (x1.0 through x2.0) is actually smaller than weapon quality (x50% - x133%). 

For preference, I'd like to see these numbers raw'd (it's a lot easier to adjust 5 quality numbers than all the metals).

I'd think the correct range of quality would be (x0.5 through x2.0) with a (x3.0-x5.0) modifier for artifacts.  That way, an artifact wooden/silver weapon would be better than all but a masterwork iron item
x3.0 * 50% = 1.5 = mid/high iron or above avg steel.

[Grendus]

First, I'm no statistics major, but it seems like the range between 1 and 2 is greater than .5 and 1.33. Unless there's some statistics thingy in there (in which case, how about some math) I think you're off. The real problem in this scenario is that artifacts use the same multiplier that masterwork does, and since artifacts can use any material and most materials have no weapon value (which means default .5 damage multiplier), unless you luck out and your dwarf randomly chooses steel/adamantine or you use a glitched method (or you only have weapon metals available) you'll get a crap weapon artifact.

I don't care how 'moody' you were when you made it, smacking an enemy with a crossbow made of fish bone is not going to be nearly as painful as smacking him with one forged of steel. Of course, it would be more realistic if marksdwarves carried shortswords for melee combat, or perhaps daggers, using a crossbow as a club would break it and not seriously harm your enemy. It's possible the magic arc will cover this, but for now I think the only 'fix' that would be fitting would be to give more materials weapon damage modifiers even if they don't have the [WEAPON] tag.

[Granite26]

for multiplication .5 is equivilent to 2.

.5 = 1/2, so 1/2 through 1 is the same range as 1 through 2.  If you rescale so that the worst material is 100%, then materials would need to run from 100% through 266%...

I'm ignoring the crossbow craziness... You're right, artifact gold weapons kinda suck... Although for gold, maybe they should (I think gold should be a .25 weapon, at best, although damage won't be quite so linear anymore...  lead will make a good club but a horrible sword in the next release)

[Seraph]

First, I'm no statistics major, but it seems like the range between 1 and 2 is greater than .5 and 1.33. Unless there's some statistics thingy in there (in which case, how about some math) I think you're off.

It has nothing to do with "some statistics thingy", it has to do with basic multiplication of fractions.
The quality multipliers are between 1 and 2, this means that the "best" multiplier is 200% of the worst one. (2/1 * 100% = 200%)
The material multipliers are between 50% and 133% (not counting HFS), this means the "best" material is 266% of the worst. (1.33/0.5 * 100% = 266%)
266% > 200%
Ergo: Material multipliers result in a bigger range then quality multipliers.

Now if we were adding instead of multiplying then you would be correct, but they arn't they're multiplied.

That said:
I agree with your general point (but not with your specific crossbow example). A wooden blade should be better then a steel one just because it's extra fancy. To be honest I like lousy artifact weapons, all those crazy extra decorations arn't something I'd see as helping with a weapons effectiveness. IRL people still have swords or muskets hanging on their walls, and towns in New England still have cannons located in downtown, but it isn't because they think they'll be effective if they are needed.
 
Personally: I'd like to see the whole weapon multiplier system reworked so that different weapons benefit different amounts from high quality manufacturing or materials or skill (although there are other things I'd like to see done first). But that's probably a discussion for a different thread.

[Mephansteras]

This whole issue is going to change dramatically in the next release anyway, since the actual material properties are going to replace the fake % numbers we have now. So a copper axe is going to be compared to an iron axe based on the actual material strengths, edge capabilities, and so on. I'm not sure how quality is going to effect that, but at least the materials aspect will change.

Bronze armor, for example, should be better then Iron armor. The 75% number we have now really doesn't reflect the realities of the materials.

[Impaler[WrG]]

Weapon crafter Dwarves with a strange mood should ONLY use a metal with a damage modifier (Copper, Silver, Bronze, Bismuth Bronze, Iron, Steel and Adamantium) and not any random metal or other material for the weapons core material, decorations are of course unrestricted.  That largely eliminates the bad material issue (other then silver which should probably lose its modifier).

[Untelligent]

Silver doesn't have damage modifier, it defaults to 50% like the generic metals.

I think we should wait and see how the new materials system pans out, first.

[Granite26]

I think we should wait and see how the new materials system pans out, first.

How is the new materials system going to change the fact that the craft quality system is constrained to a narrow band?  If anything, it's going to exacerbate the issue by expanding the range of materials even further.  Please give me one reason why the new materials system is going to change anything in order to justify waiting.

[HatfieldCW]

Are you asking that wood make better bows than steel does, or that artifacts always wtfpwn non-artifacts, regardless of quality?

For my part, I think artifact weapons should have their "artifact" status prior to their "weapon" status, so an artifact gold sword with spikes of silk and bands of glass and a picture of clouds in bauxite would be mostly a decorative thing.  Sure, you could go ahead and stab a dude with it, but why should it be more deadly than a really well made sword that's forged of steel, iron or bronze?  I'd like to see artifacts be buildable no matter what, so I could erect a scepter in my mayor's office or build that one spectacular brass boot into a structure in my barracks.  Having artifacts serve as "epic gear" is really secondary, a bonus.  If I want spears that stab super well, I'll have my legendary smith make them out of the best available materials.

Besides, moods and possessions don't necessarily have a specific motive.  They're art.  Urist has a weird dream about triangles and it reminds him of the story of that time an adventurer fought a scorpion and that stimulates him to make a mica blowpipe commemorating the whole thing.  He's not looking to buff up the fort's military with that, and selectively forbidding materials to guide his mood to higher dollar value and combat multipliers is a little too meta, in my view.  Just let the dwarf make his lead cabinet, and then maybe put him to work in that field to get better stuff.  The Gods don't always have the same goals as the player.

[Lord Shonus]

Honestly, the quality modifiers should have a much greater range. Speaking from personal experience, I know that even a subtle difference in the quality of an axe greatly modifies its capabilities, and the differnece is even more pronoi=unced with crossbow bolts.

[Silverionmox]

Weapon crafter Dwarves with a strange mood should ONLY use a metal with a damage modifier (Copper, Silver, Bronze, Bismuth Bronze, Iron, Steel and Adamantium) and not any random metal or other material for the weapons core material, decorations are of course unrestricted.  That largely eliminates the bad material issue (other then silver which should probably lose its modifier).

They could use any material, and make it into a functional weapon in incomprehensible ways. I think we should be able to see anything: functional or non-functional items (with a preference for functional items), materials that are appropriate in different ways (domain associations, functionality, personal preference, a local specialty, rarity, etc.) or none at all, just because it's an artifact and therefore strange.

[Granite26]

Well, artistic quality versus efficiency quality is an issue.  Calling weapon artifacts artistic when they aren't made with weapon-metals would be cool.

Still copper is a weapon metal, and it's worse than ok steel...

[Sunken]

Whereas artifacts are currently assembled in a fashion somewhat haphazard, I tend to think that an artifact should not necessarily be a decorative item - rather, it should be an epitome, a near-supernatural (or supernatural!) example of its kind. What that kind entails would differ from artifact to artifact.
An epitome of a cup would probably be extremely ornamental (barring supernatural properties like everlasting youth and the like).
An epitome of a sword could be extremely ornamental, or it could be extremely sharp, or extremely fast to swing - any of those things a sword can be good at.
And depending on what is epitomized, the materials should chime with the selection. It just makes sense. If the dwarf decides to make an artifact ornamental sword, he'll go with gold and other impracticals. If he goes for swiftness of cut, it's going to be steel or adamantium; nothing else will do.

[HatfieldCW]

it should be an epitome, a near-supernatural (or supernatural!) example of its kind.

I always thought that was what "masterwork" meant, something that had been done really, really, amazingly well.  Artifacts already have "all work of highest quality", so they've got it too, but mooded gear need not be "better" than masterpieces, just more... inspired.

It just makes sense. If the dwarf decides to make an artifact ornamental sword, he'll go with gold and other impracticals. If he goes for swiftness of cut, it's going to be steel or adamantium; nothing else will do.

I like this very much, and think it might relate to the dwarf's personality.  Maybe a dwarf with a strong sense of duty who scoffs at frivolity would have a mood to whip up a steel mace that menaces with spikes of steel and is encircled with bands of lead, so it's an absolute hellstorm of smashing, whereas a free spirit-type dwarf would go with gems and platinum and silk to make a more stylized and artistic item. Possessions could tie into the spirit or god responsible, so the dwarf would choose materials and configurations based on the personality of the thing that's guiding them.

[Granite26]

it should be an epitome, a near-supernatural (or supernatural!) example of its kind.

I always thought that was what "masterwork" meant, something that had been done really, really, amazingly well.  Artifacts already have "all work of highest quality", so they've got it too, but mooded gear need not be "better" than masterpieces, just more... inspired.

It just makes sense. If the dwarf decides to make an artifact ornamental sword, he'll go with gold and other impracticals. If he goes for swiftness of cut, it's going to be steel or adamantium; nothing else will do.

I like this very much, and think it might relate to the dwarf's personality.  Maybe a dwarf with a strong sense of duty who scoffs at frivolity would have a mood to whip up a steel mace that menaces with spikes of steel and is encircled with bands of lead, so it's an absolute hellstorm of smashing, whereas a free spirit-type dwarf would go with gems and platinum and silk to make a more stylized and artistic item. Possessions could tie into the spirit or god responsible, so the dwarf would choose materials and configurations based on the personality of the thing that's guiding them.

Well, masterpiece has an actual meaning in the world of crafts, unlike artifact