Print

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

[Conrad]

For someone (like me) who is not familiar with all the fancy combat calculation shenanigans, how do foreign weapons stack up against the things our people can make? Is having a lasher team at all a benefit? Are swords better than scimitars, hammers better than mauls or maces better than morningstars?

[Girlinhat]

http://df.magmawiki.com/index.php/Weapons

[Conrad]

Yes, I know, I've read that page several times. Like I stated in the original post, I would like some assistance for those who do not understand the combat calculations.

Knowing that the maul has a 100 contact area doesn't entirely help me.

[thatkid]

That's the thing, it isn't simply a matter of "This weapon is always superior." At least for the most part.

You want a lower contact area when faced with armored opponents, because it will provide you a better chance of breaking through that armor. A wider contact area will spread out of the force of the blow and cause more damage to unarmored opponents. This is largely more important for bashing-type attacks, but it can be important for edge attacks.
A sharper edge only really lends itself to edge attacks, so when comparing swords or axes you can pretty much just look at the edge to decide if one is more effective than another I suppose.
Penetration is like contact area, in that it helps decide how well an attack will pierce armor. However, IIRC, it's more important for piercing armor than contact area is.

You should obviously take what I'm saying with a grain of salt, I'm not an expert on this because I've never really been too concerned with what weapons I'm using.

[AutomataKittay]

Low contact area and high velocity are what you want for 'best' weapon. Faster they hits and the less area they contacts through, the more it ruins the other bugger's day 

[Girlinhat]

Well, comparing data...
Mace: Size 800, contact 20
Morning Star: Size 500, contact 10

According to http://df.magmawiki.com/index.php/DF2010:Combat#Weapon_Properties, it would seem that your average morning star does more damage, with ~50 mass per  contact, while a mace gets ~40.  This means that a morning star should perform roughly 25% better than a mace, assuming they're made of the same material.

Ultimately though we don't have a great deal of knowledge, just a lot of common-sense and observations.  Lower contact area seems to be good, as it encourages deeper hits.  Higher size is good, as heavy weapons hit harder.  Higher velocity is better, as it effectively multiplies your dwarf's strength.

[Fredd]

 A lasher squad seems to be the deadliest you can create, most scenarios. Beware some of the human weapons. You cannot use a shield with them.And without great strength, cannot wield them.
 Arena mode is a great way to test out the weapons, and is quite fun also.
For a comparison, look in the raws under item.weapons. This is the easiest way to determine combat info

[AutomataKittay]

Agreed with above, arena mode is the way to test out whatever combo you're trying out. I uses it all the time to test things out or just to see how screwed I am 

[Conrad]

Alright, I'll keep my lasher squad (at least for variety). The differences all seem very close. They would not be enough to beat the quality bonus, would they? I've never seen a masterpiece morningstar come by, so would a manufactured mace be better then?

I guess if you have quality weaponsmiths, it's better to go with homemade just because the quality is there.

[Girlinhat]

Quality determines the to-hit bonus.  Weapon type and material determines the damage.  If you have skilled soldiers, give them lashes.  Unskilled soldiers (ie, low in fighter, shield, and dodge) will probably enjoy that masterwork mace better.

[Kicior]

maces better than morningstars?

Check it out in arena. People in steel armour and silver morningstars pwn people in steel armour with silver maces. Morningstar is like a mace, but it has spikes, so it doesn't just break bones, but it tears tissues also.

[Shook]

If we're talking axes, then small area isn't necessarily good. They have a rather large contact area, but also significant penetration, which means they lob off limbs like rotten twigs. For edge weapons, a small contact area means a piercing attack, which equals poking holes in vital organs, but generally with no dismemberment. Big contact areas behave like slashing or hacking attacks, which are supremely effective against unarmored humanoids (or armor of lesser material quality) and creatures of equal or smaller size, but are notably less effective against huge or well-armored foes.

As for foreign weapons, they're not always better. I'm pretty sure that dorfs normally can't use the biggest weapons, such as mauls and greataxes. And now, for a (theoretical) list of comparison:

- Unusable melee weapons: Pike, halberd, 2H sword, maul and great axe.
- Scimitar = Short sword (all values are equal)
- Long sword > short sword, and can be used in one hand by dorfs. Bigger slashes, deeper stabs and more mass.
- Large daggers are probably inferior in terms of slashing, but have VERY small contact areas on stabs, meaning it will go through just about anything. These weapons are rather rare though.
- Whips are supposedly extremely effective against armor, but i don't know about scourges.
- Flails are likely to be very effective blunt weapons against soft targets (very high velocity), but the bigger contact area possibly hurts performance against hard armor.
- Morningstars are a bit of an oddity, since they have a tiny and shallow edged attack. They'll cause more bleeding than maces and hammers, and as Kicior said, will probably break bones too.

Based on raw analysis, experience, hearsay and some of the above posts.

(also, six-tuple ninja, i started writing before Girlinhat posted the second time )

[Girlinhat]

Dwarf Size: 60,000 (Give or take for broadness/height variance.  Possible ~93,750 size at max range, if I'm reading things right.)

Weapon: Size (single-handed)
Pike: 62,500 (77,500)
Halberd: 62,500 (77,500)
2H Sword: 62,500 (77,500)
Longsword: 52,500 (57,500)
Maul: 62,500 (77,500)
Great Axe: 62,500 (77,500)
Large Dagger: 5,000 (27,500)
Scourge: 22,500 (27,500)
Flail: 42,500 (47,500)
Morning Star: 32,500 (37,500)
Scimitar: 32,500 (37,500)

If I'm reading things right, a dwarf's height and broadness can be 75-125% default size.  If both are applied, that means a dwarf can be between 33,750 and 93,750 size.  The largest of dwarves can single-hand any weapon, and equip a shield or another weapon in the off-hand.  An average dwarf uses most foreign weapons as a multi-grasp.  A very small dwarf cannot use the majority of weapons, even domestic weapons (which makes me think I'm interpreting the numbers wrong).  However, the chances of getting both broadness and height at minimum is 1/14, and genetics do seem to play some role, making exceptionally small dwarves rare and/or evolution'd away during worldgen.  I've heard conflicting reports about dual-wielding weapons and shields, and I know that high/broadness plays a roll in weapon size, but the exact relation is unknown.

[Jake]

If I'm reading things right, a dwarf's height and broadness can be 75-125% default size.  If both are applied, that means a dwarf can be between 33,750 and 93,750 size.  The largest of dwarves can single-hand any weapon, and equip a shield or another weapon in the off-hand.  An average dwarf uses most foreign weapons as a multi-grasp.  A very small dwarf cannot use the majority of weapons, even domestic weapons (which makes me think I'm interpreting the numbers wrong).  However, the chances of getting both broadness and height at minimum is 1/14, and genetics do seem to play some role, making exceptionally small dwarves rare and/or evolution'd away during worldgen.  I've heard conflicting reports about dual-wielding weapons and shields, and I know that high/broadness plays a roll in weapon size, but the exact relation is unknown.

Dwarves carrying an unlimited number of weapons and being able to wield anything in conjunction with a shield is a bug, and you're not far off how it should work by my reckoning.

[Naz]

Just throwing this in real quick as I don't pretend to have fully grasped the combat calculations. I believe the wiki entry on armor states that against heavily armored opponents, blunt attacks are very effective as they will ignore the fact that they can't pierce the armor and instead cause crushing injuries. That is of course, provided that the weapon is of high mass.

In short, mix up your forces since there's no all-purpose Dwarven Nuke Hammer.

*scribbles raws for pitchblende maul*