Print

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

[SirStrange]

This has probably been discussed before, but I'm curious as to how the new material values for weapons will effect blunt weapons, which will apparently do damage based on weight.

Does this mean that clownite warhammers will be the weakest form of hammer since they would be so light? Will it be better to whack things with copper hammers or something because of the weight issue?

I don't expect anyone to know for sure until the new version comes out of course, but it sure seems like this would be the case.

PS. I didn't think of it 'till now, but maybe material density will have something to do with it?

[Rafal99]

Yeah I was wondering about that too. In the next version apparently we can make weapons from all available metals and alloys. Every substance has quite a few parameters, does anyone know which ones of them will be important for blunt/slashing/piercing weapons respectively?
For hammers it seems it will be totally different than now, so no more adamantine hammers.
What about slashing and piercing weapons?
Does adamantine > steel > iron > bronze > copper > everything else still apply to them?

[Schilcote]

I think that the lower weight of the Adamantine hammer would be offset by the wielder's ability to move it at a higher velocity. You know, F=ma. If you had a relatively light giant hammer (it'd still need to have a respectable mass though), and you moved it really quickly, I bet it'd be more effective than a hammer twice as heavy moving at a quarter the speed.

[SirStrange]

You're probably right about that.

I can see this update making blunt weapons far superior to swords and whatnot for the early game. Seems like a heavy copper warhammer would make a much better weapon than a less than razor-sharp copper sword.

Dunno how heavy/what kind of edge copper will have of course, just using it as an example.

[Max White]

Unless of coarse rather then fighting a hoard of goblins or SUPER BATMEN ON GIANT BATS WITH BLOW PIPES you were instead fighting a mega beast, and every time said hammer came into contact with said beast it sent him flying back into a wall, giving the dwarf time to recover and be ready for the next hit, rather then many weaker swings.

Think about it.

[reubend]

Plus, kinetic energy is 0.5*m*v^2, so swinging it faster will probably have a larger impact than a heavier weapon.
Although at the same time, momentum is m*v, so who knows how it will play out.

[Max White]

Your also assuming that speed swing is directly proportional to mass. Just because its mass is half as much, doesn't instantly mean it can be swung twice as fast. I can say without question though, that mass is directly proportional to mass.

[SirStrange]

Unless of coarse rather then fighting a hoard of goblins or SUPER BATMEN ON GIANT BATS WITH BLOW PIPES you were instead fighting a mega beast, and every time said hammer came into contact with said beast it sent him flying back into a wall, giving the dwarf time to recover and be ready for the next hit, rather then many weaker swings.

Think about it.

What? I said hammers might be better than swords for the early game. I don't think I said anything about fighting mega beasts with swords or whatever you're talking about.

 I'm thinking about it, but I don't get what I'm supposed to be learning here.

[Earthquake Damage]

The "1/X times weapon mass means X times swing speed" argument is flawed.  I'm no physiologist, but I do know your arm still has inertia independent of any weapon you might wield.

[ungulateman]

Seeing as Adamantine has an absurd maximum edge sharpness, it will do huge damage even with how light it is. So they will be powerful still.

[beekay]

Problem is, unless your hammer is made of lead or gold or something, you're going to get it moving as fast as you can manage regardless of the specific weight. It's not a choice between heavy hammer at 4m/s and light hammer at 40m/s, it's 4 for both. So steel should still be more effective than adamantine (although obviously adamantine would hold its shape better, and I suspect Toady wouldn't let it happen anyway).

Maybe if this was a greataxe or whatever the humans use, that would be a point.

[Jimmy]

War hammers actually have a small surface area and are more designed for piercing heavy armor and bashing plate armor to render it immobile. For piercing, blue metal would obviously be preferable. For bashing, the force is dependent on the length of the pole and the weight of the head. Therefore I'd suspect a lead warhammer would be superior to steel.

[Garrie]

Therefore I'd suspect a lead warhammer would be superior to steel.

Until something to do with weapon wear/damage is implemented, at which time we all go back to designing strategies. Again. Crap this game is good...

[Max White]

Correct me if I am wrong, and it happens often, so feel free to jump in, but isn't platinum the heaviest metal? Therefor a legendary platinum war hammer would shred its way through ANYTHING. A sword, were you want edge is better suited to something like steel or HFS concealer and an spear doesn't matter, because there only good for traps.

[Huggz]

Correct me if I am wrong, and it happens often, so feel free to jump in, but isn't platinum the heaviest metal? Therefor a legendary platinum war hammer would shred its way through ANYTHING. A sword, were you want edge is better suited to something like steel or HFS concealer and an spear doesn't matter, because there only good for traps.

I believe lead is heavier than platinum, and anyways platinum is relatively malleable so it would just deform, which I imagine would also be the problem for copper. Assuming clownite hammers will be powerful, I will probably imagine it as a clownite-coated lead hammer