Print

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

[EagleV]

I did some parallel research with ranged weaponry, and found a few oddities:

[SHOOT_FORCE] changes nothing, or almost nothing. I had two dwarves battle against a cow, one had a crossbow (force 1000), another had an ubercrossbow (force 10000), both did approximately the same damage. (Note that SHOOT_MAXVEL was adjusted to account for the new force). One theory is that the force is the maximum of the shootforce and the dwarves' force, but even when the Ubercrossbow had a shootforce of 10 (100 times smaller) the bolt did the same damage. In my opinion, this tag is broken.

[SHOOT_MAXVEL] is quite interesting, as changing this does not change the ingame velocity of the bolt - in other words, the bolt still needs exactly the same time from the crossbow to the target. However, it does change the velocity in the damage calculations. On maxvel 1, I had only one tear skin, using 200 bolts and two grand-master marksdwarves without armor.

[Chronas]

i think toady said something about those tags having to do with how fast the bolts move, not damage calcs. logical when you consider f=ma

[Yelloq]

Through testing, I personally have deducted that Adamantine Arrows and bolts aren't as good as Iron Arrows or Bolts.

[Todestool]

I've determined that if you want blunt weapons to make more sense than they currently do, replace the placeholder raw values (in inorganic_metal file) of impact_yield and impact_fracture (all metals use extremely high values from stainless steel) with the values in shear_yield and shear_fracture.

Theoretically, the former should be compressive strength values and the latter tensile strength, but I read that for metals they are essentially the same (ref: here, here, scroll down to compression, and referring specifically to steel).

Of course real life is secondary to gameplay, but my testing found that these alterations make lead, gold, and silver less than ideal weaponry and armor, with steel-wielders consistently dominating.

[Shadowlord]

Perhaps someone should summarize the findings for Toady, particulary the PSI/kPa stuff, the compressive strength / tensile strength stuff, the testing results with spears both with and without shields and how spear-users were more effective without shields, and the stuff about the broken crossbows (although it sounds like testing crossbows isn't finished).

P.S. Shield+Spear users were only good historically when in a phalanx formation or the like, no? You could flank them or cause them to turn in random directions, ruining the formation, if they didn't have excellent unit cohesion and ability to follow orders. A single soldier by himself would be useless against more than one enemy or an enemy with a ball-and-chain.

[zagibu]

Well, there are many kinds of spears, and I imagine those in df to not be very long, maybe 1.5 times a user's height, if at all. Such spears can be used in duels, too, where the long range can be an advantage. They are also light enough to allow quick maneuvers. They ARE both-handed weapons, though, so you shouldn't be able to use a shield with them, or at least get a major negative combat modifier.

[Proteus]

Well, I wonder how widely used normal spears as a melee weapon really were,
in contrast to other polearms like poleaxes (for examples Glaives, Halberds)
or polehammers (Bec de corbin, Lucern hammer etc.)

At least during the time when they didnīt see use in Phalanx formations,

[userpay]

Well looks like glass seraded blades are useless now, just about everysingle damn strike got deflected even while they were passed out on top of it. Any suggestions for what to stick in weapon traps besides the HFS metal?

[Diomedes]

Shield and spear are by far the best weapons on the battlefield. A sword isn't a good weapon. No range and cutting is by far inferior to stabbing. A mace is slow and only used because of heavy plate armor. A pole-arm is basically a modified spear where a hook is attacked to pull horsemen off their horses.

But things depend on tactics and it's kind of rock paper scissors. If your spears are significantly shorter then those of the enemy and both sides use proper tactics and discipline then how are you going to do anything? You can't. and if people don't think they can win they won't fight. But if spears get too long then short range weapons like underhand stabbing swords become stronger again. If you have extremely long spears you become less and less mobile and once the enemy gets closer then your spear head is you can only drop your spear and draw a dagger.

[forsaken1111]

Well, I wonder how widely used normal spears as a melee weapon really were,
in contrast to other polearms like poleaxes (for examples Glaives, Halberds)
or polehammers (Bec de corbin, Lucern hammer etc.)

At least during the time when they didnīt see use in Phalanx formations,

If we're talking real-life use, AFAIK spears were the peasant weapon. Easy and cheap to make, they used very little metal and a blacksmith could bank out spearheads by the dozen. Wood was generally much easier to come by. Give 100 unskilled drooling idiots sharp pointy spears and even they may get lucky and stab a knight on horseback in the right place, for far less than it cost to arm and armor said knight.

[zagibu]

Yeah, the spear is either good in formations or when you face few opponents, it obviously sucks in the heat of the melee. You also need agility to wield it effectively, so it's not well suited for plate armor. I wouldn't say a sword sucks, though, because it's very versatile. You can hack lightly armored targets to pieces and try to stab armored targets where they are not covered. In combination with a large shield, and plate armor, you can turn into a tank. Catch the spear with your shield and lop the speardude's head off. Axes break shields and hammers damage through armor. Their shafts are usually made of wood, to counter the heavy head, so they break faster than swords.

BTW, I'm still running the tests...they take forever. 10 rounds of hammer vs wooden sword in full armor takes almost two hours. Good thing the stuff is automatic, now.

I removed the [INTELLIGENT] tag from the test race...does that remove their ability to level up in skills? I can't check, because without it, no skills are listed in the general tab. Are the skills just not listed, or do they also have no effect, when [INTELLIGENT] is missing?

[Diomedes]

Plate armor is something very very unusual. Not to mention extremely expensive.

Most battles were fought by infantry. Most of the times there were normal people and not professional soldiers. Usually soldiers wouldn't have much more than a metal helmet and metal cuirass. That's the stuff you need to protect most. And more often then not either one or both were of leather.

[Dwarf]

Metal cuirass?

The standard pressed peasant, depending on the age, would've had not more than his clothes, a shield, a spear or axe, and IF he is lucky, a helmet and thick quilted jacket.

[zagibu]

Yeah, but DF doesn't model real-world economics. Also, it's a game, so it can surely balance things in spite of reality and in favor of gameplay.

[SIGVARDR]

Yes,plate armor wasn't nearly as common as a lot of people think back in the day.
 it was,however,a lot more effective than people think.One man in full plate and chain,backed by his men,could cut a path straight through the opposing army.
With the introduction of surface hardened steel,swords and even the heavier blows of axes would deflect off of the plate.
 A charging horseman with a lance may very well pierce through the plate,to be stopped by the chain and leather underneath.
 
A hammer or axe,with a small edge designed to pierce through the armor,or transmit the force through it,was effective,but modern tests show that multiple blows in the same area with considerable force were required to significantly hurt someone underneath.By that time,the man inside the armor has surely killed you.

 Arrows from bows show little impression upon the steel,and crossbow's,while able to pierce most plate of the day,were often slowed enough by piercing through the plate that they would do little to the man underneath it.
 
Not all is created equally.some plate is thin and to be worn with chain mail and leather,some is thick and tempered,meant to be worn alone,so on so forth.
 A breastplate and helm were often the only piece worn,and even then expensive,meant for military commanders.A full suit was often commissioned only by the very wealthy,worn by their sons and some very well-to-do knights.

Realize also you are not targeting a dummy with armor.This is a man,who moves and dodges around(plate armor is not as heavy as you think)and if you miss your first strike,you very well may not get another one.

 To sum up what I'm trying to say,a combat experienced man with a full suit of plate armor,mostly against conscripted militia and archers,is an absolute juggernaut.They were not brought down easily,more often the tactics of throwing people to the slaughter in the hopes one would strike a vital area.
That said,it was a rare sight to see,and by the time many blacksmiths were to the stage were they could produce the armor for more than the wealthy,the implementation of gunpowder brought it to a halt.

Just something for you to think about the next time you send your fully iron plate wearing dwarfs out to slaughter goblin siege number 243.