Bay 12 Games Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  
Pages: 1 2 [3]

Author Topic: Do weapons really need changing? It seems pretty realistic.  (Read 4886 times)

catsplosion

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Do weapons really need changing? It seems pretty realistic.
« Reply #30 on: May 13, 2010, 01:19:14 am »

Um, well before this point one of the combatants will get wise and thrust the sword through the mail rather than slash the sword's edge along the mail. And yes, a thrust penetrates mail.

This is how most notable deaths take place in the Aeneid.  Everyone wears armor and it never seems to do much, because they're heroically strong and fighting with spears.
Logged

cganya

  • Bay Watcher
  • Commander Anya Snow
    • View Profile
Re: Do weapons really need changing? It seems pretty realistic.
« Reply #31 on: May 13, 2010, 07:34:58 am »

Um, well before this point one of the combatants will get wise and thrust the sword through the mail rather than slash the sword's edge along the mail. And yes, a thrust penetrates mail.

I agree that a chain mail usually wont stop a well placed stab from a sword. a stab is piercing and chain mail is medium armor, it's specialty. The point I was trying to get across is that there are certain weapons that just don't work against certain armors (most swords against plate mail) and that others really shine in those situations (war hammer).

I'm sure there are other examples.
Logged
My current project: Playing through might and magic 6 and posting the videos on youtube.
http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=136329.msg5003966#msg5003966

Sensei

  • Bay Watcher
  • Haven't tried coffee crisps.
    • View Profile
Re: Do weapons really need changing? It seems pretty realistic.
« Reply #32 on: May 13, 2010, 11:04:12 pm »

Weapons could use a little tweaking. However, the problems will be far less glaring once bodies are fixed, because right now apparently a lot of organs are redundant.
Logged
Let's Play: Automation! Bay 12 Motor Company Buy the 1950 Urist Wagon for just $4500! Safety features optional.
The Bay 12 & Mates Discord Join now! Voice/text chat and play games with other Bay12'ers!
Add me on Steam: [DFC] Sensei

SanDiego

  • Bay Watcher
  • I SEE IN YOUR SOUL
    • View Profile
Re: Do weapons really need changing? It seems pretty realistic.
« Reply #33 on: May 14, 2010, 10:53:01 am »

Um, well before this point one of the combatants will get wise and thrust the sword through the mail rather than slash the sword's edge along the mail. And yes, a thrust penetrates mail.

I agree that a chain mail usually wont stop a well placed stab from a sword. a stab is piercing and chain mail is medium armor, it's specialty. The point I was trying to get across is that there are certain weapons that just don't work against certain armors (most swords against plate mail) and that others really shine in those situations (war hammer).

I'm sure there are other examples.
I just skimmed through the thread and thought I should reply to this and to OP. This quote first. Mail will stop both slashes and stabs, it's designed to do it. But it won't protect you from the trauma caused by impact of the weapon, which can kill you, or at least maim you (v. inf.). Plate mail, however, can protect you even from blunt trauma.

@OP: Blunt weapons are extremely dangerous. Aside from the obvious skull smashing, they can cause pneumothorax (via broken rib) or organ rupture. This causes internal bleeding, severity depends on organ hit and power of the blow (liver and spleen are extremely rich in blood, their ruptures are the most severe), you can even bleed to death. Besides, pain caused by rupture of spleen or liver will leave you lying on ground, defenseless.
Logged
Welcome to Murdermachines. Try the gecko sauce; it's delectable and delightful, a wonderful blend of savory and spicy that makes any dish delicious without being too overwhelming.

(Warning: Do not ask about the manufacturing process for gecko sauce)
(Warning: Gecko sauce may cause acute respiratory failure on contact)

Toybasher

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Do weapons really need changing? It seems pretty realistic.
« Reply #34 on: May 15, 2010, 09:45:42 am »

Um, well before this point one of the combatants will get wise and thrust the sword through the mail rather than slash the sword's edge along the mail. And yes, a thrust penetrates mail.

I agree that a chain mail usually wont stop a well placed stab from a sword. a stab is piercing and chain mail is medium armor, it's specialty. The point I was trying to get across is that there are certain weapons that just don't work against certain armors (most swords against plate mail) and that others really shine in those situations (war hammer).

I'm sure there are other examples.
I just skimmed through the thread and thought I should reply to this and to OP. This quote first. Mail will stop both slashes and stabs, it's designed to do it. But it won't protect you from the trauma caused by impact of the weapon, which can kill you, or at least maim you (v. inf.). Plate mail, however, can protect you even from blunt trauma.

@OP: Blunt weapons are extremely dangerous. Aside from the obvious skull smashing, they can cause pneumothorax (via broken rib) or organ rupture. This causes internal bleeding, severity depends on organ hit and power of the blow (liver and spleen are extremely rich in blood, their ruptures are the most severe), you can even bleed to death. Besides, pain caused by rupture of spleen or liver will leave you lying on ground, defenseless.

The blunt weapons should be buffed, the way you described it is PERFECT!
Logged

PhoenixFlame

  • Escaped Lunatic
    • View Profile
Re: Do weapons really need changing? It seems pretty realistic.
« Reply #35 on: May 18, 2010, 11:03:14 pm »

DF has a rather complicated damage system, much more complex than anything I've really ever played before. However, some are still quite intricate, and the hammer 'problem' calls to mind a little side effect of savaging enemies with impact weapons in Monster Hunter. Knockout damage!

It's like subduing damage, in that it's seperately tracked from lethal damage for the head and body (all non-head locations). KO damage to the head, once reaching a certain threshold, knocks the monster unconcious for a period of time, while KO damage to the body drains its stamina. It occurred to me that DF already has systems for unconciousness and stamina tracking, and hammer hits should rapidly cause the opponent to become winded/overexerted from body strikes, or unconcious from nonlethal hits to the head.
Logged

Foehamster

  • Bay Watcher
  • Zig Frostrushes The Speachless Eater of Saints
    • View Profile
Re: Do weapons really need changing? It seems pretty realistic.
« Reply #36 on: May 19, 2010, 11:03:49 am »

DF has a rather complicated damage system, much more complex than anything I've really ever played before. However, some are still quite intricate, and the hammer 'problem' calls to mind a little side effect of savaging enemies with impact weapons in Monster Hunter. Knockout damage!

It's like subduing damage, in that it's seperately tracked from lethal damage for the head and body (all non-head locations). KO damage to the head, once reaching a certain threshold, knocks the monster unconcious for a period of time, while KO damage to the body drains its stamina. It occurred to me that DF already has systems for unconciousness and stamina tracking, and hammer hits should rapidly cause the opponent to become winded/overexerted from body strikes, or unconcious from nonlethal hits to the head.
Yeah, the good part of blunt weapons right now is a good hit tends to at least stun your target for a few rounds.  It usually breaks a limb too.  I was able to kill most of a goblin fortress (populated by humans and ruled by a one eyed shrew) by smacking one guy, backing off a tile and hitting the next so only 1-2 were swinging at me at a time.

I enjoy broken arms or legs just leaving a creature reeling, but it takes a while to randomly bruise both lungs or get a brain-crushing hit.  So I'd be happy with: Slightly more serious (longer) bleeding, more internal bleeding on body whomps.
Logged

SanDiego

  • Bay Watcher
  • I SEE IN YOUR SOUL
    • View Profile
Re: Do weapons really need changing? It seems pretty realistic.
« Reply #37 on: May 19, 2010, 12:36:57 pm »

The materials are still in statu nascendi, but I propose this little tweak to armour system (based on real characteristics):

Let's have Three basic armour types plus one extra: Leather, Chain, Plate, Gambeson (padded armour - basically several layers of cloth sewn together).

Leather - easy to make, easy to carry, good protection against slashing and cutting attacks, no protection from blunt trauma.

Chain - moderately difficult to make (at least talented armoursmith), difficult to carry (will need stronger dwarf - weight of mail rests heavily on shoulders, trust me I've tried), good protection against cutting, slahsing and decent against piercing weapons, no protection against blunt trauma. Let's count cca one bar of metal on each part of set (coif, greaves, mittens, boots) and two for mail.

Plate - difficult to make (at least Great armoursmith), slightly more dificult to carry (surprisingly the main element in movement in plate maille is agility - the weight of armour which is surprisingly small /cca 40 lbs for man-sized one/ and is distributed evenly around the body; you just need to get used to it, saw guy make catwheels in full plate), excelent protection against all types of damage, strong attacks may cause defects and damage to armour that needs repairing at smithy. Needs to be carried over gambeson. Let's count one metal bar on each part (gauntlets, pauldrons, legplates, greaves, helmet) and three for cuirass. Helmet must be worn in combination with some headwear (i.e. cloth cap)

Gambeson - it's basically several layers of cloth sewn together. They were either used solo or worn under chain mail/plate. Solo they offer pretty good protection against blunt trauma, but against edged weapons the protection is poor and does not protect against piercing weapons. Wearing it under armour reduces blunt trauma caused by impact. Laughably easy to make, even by  less than average clothier.


Now, by those minimal skill levels I mean minimal fail-free level. Any dwarf under this skill level can try, but has a chance of producing total crap and thus wasting the material (learn by doing mate), that can be melted at smelter later.
Logged
Welcome to Murdermachines. Try the gecko sauce; it's delectable and delightful, a wonderful blend of savory and spicy that makes any dish delicious without being too overwhelming.

(Warning: Do not ask about the manufacturing process for gecko sauce)
(Warning: Gecko sauce may cause acute respiratory failure on contact)

Foehamster

  • Bay Watcher
  • Zig Frostrushes The Speachless Eater of Saints
    • View Profile
Re: Do weapons really need changing? It seems pretty realistic.
« Reply #38 on: May 19, 2010, 04:53:48 pm »

The materials are still in statu nascendi, but I propose this little tweak to armour system (based on real characteristics):

Let's have Three basic armour types plus one extra: Leather, Chain, Plate, Gambeson (padded armour - basically several layers of cloth sewn together).
It occurs to me that leather armor is much closer to the gambeson. Both of which provide decent padding, but are more "thick skin" than a deflector for cutting and stabbing.  Though really chain and scale have decent crush resistance because they can lock flat.  So honestly I think its more that nothing else besides blunt trauma makes it through good plate mail.
Logged

Khan FurSainty

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Do weapons really need changing? It seems pretty realistic.
« Reply #39 on: May 20, 2010, 03:17:36 am »

Gambeson - it's basically several layers of cloth sewn together. They were either used solo or worn under chain mail/plate. Solo they offer pretty good protection against blunt trauma, but against edged weapons the protection is poor and does not protect against piercing weapons.

Actually, the gambeson offered protection against arrows too.
Logged

SanDiego

  • Bay Watcher
  • I SEE IN YOUR SOUL
    • View Profile
Re: Do weapons really need changing? It seems pretty realistic.
« Reply #40 on: May 20, 2010, 08:23:12 am »

The materials are still in statu nascendi, but I propose this little tweak to armour system (based on real characteristics):

Let's have Three basic armour types plus one extra: Leather, Chain, Plate, Gambeson (padded armour - basically several layers of cloth sewn together).
It occurs to me that leather armor is much closer to the gambeson. Both of which provide decent padding, but are more "thick skin" than a deflector for cutting and stabbing.  Though really chain and scale have decent crush resistance because they can lock flat.  So honestly I think its more that nothing else besides blunt trauma makes it through good plate mail.
Leather armour is actually surprisingly hard and unyielding, thus providing decent protection.
Gambeson - it's basically several layers of cloth sewn together. They were either used solo or worn under chain mail/plate. Solo they offer pretty good protection against blunt trauma, but against edged weapons the protection is poor and does not protect against piercing weapons.

Actually, the gambeson offered protection against arrows too.
Well, but not better than several layers of clothing. Against bow with more than 90 lbs draw weight it really doesn't matter much anymore.
Logged
Welcome to Murdermachines. Try the gecko sauce; it's delectable and delightful, a wonderful blend of savory and spicy that makes any dish delicious without being too overwhelming.

(Warning: Do not ask about the manufacturing process for gecko sauce)
(Warning: Gecko sauce may cause acute respiratory failure on contact)
Pages: 1 2 [3]