Bay 12 Games Forum

Dwarf Fortress => DF Modding => Mod Releases => Topic started by: Grimlocke on December 19, 2014, 08:08:20 pm

Title: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.44.12) - Revision 7: Guns & Fashion
Post by: Grimlocke on December 19, 2014, 08:08:20 pm

Guns guns guns! Also fancy clothes and item descriptions. Fixed the arty, get em while they're fresh.

Code: [Select]

╔═╗ ╔╗  ╦ ╔╦╗ ╦   ╔═╗ ╔═╗ ║╔═ ╔═╗ ╗ ╔═╗   ╗ ╔ ╦ ╔═╗ ╔╦╗ ╔═╗ ╔╗ ║ ║    ╔╗   ╔╗  ╔═╗ ╔═╗ ╦   ╦ ╔═╗ ╔╦╗   ╔╦╗ ╔═╗   ║ ╔═╗
║╠╗ ╠╩╗ ║ ║║║ ║   ║ ║ ║   ╠╩╗ ╠╣    ╚═╗   ╠═╣ ║ ╚═╗  ║  ║ ║ ╠╩╗╚═╣   ╔╩╣   ╠╩╗ ╠╣  ╠═╣ ║   ║ ╚═╗ ║║║   ║║║ ║ ║ ╔═╣ ╚═╗
╚═╝ ║ ║ ╩ ║╩║ ╚═╝ ╚═╝ ╚═╝ ║ ║ ╚═╝   ╚═╝   ╝ ╚ ╩ ╚═╝  ║  ╚═╝ ║ ║ ═╝   ╚═╬   ║ ║ ╚═╝ ║ ║ ╚═╝ ╩ ╚═╝ ║╩║   ║╩║ ╚═╝ ╚═╝ ╚═╝Revision 7b

 - Replaces the weapons, armor and clothing with historically accurate ones from 15th century Europe.
 - Alters combat to be both more realistic and interesting.
 - Adds (optional) historic ferro-metallurgy
 - Adds guns and artillery now!

Main features: (green stuff is new stuff)

---

Tons of weapons! - Numerous weapons added for each weapon skill, two-handed versions for all weapon categories safe daggers
Tons of armor! - Including padded armor and cuir bouille (boiled leather) armor.
Period accurate gunpowder weapons! - That's right, working, balanced and interesting gunpowder weapons. Arquebusses and Handgonnes, as well as...
Fixed artillery! - Bombards, organ guns and more can be installed as building and fired at great distance & potential harm.
Throwing weapons - War darts equipped along with a spear can be hurled at the enemy, they rarely break and hold up well in melee
More shields - Shields of various sizes, each size up giving more protection but also adding encumbrance.
Equipment encumbrance - Heavy armor, full coverage helmets and large shields now encumber the user's skills and endurance somewhat.
Period accurate clothing - Gowns, hosen and really fancy headwear complement the historic setting of this mod.
In-game item descriptions for all this - The item info screen now has a detailed description of all the weapons, armor and clothing added by this mod.

Various ammo types - Both broad and pointy arrows, ball ammunition and shot for gunpowder weapons.
Added a number of civilian weapons - By making them tools with various uses civilians now carry daggers and cudgels.
Added and modified trap components - Tridents, forks, giant hammers & more.

Rebalanced weapons - Reduced massive contact areas, regulated the armor penetration to be more realistic and gave weapons a realistic weight.
Rebalanced armor and clothing - Armor thickness is now more consistent, armor can be worn over other armor only where feasible.
Altered metals - High-impact edged attacks can now break bones even when they fail to cut through the armor, padded and leather armor actually works.
Rebalanced unarmed combat - Contact area of all unarmed attacks in the game increased, lowered bone density, and reduced velocity of entity creature attacks.
Adrenaline simulation - An interaction gives creatures in combat a substantial boost in willpower. Fights are longer and less luck-of-draw.
Added collarbones and hipbones - Internal 'limbs' between the limbs and body. Breakable, realistic, and enables some other mod features.

Moved flails to the whip skill - And made whips and scourges tool instead of weapons.
Moved two-handed polearms to the pike skill - Forcing the silly entity equipment system to not use a shield along with them.
Removed armor pants - Moved leg protection to foot-worn armor, lower body protection was already on upper body armor.
Changed leather armor to boiled leather armor - This is not regular tanned leather, but a hard, almost plastic-like material. Can be worn as addition to mail armor, or by itself if your desperate.


Latest Version Download here! (http://dffd.bay12games.com/file.php?id=14042)

Older versions:
Revision 6c (43.05) (http://dffd.bay12games.com/file.php?id=13330)
Revision 6b (43.05) (http://dffd.bay12games.com/file.php?id=12764)
Revision 5b (http://dffd.bay12games.com/file.php?id=11866)
Revision 4c (http://dffd.bay12games.com/file.php?id=11337)
Revision 3b (http://dffd.bay12games.com/file.php?id=10505)
Weapons file with fixed secondary attacks, goes with 3c (http://www.pastebucket.com/80415)
Revision 2 (http://dffd.wimbli.com/file.php?id=10404)
Initial release version (http://dffd.wimbli.com/file.php?id=10276)


How-to-use

---

- Grab dfhack, either from its own page http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=164123.0 or from any of the all-in-one packs out there.

 - Copy the contents of '1 - Arms and Armor' to /raw
   Overwrite all, the base mod is ready for use.
   Note: The mod now ships with a number of scripts, all of which go in the raw folder (or hack/scripts/modtools in case of the two located in the modtools folder)
   
 - Add the following line to dfhack.init in the base DF folder: sc-script add SC_WORLD_LOADED raw/scripts/grims.init
   If no dhack.init exists, rename dfhack.init.example to it.

 - For the metallurgy mod, copy the contents of '2 - Metallurgy' to /raw as well.
   Be sure not to do it in reverse order, that would make a mess of things.
   I do not know what happens when you use only the metallurgy parts. Some custom re-fitting would likely be needed, but I won't be doing that.

 - Compatibility patches are still being worked on

 - The 3rd folder contains a file with all the entity tags for this mod. Useful if you want to integrate this mod with other mods.

 - The 4th folder contains some legacy items and a nifty armor man civ, a whole bunch of suits of armor walking around by themselves. You can dismantle and wear them if your human sized.

Compatibility notes for integration with other mods by Amostubal:

---

http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=146737.msg7617631#msg7617631


Changelog:

---

7b: Fixed the fixed artillery.

---

- Fixed an issue where the script choked on items not having a weight calculated and issues with targeting not considering floors when shooting down/up and seeing fortifications as walls.
    also made some small improvements to the scripts performance, and fixed a rare instance of ammo being fired but not being removed from the barrel.
 
7a: Added tons of stuff, including dfhack scripts.

---

- Two scripts with easy customization: modtools/ranged-mod and modtools/arty-mod
    ranged-mod can modify ranged weapons in more ways than this mod even had use for. you can now add handgonnes, but also burst-fire rifles, miniguns, explosive table throwing slings, etc.
   arty-mod turns buildings with the appropriate reactions into artillery pieces, letting dwarves load them and blast enemies to oblivion with them. artillery operators will become fearless of the enemy while they do so.
   run modtools/ranged-mod -usage or modtools/arty-mod -usage in the dfhack terminal for more details.
 - Implementation of the above two in the form of handgonnes, arquebusses, arbalests and war darts as well as bombards, organ guns, swivel-mounted serpentines and light ballistas. They have longer reload times, produce smoke and muzzleflash and are less accurate than bows and crossbows, but hit with quite a bit of punch.
 - New ranged weapon functionality extended to default weapons. Bows, crossbows, etc now have damage falloff, differing fire rates and accuracy as well as quality scaling that make them actually hit harder, faster and more accurate as their ammunition and the weapon itself are of higher quality.
 - Fashion! Gowns, chapperons, liripipes and hosen added to complete the historic weapons & armor. Added advantage is most terms for medieval fashion apply to both genders, most of what comes with this mod is mens fashion (I'm steering clear of hennins for now) but gowns and such were worn by both women and men so the 'warrior in a dress' thing is no longer a thing.
 - 783 lines of item descriptions now help in making clear what exactly poleaxes, liripipes and arquebusses actually are.
 - Equipment encumbrance added through the stock dfhack script modtools/item-trigger. Heavier armor will cost some endurance but also add toughness, large shields will cost strength to simulate them getting in the way of weapons.
 - Numerous fixes which I may or may not have forgotten by now. 7a is obviously not save compatible.

Spoiler: Older changes (click to show/hide)

Patch for non-metallurgy steelmaking

---

- Entity reaction tokens for steelmaking in the non-metallurgy version went missing. Added them back in, the reactions should show up in existing games. This patch is not required for the metallurgy version.

Revision 6c changes: various bugfixes and 44.02 compatibility

---

- Updates the mod to 44.02.
 - Added descriptions to metallurgy reactions.
 - Added an alternative reaction for glass and charcoal powder that uses a jub instead of a bag.
 - Fixes: Meteoric iron production, mysterious iron boulders, various language errors and various small adjustments to equipment (such as reduced greatsword sizes).

Revision 6b changes: fixes and DF Revised patch

---

- Added compatibility patch for Dwarf Fortress Revised, which is pretty much the successor to Modest Mod.
   Still requires both mods. Install Revised first, then my base mods, then the patch.
 - Fixes: Placed aluminum back into the non-metallurgy version, made neck nervous tissue less vulnerable, actually put in the correct material template file (doh).
 - Oops, one extra fix added later: Removed micro-reduce steel reaction.

Revision 6a changes: 43.05 fixes, weapon and material rebalance

---

- 43.05 Proper Compatibility!
   Modified joints to be larger, and bodypart materials to have higher resistence to bending, pulling and twisting. Joints will still break, but only with pretty substantial amounts of force.
   Various modification, since 43.04+ seems to have slightly upset the previous balancing scheme.
 - Weapon Rebalancing and Diversification:
   Blunt and spiked weapons substantially more useful, and now the primary anti-armor tool.
   Increased the range of attack speed from 4 to 11 prepare+recover time.
   Speed and damage spread more evenly. Weapons are still sorted according to type, then handedness (1h or 2h), then weight.
   Added duplicate entries for 'priority' attack. The AI will do more spiking with a military pick, and more bashing with a warhammer. Stabby swords stab more, slashy ones mostly slash.
   Moved weapons to legacy file: Light battleaxe, bearded axe, broad falchion and voulge. All due to pre-dating our 15th century setting by too much.
   Re-added a military-use rondel and bollock dagger. Their non-existence was causing some issues with thieves being unarmed, and tool-type weapons are not equipable in fortress mode.
 - Armor Modifications:
   Moved padded gloves and boots to legacy, due to most likely not existing. Increased protectiveness of shoes and gloves, though not to the level of the padded versions.
    Added 'munitions grade' armor to goblins. This makes invasions a bit more of a challenge, as they will wear armor even as civilian clothing.
 - Material Changes:
   ALL non-deep metals as well as leather now have the same shear yield, but different impact yield/fracture and different shear fracture. This makes iron armor not simulate gingerbread when hit with something better than iron, it will be inferior but still useful.
   Leather armor now gives protection against lighter edged blows. It will still get chewed up a LOT faster than metal, but should be more useful and a good addition to cloth armor if your low on metal.
   Reduced max edge on iron, a bit less on steel, and left at default (10000) for crucible steel.
   A certain overly colourful metal has been nerfed. It will go through steel with enough force, but a slight flick with a saber won't decapitate an armored man anymore. Avoid using it for ammo.
 -  Other Stuff:
   Case-hardening steel now yours a billet that will need to be hammered. This simulated folding the non-uniform case hardening product into something more homogeneous and actually useable.
   Actual documentation for weapons and armor, including which armor can go over which other armors! It doesn't look pretty, but I hope it clears things up a bit.
   Moved leaf arrows and trefoil arrows to legacy. They were pretty much redundant in terms of functionality.
   Increased the surface broadhead bolts, hopefully resulting in less wasted ammunition of irritating pond crawlers and such.
   I may be forgetting some stuff... Surprise features!

Revision 5b changes: Oops, stray SHAPED tokens

---

- Removed misplaced SHAPED token in two of the helmets. No idea how they got there in the first place, but gone they are.

Revision 5a changes: Lots of changes to armor, addition of metallurgy and collarbones!

---

- Added the historic metallurgy module!
   Adds buildings: Bloomeries, Blast furnaces, Puddle furnaces, a Crucible furnace and Finery forges.
   Adds the various iron smelting and refinement processes that were in use around the middle of the 15th century.
   Adds materials: Pattern-welded steel, Crucible steel and Meteoric iron.
   Either charcoal, or flux + mineral fuel is required to smelt iron. Have a use for all those trees and make some elves cry!
   Dwarves posses some exotic metallurgical knowledge: Crucible steel and puddle furnaces. These are not native to medieval Europe, but neither are dwarves.
   Just ferro-metallurgy for now. Information about 15th century methods for smelting other metals is somewhat spotty, and I need to read up on it first.
   Removed weapon and armor usage from bronze and silver. Weapons made from these metal were not a thing in late medieval Europe.
      If you want them back in, copy the tags over from another weapon and armor metal.

 - Armor additions and removals:
   Added Ocular kettle helm: A kettle helm that reaches over the eyes and has eye slits to look through. Covers slightly more than the visored sallet, but also slightly thinner.
   Added mail and plate Bevors: A piece of armor covering the bottom of the face and throat), these can be worn under kettle helms, sallets and great helms.
   Added mail sleeves: The same as mail mittens except they cover the whole limb. Can be used in combination with coat of plates.
   Added boiled leather helmet and limb armor: Their exact history is spotty due to their nasty habit of rotting away, but it shows up on various effigies and images.
   Removed ALL spangenhelm-derived helmets, due to them being woefully displaced in time for this mod.

 - Armor layering and coverage changes.
   Worked out some glitches with armor not always wanting to be worn over clothing which should be wearable under it (socks, shirts, etc).
   Partial plate limb armor can be worn over mail limb armor (as they were historically).
   Visored sallet no longer has 100% coverage, but can be worn with bevor.
   Mailed bascinet and mail coif can now only be worn under great helms.
   Increased body armor thickness quite a bit.
   Cuirasses, coats of plates and brigandines now protect only the upper and lower body and the neck.

 - Collarbones!
   An internal limb connecting the upper body with the arms of every humanoid body.
   Can be broken with a severe hit on the upper body, breakage will incapacitate the attached arm.
   Enables me to let body armor protect the neck without also extending to protect the upper arms.
   Added a layer of muscle around ribs and collarbones to keep them from shattering from minor damage.

 - Restructured the mod archive to be less messy.
 - Trapcomp file in included by default now. Nerfed serrated disks to be just a bit less game-breaky.
 - Dropped support for items only version.

Revision 4c changes: more minor fixes and changes

---

- Fixed stupid duplicate gloves for real this time
 - Less awkward armor names / more descriptive armor names!
   Renamed 'gauntlet and bracers' to 'arm harness'
   Renamed 'boot and greave' to 'leg harness'
   Renamed 'plate armor' to 'plate cuirass'
   Renamed 'hauberk' to 'mail coat'
   Renamed 'haubergeon' to 'mail shirt'
 - Fixed bismuth bronze. It has the same properties as regular bronze, as it has in the stock game.
 - Rearranged some armor and clothing layering. Still works the same but easier to keep track of for me.

Revision 4b changes: minor fixes

---

- Fixed some stock files getting mixed up into the download and making a duplicate item

Revision 4 changes: 42.01 compatibility!

---

- List of updated files:
   b_detail_plan_default.txt
   body_default.txt
   c_variation_default.txt
   creature_standard.txt
   material_template_default.txt
 - If you run 42.01 with the old version, update now as parchment, drunkenness and other possibly important things might not work!

Revision 3c changes: just a quick fix!

---

- Removed flat strikes until the AI can handle them responsibly
 - Cleaned up pommel/butt/butt-spike attacks. They are now consistent and not completely useless in some cases.

Revision 3b changes: bugs & balance!

---

- Adjusted weight on some weapons (mostly axes).
 - Adjusted material cost of axes, maces and the bardiche.
 - Increased the surface of most blunt weapons to increase pulping damage.
 - Increased protectiveness of all limb armor (to simulate limbs yielding more to impact).
 - Reduced edge value of all weapon metals to 500, which increases momentum cost for cutting through armor and tissue.
   This means padded and leather armor now offer at least some protection against lighter blows.
 - Added CAN_BE_MUTUAL to the adrenaline interaction, which seems to make it a bit more reliable in dwarf mode at least.
 - Added thin layer of muscle and fat to the head, having none caused skin-less creatures to have no tissue on their head.
 - Fixed invincible head bug. I'm not sure what caused it in the first place, but its gone.
 - Made finger and toes internal. For some reason they do not come up in combat logs at all now.
   I think is slightly better then losing a hand because a child scratched your thumb off.
 - Added spinted limb armor. This was actually a Rev3 change but I forgot to mention it.

Revision 3 changes:

---

- Added numerous modifications to combat! See feature list.
 - Rebalanced weapons to work with the above.
 - Added early variant of the arming sword, for a more complete set of earlier medieval equipment.
 - Added a stake to the wooden weapons.
 - Reduced weight of some swords and axes.
 - Made all helmets a bit thicker.

Revision 2 changes:

---

- Added modified cloth and leather materials for the padded/leather armors to work properly.
 - Numerous balance adjustments.
 - Adjusted entity_default to divide the items a bit more sensibly.
 - Added a number of armor pieces:
   Armets, late-medieval Italian full helmet.
   Barbutes, late-medieval Italian helmet modelled after the Corinthian helmet.
   Partial plate armor, earlier plate armor with 83% coverage.
   
 - Renamed and repurposed a number of weapons to less obtuse names:
   glaive faussard -> short glaive
   pronged warhammer -> short polehammer (this also became two-handed)
   poleaxe -> light poleaxe
   polehammer -> crow's beak
   pronged polehammer -> polehammer
   bill-guisarme -> bill-hook
   faussard -> military scythe
   
 - Removed the following items:
   ITEM_WEAPON_SWORD_CLEAVER_FAUSSARD (highly debatable existence)
   ITEM_WEAPON_POLEARM_FAUCHARD_FORK (superfluous)
   ITEM_HELM_MASKED_LAMELLAR (superfluous)

Accreditations and misc notes:

---

- Loads of thanks be to zaporozhets who's worked I've pretty damn heavily drawn from for the ranged-mod and artillery script! His stuff here, check it out http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=171742.0
 - The entirety of the DFhack team and the folks who write scripts for it.
 - Compatibility for the 42.06 creature variation file and the Modest bodies mod gracefully provided by Taffer
 - Made possible with glorious Science committed by Urist da Vincy and many others
 - Helped along by various members of the community that pointed out errors and potential improvements.
 - Any criticism or comment, be it positive, negative or neither, is very much appreciated!
 - Anyone is free to use all or parts of this mod in their own projects, or to fork this project if they think I'm making a mess of things! Crediting me is optional, though appreciated.

This mod is (partially or entirely) included in:
 - A more mundane mod (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=157452.0)
 - Legendary Dwarf Fortress (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=168221.0)
 - Asin's Goblinoids (and Orcs) Mod (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=164948.0)

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor
Post by: Ladygolem on December 20, 2014, 08:19:30 pm

Looks really interesting! Question: what was the motivation for making whips, scourges, etc. tools?

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor
Post by: Grimlocke on December 21, 2014, 08:57:12 am

It's purely to get the game to stop placing them on soldiers. Carrying a whip to a battlefield would be an immensely silly thing to do, especially after I adjusted their rather weird armor penetrating behaviour.

I also tried to have the game use actual leather for them but [LEATHER] did not work. I'm still trying to figure out if wool whips are better than steel whips.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor (0.40.xx) - Revision 2
Post by: Grimlocke on January 09, 2015, 09:33:34 pm

Updated! See above.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor (0.40.xx) - Revision 2
Post by: Urist Tilaturist on January 12, 2015, 06:28:46 am

I guess that the OP steel whips of normal DF are supposed to be flails and are just implemented wrong. Since this mod adds flails, steel whips are unnecessary.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor (0.40.xx) - Revision 2
Post by: Dynastia on January 16, 2015, 06:46:45 pm

Quote from: Grimlocke on December 19, 2014, 08:08:20 pm

Lastly there are some names I can't figure out. What is a general term for someone using a two-handed polearm?

Guisarmier is the modern term most people use, but the contemporary English referred to all polearms as 'staves' and their wielders as 'stavesmen'.

Quote from: Grimlocke on December 19, 2014, 08:08:20 pm

Or for a viking-style sword without using any time/place/people names?

You could call it an arming sword and then call the more classical knightly-style arming sword a 'cruciform sword', if you were so inclined. Or maybe early arming sword vs modern arming sword. Personally, I'd call it a dwarven sword.

Quote from: Grimlocke on December 19, 2014, 08:08:20 pm

I'm also not too sure about 'flailman', but 'flailer' is worse for certain.

I'd go with 'flailsman'.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor (0.40.xx) - Revision 2
Post by: Grimlocke on January 17, 2015, 09:42:36 pm

Thanks! Those actually work rather well!

'Stavesman' and 'flailsman' also have the benefit of the name being self-explanatory.

'Cruciform sword' from what I have read mostly refers to the larger swords with 2-handed grips, which I already used other names for (bastard sword, longsword and two-handed sword, in order of size).

Early/modern arming sword works I suppose. I considered calling some weapons after their host civilisation, but that would add the problem of it not being apparent just what shape the sword has just from 'dwarven sword' or 'goblin axe'. It would be really nice to have ingame descriptions of weapons and other items, beside 'this is a steel sword, it is studded with well made groundhog bone'

Anyhow, the next version of this mod will alter civilisation creatures. It will be easy to include the new profession names.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor (0.40.xx) - Revision 2
Post by: Dynastia on January 19, 2015, 07:01:20 am

No, cruciform swords included any sword defined by their crucifix-like shape ; the flat crossbar that serves as a hilt/handguard. There were certainly cruciform longswords, and at some point that might have even been the norm in places like Germany and Switzerland but for the most part your typical cruciform sword was a one-handed arming sword, pretty much directly evolved from the spatha and viking sword.

It's a tricky thing to get the names both accurate and looking nice for stuff like viking swords and scythian axes, etc., unless you're making direct cultural analogues (dwarves = vikings or dwarves = romans, etc.), but personally I think early/modern arming swords might be your best option. It's clunky, but so is anything else I can think of.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor (0.40.xx) - Revision 2
Post by: Urist Tilaturist on January 19, 2015, 01:00:28 pm

Mythical mining dwarves came from Norse mythology, but they are not real Vikings and their crafts should not be referred to as such.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor (0.40.xx) - Revision 2
Post by: Grimlocke on January 20, 2015, 12:35:36 pm

Quote from: Dynastia on January 19, 2015, 07:01:20 am

No, cruciform swords included any sword defined by their crucifix-like shape ; the flat crossbar that serves as a hilt/handguard. There were certainly cruciform longswords, and at some point that might have even been the norm in places like Germany and Switzerland but for the most part your typical cruciform sword was a one-handed arming sword, pretty much directly evolved from the spatha and viking sword.

It's a tricky thing to get the names both accurate and looking nice for stuff like viking swords and scythian axes, etc., unless you're making direct cultural analogues (dwarves = vikings or dwarves = romans, etc.), but personally I think early/modern arming swords might be your best option. It's clunky, but so is anything else I can think of.

On cruciform swords: I suppose your correct, though that does leave the name being a lot more encompassing than I would like.

And yes the names have proven to be one of the harder parts of getting this kind of mod right. Most archaeological finds are named after the place they were found, or by the people that supposedly used them, neither of which I can use here and the more general names are often too ambiguous, obscure or localized. There are for instance about 6 weapons in this mod that could be called just 'pollaxe', since this name refers to a type of construction and use rather than any specific configuration.

It would be pretty nice if I could hack in item descriptions for weapons. May have to look into that.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor (0.40.xx) - Revision 2
Post by: Dynastia on January 21, 2015, 12:22:23 pm

It might be an idea to just pick a certain historical location and specific timeframe for each entity and then remove all other weapons as redundant ; or maybe even split them up into multiple mini-mods, so people can choose whether they want their dwarves using 14th century franch or 8th century viking equipment, etc. That would mostly solve the problem of having 6 different poleaxes. To be honest it's probably a good idea to merge any weapons that have similar form and function into a more generalised title, and you'd still have a boatloads of improvement over vanilla DF, historically speaking.

Oh, just wanted to ask, are you going to restrict elven weapons to ones that would work fairly well if made of wood (spears, clubs, flails, etc.) and take away their silly wooden longswords? I'd like that.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor (0.40.xx) - Revision 2
Post by: Urist Tilaturist on January 21, 2015, 12:38:13 pm

If elves used obsidian, then they could make macuahuitl. Otherwise, wooden swords should be out, except for bludgeoning.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor (0.40.xx) - Revision 2
Post by: Grimlocke on January 21, 2015, 04:52:10 pm

Already changed the elven weapons, they now use a quarterstaff, club and threshing flail. I don't actually know how much sense wooden spears make, or whether it would do anything other than blunt damage.

I tried to get elves to use flint and obsidian some time ago but that didn't work out so well. I might take another swing at that some time in the future, though I'm not sure about shoe-horning in weapons from a completely different continent into medieval Europe. Then again, tree-hugging cannibal Elves don't make any sense there either... eh ill see.

And yes I did think of splitting the mod into various time/place variations, the entity file I have in there now already has east-European weapons split off from some of the west-European, though I have been having somewhat of a harder time finding accurate information about the later east-European weapons and armor.

I am not entirely satisfied about the approach, if only because equating the Rus to Goblins does not do the Rus much justice... but it's certainly better than every civ having a weird soup of weapons and armor from all over the place (and time).

Splitting up the mod in multiple files would be nice once it gets any bigger, though it could get.. complicated what with every imaginable era and place having at least some overlap with others. Mail, spears and bows for instance are all but ubiquitous from the Romans to the end of the middle ages. I suppose I could make a basic set of weapons and then split off the more specific ones into separate files? Better make an excel sheet at that rate though.

Having a dark age mod would be pretty neat though. It's a fascinating era, rather under-appreciated in the media if you ask me.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor (0.40.xx) - Revision 2
Post by: Urist Tilaturist on January 21, 2015, 06:42:06 pm

Wooden stakes can be very sharp and leave horrible splintered wounds. Punji sticks work on similar principles. Where they fail is in piercing armour and not breaking apart with repeated use.

Who said DF was mediaeval Europe? Toady referenced goblins being influenced by the Assyrians once. Elves seem like some sort of Amazonian or New Guinean savage tribe who have strange ways of getting wood without harming trees or resorting to cheap penis jokes.

Since the "weapon balance mod" has died down and achieved little, could historically appropriate raws changes like removing most of the head muscle and fat fit in this mod? If the aim is to recreate historical combat, that is not possible without some raws changes (unarmed attacks are still too strong with the current version of the mod).

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor (0.40.xx) - Revision 2
Post by: Grimlocke on January 21, 2015, 11:56:22 pm

I said it was set in medieval Europe :)

I know DF canon is kind of... ambiguous about its exact setting, but all the weapons and attire are basically copies from D&D, which in turn based its weapon set on medieval Europe. I'm also no big fan of games and other media throwing together things from cultures from completely different times and places, like the obligatory katana that is in every game with melee weapons ever. It just looks... weird and out of place in settings which is nowhere near Japan. Katanas don't even make sense in the technical aspect either when places alongside plate armor and morningstarts. The shape of a katana stems from its laminated construction, which in turn is a result from the lack of good quality iron ore in the Japanese archipelago. Plate armor suggests a thriving steel working industry and a plenty of material to work with.

...

/rant

Aaanyhow, I do realize the Elves are going to fail at making any sense one way or another. At some point I will either give them a selection of neolithic weapons or outfit them as woodland brigands with metal weapons. For now giving them less silly wooden sticks will have to do, wooden spears will be added in the next version of this mod.

As for the general combat balance stuff: I currently have modified unarmed combat (including animal bites), an adrenaline simulation interaction that gives creatures a ton of willpower and some endurance as long as combat lasts, and adding the head muscle fix it pretty trivial. I'm already modifying the entity creatures anyway.

It's all gotten a bit slow to progress though as some modifications I made in the metal raws which largely fixed armored, armed combat had the nasty side-effect of requiring me to separately rebalance and test every weapon (rather than the last version where I had at least a rough guideline).

...

Quote from: Urist Tilaturist on January 21, 2015, 06:42:06 pm

Elves seem like some sort of Amazonian or New Guinean savage tribe who have strange ways of getting wood without harming trees or resorting to cheap penis jokes.

 :P

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor (0.40.xx) - Revision 2
Post by: Urist Tilaturist on January 22, 2015, 11:52:42 am

While dwarves could be compared to Vikings, given their origins as smiths in Norse myth, I do not think DF is much like mediaeval Europe because of elves, who with their lack of metals and cannibal habits would seem very out of place there. There are a hotchpotch of cultures, some of which are more like mediaeval Europe than others.

Katana would not make much sense if everyone has plate armour and abundant metals, but not everyone in DF has. Their existence would not be outstanding in areas where iron, and therefore iron plate, were rare.

Wooden stakes were also used in mediaeval Europe by archers, who stuck them around camps and in front of their posistions to deter enemy horsemen. In an emergency, they could serve as improvised spears.

Eventually I would like to see elves trading for and using metal, even if they refrain from mining it, but the price of good iron must be higher first to stop it being too abundant.

For unarmed combat, other changes discussed in the other thread were making small body parts internal to slightly improve AI wrestling, and reducing the attacking power of materials like nails and bone to stop scratches from breaking ribs and so on.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor (0.40.xx) - Revision 2
Post by: friendguy13 on January 22, 2015, 04:12:37 pm

Why do some of your armor pieces have more than 100% coverage.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor (0.40.xx) - Revision 2
Post by: Grimlocke on January 22, 2015, 07:25:40 pm

Quote from: friendguy13 on January 22, 2015, 04:12:37 pm

Why do some of your armor pieces have more than 100% coverage.

Coverage, for some reason not shared with the public, is factored in to armor thickness and can be larger than 100%. A 50% coverage armor is not only ignored by half the hits, but is also half as thick.

Armor thickness for creatures of the same size is Coverage*Layer size*(1.25*stepping tokens), with this mod I attempted to keep the armor thickness for the various bodyparts the same where it should be.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor (0.40.xx) - Revision 2
Post by: Urist Tilaturist on January 26, 2015, 12:59:35 pm

How is progress on the new mod version? I would like to playtest a version which included both unarmed and armed combat improvements to see how they fitted together, remembering of course the limitations of what modders can do now.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor (0.40.xx) - Revision 2
Post by: Grimlocke on January 26, 2015, 10:25:42 pm

It's mostly done, just wrapping up some last oddities with the weapons, as well as fixing ranged combat from being... weird. Things like bolts breaking bones through armor, which seems to happen regardless of the mass of the bolts.

Punching and kicking no longer breaks bones, which is not entirely realistic as you can break bones if someone is up against the ground or a wall, but increasing force means that punching an armored man in the gut sends him into a vomiting spree. Organ damage and knock-outs overall happen a bit too soon but this is outside of raw modding reach.

Axes and other percussive edged weapons can now inflict substantial blunt damage even if they fail to penetrate, unlike the stock game where any edged weapon failing to cut just results in a bruise.

Small body parts have proven... finicky. Using the body detail plans proved pointless, they are bugged and don't even seem to work right on stock game. Cheeks are supposed to cover the tongue and teeth, but only the tongue gets covered in-game. Making finger/toes embedded lets them be covered by the right armor, but they always break anyway because the bodypart is so tiny. Making all the face parts internal resulted in some exotic combat reports, though all in all it may be the best option.

Anyhow, ill be sure to put something up tomorrow, even if its just a playtest version.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor (0.40.xx) - Revision 2
Post by: Urist Tilaturist on January 27, 2015, 03:33:06 am

Breaking small bones like jaws and ribs should be possible for legendary fighters, though I am not sure if modders can change how much a skill improves something.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor (0.40.xx) - Revision 3
Post by: Grimlocke on January 27, 2015, 05:02:15 pm

Updated!

The combat balance right now is still not perfect, but certainly a lot better than before. I could not get the small bodyparts to work right, making them internal causes some really messy combat report where every single part of the face gets pulped and somehow it makes it impossible pulp the head with blunt weapons.

I doubt however that I tested every possible combat situation, so if anything odd happens, please do say!

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor (0.40.xx) - Revision 3
Post by: Urist Tilaturist on January 29, 2015, 01:09:38 pm

I am about to playtest the new mod version to see how much better it is.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor (0.40.xx) - Revision 3
Post by: Urist Tilaturist on January 29, 2015, 01:24:20 pm

Head biting works very well indeed, with damage only tearing the skin. Removal of the muscle and fat from heads has helped a lot.

In a fight between a completely untrained dwarf and a completely untrained goblin, shaking after biting still seems a little overpowered, as does scratching. What would be better is if the damage of these attacks increased greatly with skill, but I expect that is out of the reach of modders.

The adrenaline syndrome seems to work inconsistently. Some fighters seem to get battle rage, and others seem not to, though they all show as having the syndrome.

2 grand master fighters fought in the same way as 2 dabbling fighters, which seems very odd.

In a clash of grand master axemen, a nasty situation arose where a goblin kicked a dwarf to the ground and hacked at his head over and over again, mangling the skull beyond recognition. Despite this, the dwarf stayed alive and the goblin kept on hacking until he collapsed from over exertion. While this is mostly a bad AI problem, since the goblin should just pull off the helmet, survival with a skull mangled beyond recognition should not be possible. The dwarf finally bled to death after the goblin had collapsed and recovered 3 times. There is still some work to do.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor (0.40.xx) - Revision 3
Post by: Grimlocke on January 29, 2015, 03:46:45 pm

Scratching seems to damage the fat layer, I can probably adjust the penetration depth on the entity creatures to reduce it.

I also just noticed I left in my debug tag in the interaction which turns everything into a blue U when it battle-rages... oops. At least it showed when it works. And yes the AI seems to sporadically fail to actually get the syndrome from the interaction, I am not sure whether or not this is a bug but either way it seems out of raw modding reach. It does at least add an extra incentive to sneak up on enemies as a single good hit on an unaware enemy can make them give into pain.

The unarmed attacks are a bit finicky to work with, either they are bone shattering Dragonball Z ripoffs, or just do bruises no matter what. I will be messing around with it a bit more in the hope of finding a middle ground but I doubt it will ever work perfectly.

There also seems something very wrong with blunt damage to heads, as the skull somehow fails to transfer any momentum to the brain after being hit. I have no idea when this snuck in, I have reversed pretty much every change I made to the head materials, tissues, etc. one by one and the same things keeps happening. Somehow repeatedly hitting unarmored enemies over the head with a maul does not actually kill them.

Also there is annoying 'dented hair' from the changes I made for padded armor... Not sure how to get around that...

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor (0.40.xx) - Revision 3
Post by: Urist Tilaturist on January 29, 2015, 05:45:09 pm

The weird invincible skulls are the biggest problem with this. There must be some raws problem which caused it. Finding a balance with unarmed attacks is very hard and will take time, but the skulls need fixing first.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor (0.40.xx) - Revision 3
Post by: Urist Tilaturist on February 01, 2015, 06:37:04 am

Any progress on the skulls problem?

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor (0.40.xx) - Revision 3
Post by: Grimlocke on February 01, 2015, 05:58:59 pm

Ok, following a few days of busyness, procastrination and failing to find out what is causing this, I have found there to be two problems:

One is the head not being pulpable due to the tissue layer changes. Which makes no sense, the muscle and skin material have very similar material and tissue properties. I am trying to find a way to find a way to have cake and eat it too, but for now replacing the modded body detail plan line with [BP_LAYERS:BY_CATEGORY:HEAD:ARG3:50:ARG2:5:ARG1:1] will solve that problem (which was the main cause of downed enemies being indestructible).

Another seems that for some reason my modded weapons don't seem to want to damage brains with blunt damage. All the organ damage liking breaking ribs and bruising lungs works fine, even knock-outs happen regularly, just the 'brain bruises' don't want to happen. The only difference I can think of is that I use an edged attack with 0 penetration depth for blunt attacks as these are (very annoyingly) also tied to AI behaviour. Edged attacked are used about 100 times more often by the AI so this is really kind of needed for this mod, what with all weapons having secondary attacks and a lot of weapon having both a blunt and edged primary attack.

Anyhow I will be making an update for the current version with whatever I come up with for the head tissues, as well as a slight buff for the lighter battleaxes which did perform a but more weakly than I thought.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor (0.40.xx) - Revision 3
Post by: Urist Tilaturist on February 07, 2015, 04:41:19 am

How much progress has there been on the new version?

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor (0.40.xx) - Revision 3
Post by: Grimlocke on February 07, 2015, 07:38:43 am

Mostly been busy getting bugs and oddities out. Also increased the contact surface of most blunt weapons to make pulping easier and fights hopefully less prolonged.

I think I at least managed to make the adrenaline interaction work reliably in dwarf mode, adventurer mode I'm still not sure about. In the adventurer-arena mode it works automatically on the player character (Weirdly enough) but tends to have a large delay for enemies. The arena AI in general seems a bit fudged though so perhaps in actual play it will do better.

I have also been trying to get some more mileage out of armored combat, mainly hits on limbs not being very realistic but that didn't work out.

At any rate I will probably have a release this weekend.       

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor (0.40.xx) - Revision 3
Post by: Teh Barple on February 07, 2015, 11:54:36 am

just wanna say that this mod is amazing and i love it, keep up the good work!

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor (0.40.xx) - Revision 3b
Post by: Grimlocke on February 07, 2015, 03:18:50 pm

Aaand updated to Revision 3b! No big changes but plenty of small ones, including the fix for the annoying invincible head bug.

One remaining gripe is the annoying 'dented hair' combat reports, which I can't get rid of without making woollen padded armor useless.

And this is not a huge problem, more of an... awkward thing: Does anyone knows better names for 'gauntlet and plate bracers' and 'boot and plate greave'?

And glad you like it Barple  ;)

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor (0.40.xx) - Revision 3b
Post by: Urist Tilaturist on February 07, 2015, 05:46:42 pm

Why are boots and plate greaves 1 item? Historically greaves and sabatons were separate pieces of armour and I am not aware of a term for both.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor (0.40.xx) - Revision 3b
Post by: Grimlocke on February 07, 2015, 06:36:51 pm

Gameplay reasons. I can't make any item covering a leg that doesn't cover a foot.

The default 'greaves' did not work as they covered the lower body and inevitably overlapped with the upper body armor which always also covers the lower body. That and leg armor is not like trousers.

Every armor item beside some helmets are also a collection of separate armor pieces. The 'plate armor' for isntance is composed of a breastplate, backplate, tassets, spaulders, rerebraces, gorget and probably a few things I forgot.

The reason the body armor covers the upper arms, in case anyone wonders, is that I have to give the body armor at least 1 upper body stepping for it to cover the neck and throat.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor (0.40.xx) - Revision 3b
Post by: Urist Tilaturist on February 09, 2015, 01:34:10 pm

After some more testing...

A fight between an untrained, unarmed dwarf and goblin was a horrendous affair lasting 92 pages of combat report. The dwarf initially gained the upper hand, knocking out some of the goblin's teeth and crushing several of his joints before settling for punching him in the head for literally days on end, collapsing and regaining consciousness before resuming work. After a few days of this beating, the goblin suddenly became responsive again and bit the dwarf in the foot. The dwarf suddenly soiled himself and ran shrieking "Help, save me" while vomiting profusely. A second bout of fighting then ensued, with the dwarf initially pummelling the goblin's head again before the goblin finally bit the dwarf's head and shook him around until he bled to death.

There were still issues with this fight, but they were mainly an inability for participants to walk away from a lethal fight and poor AI resulting in obsessive head punching. Tissue raws seem fairly good.

A match between grand master unarmed fighters (all skills grand master) was short but vicious. The dwarf quickly defeated the goblin by biting off his finger, exploding his foot into gore with a kick and finally exploding his head into gore with a punch, only taking 5 report pages to do so. While grand master fighters have more striking power, it seems a little unfeasible that one could explode a head into gore with a punch. If there were some way of damaging the brain without crushing the skull, that might be more suitable, but at the moment much of the combat system is out of our reach.

I was about to test armoured fights when I saw that I had not installed your mod properly. My conclusions from unarmoured fights may be invalid.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor (0.40.xx) - Revision 3b
Post by: Grimlocke on February 09, 2015, 04:25:19 pm

The unskilled, unarmored, unarmed combat being that way is kind of inevitable (heh) at this point, as I can't for instance regulate how much momentum bonus skills give. If I give the unskilled fighters more impact, the grand master ones get a proportional increase. I also don't know of any way to encourage the AI to strangle enemies, or for the game to more often inflict brain damage (I did some experimenting with the size of the skull and brain for that but there is no obvious difference).

Thankfully it will also be fairly uncommon in actual play as even the adventurer mode civilians carry daggers, knives and cudgels. For fortress mode it will at worst make for a realistically one-sided fight when a goblin finds one of your dwarves with no weapons.

I should also note that grand master punchers seem to be exceedingly rare ingame. I would still like them to behave realistically but its not a great priority when altering it also affects other parts of the game.

Anyhow I look forward to hearing more results! Keep in mind that for armor to reach full potential you will also need to add the various padded armor pieces (the aketon, padded coif, gloves and padded boots fit under armor). Not having these will make the fighter fairly vulnerable to blunt damage.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor (0.40.xx) - Revision 3b
Post by: Urist Tilaturist on February 09, 2015, 05:10:53 pm

Thank you for the advice. Unarmed, unskilled clashes like the first fight will fortunately be rare, since any real goblin invaders will have at least minimal training and equipment. Have you checked to see if fortress invaders equip themselves properly?

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor (0.40.xx) - Revision 3b
Post by: Urist Tilaturist on February 10, 2015, 01:58:30 pm

In a longsword duel between a completely unskilled but fully armoured (steel and padding) dwarf and goblin, the fight started with many ineffective blows being exchanged before the goblin finally knocked down the dwarf and stabbed him again and again in the head until he died. Unfortunately, stabbing through gaps in the armour does not seem to be possible here. The fight was reasonable for unskilled participants, though the head being "cloven asunder" through the helm seems a little unlikely, especially after both participants have been fighting for some time and would be tired.

More testing to come later.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor (0.40.xx) - Revision 3b
Post by: Grimlocke on February 11, 2015, 12:29:59 am

Weak point attacks are not really possible to mod in I'm afraid.

As of now an adapt swordsman has a small chance to stab through armor of a standing opponent when using a heavy attack, which in not particularly realistic until you pretend he hit under a joint or something. That's as close as I can get it though.

'Cloven asunder' is kind of an unfortunate term the combat log uses for every bodypart that gets pulped by edged weapons. Which means that even in the vanilla game if you stab someone upper body enough times it gets 'cloven asunder'. Which is weird but also a good way to keep fights from getting stuck because of attacks that don't penetrate far enough to damage brains.

As for fortress equipment: I haven't checked, but if its anything like adventurer mode equipment its... not great. Basically the game throws together a random body armor and helmet for every entity and still does the silly thing where it puts shields on soldiers using non-pike-skill two-handed weapons. From what I have heard invaders behave largely the same, although to be honest it has been a while since I last ran a fortress long enough to get invaded in the first place. There's always some bug or quirk I run into that annoys me enough to eventually gen a new world.

There is supposedly a set of uniforms the game generates for each entity that could theoretically be modified to make sense, but that's all scripting voodoo territory.

Soo yeah sadly most of the quirks there come down to 'it was inevitable'.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor (0.40.xx) - Revision 3b
Post by: Urist Tilaturist on February 11, 2015, 11:19:29 am

Could you use dfhack to spawn a load of invaders and check their armament? I presume there is no way to fix those problems.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor (0.40.xx) - Revision 3b
Post by: Urist Tilaturist on February 12, 2015, 01:52:08 pm

A fight between 2 legendary longsword wielders in full plate had a few problems. Besides heads being cloven asunder, the goblin smashed the dwarf on the upper left arm with the flat of his longsword and exploded it into gore. Not only is that a stupid attack which should not have done more than bruise muscle through armour, it could have snapped the longsword in 2 if struck with that level of super-goblin force. Removing attacks with the flat of the sword would be a good idea, since their implementation seems utterly broken now.

I then set a fully armoured legendary axedwarf on the victorious goblin, who proceeded to smash straight through his armour in with superdwarven strength until something utterly stupid happened. This dwarf, who had hit the goblin so hard his axe had gone straight through steel plate and got briefly stuck, bashed the goblin on the eyelid...denting the eyelash and bruising the skin. This, for once, is comically underpowered; an attack of that sort should have blinded the goblin at least, if not killed him. The dwarf then recovered his form by cleaving the goblin across the waist so deeply his axe became stuck again, and finishing him off.

The same axedwarf then hacked down a legendary goblin axedwarf with no issues at all, cleaving his head asunder with several strong chops.

Finally, the axedwarf faced a hammer goblin. He did another stupid slap with the flat of his axe (why?) before having his skull caved in. Weirdly, a scratch on the eyelid was blocked by an aketon; what kind of aketon covers the eyelids without blinding the wearer?

I deployed a hammerdwarf to fight the hammer goblin. He did well, smashing out many of the goblin's teeth, though such small body part attacks should cause wider destruction. A scratch on the nose was blocked by the aketon (I have no idea what a goblin or dwarven aketon looks like anymore), but the dwarf eventually prevailed, caving in the goblin's skull with the war hammer.

The main suggestion from these tests is to remove if possible slaps with the flat. They should be very ineffective, especially against armour, and the AI really has to stop using them entirely in its current sorry state.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor (0.40.xx) - Revision 3b
Post by: Grimlocke on February 12, 2015, 03:07:15 pm

Aaah, flat strikes. I flat out forgot about those!

 :P

Ok terrible puns aside, it seems I haven't adjusted the flat attacks velocity since the first version at all. I could adjust them to more reasonable values fairly easily, though I suppose its worth considering removing them entirely as the AI can't tell the difference between a lethal secondary attack (like a pommel bash) and a non-lethal secondary attack.

The face parts right now are left as the vanilla ones, which is to say pretty broken. For some reason they are not at all covered by the helmet, hits on them do not translate to damage to the actual head at all, the AI is way to fond of using any 'high roll' attacks they get on them and any clothing that extends two steps from the upper body does cover them. This is the culprit behind all the weirdness with bruised eyelids and noses getting scratched being blocked only by body clothing. Its not even the weirdest I have seen, my character once decided to bite and rip out someone's tongue, unimpeded by his helmet, face and general logic.

I have no luck in fixing this so far, at all. Making them embedded does nothing beside making them impossible to sever, making them internal causes the hits on the head to smash every single facial feature at once, and somewhere along the line it went and caused that weird invincible head bug. Removing them entirely is also problematic is a whole lot of creature entries reference them for descriptions like long noses and such. Teeth are even more annoying as they are used by attacks so I can't replace those with a dummy bodypart either.

A few historic notes: An aketon is a padded jacket, often with long sleeves. The names are somewhat ambiguous and often interchangeable, but here its the thinner version worn under armor or worn by civilians, often more for fashion than protection. For this mod it also covers the legs as making separate padded breeches once more causes the annoying double armor coverage on the lower body. Its not supposed to cover any part of the head, that's an annoying side effect of making a piece of body clothing/armor that covers the whole arms.
Slapping someone in armor with the flat of a longsword really hard would not break it, they are fairly flexible. Of course this does make a slap like that breaking bones through armor all the more silly.

Anyhow I will either remove the flat attacks or severely weaken them for the next version. For the face bits I'm really not sure what to do though...

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor (0.40.xx) - Revision 3b
Post by: Max™ on February 12, 2015, 09:23:11 pm

I don't use the full mod since I was having bad luck with some other stuff and rebuilt from scratch, though it did inspire me to make my war hammers into lucerne hammers with a spike on the back.

Anyway, for the face bits, could you change the rel-size to make them much much harder to target unless done deliberately on a prone target or as a freak lucky shot?

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor (0.40.xx) - Revision 3b
Post by: Urist Tilaturist on February 13, 2015, 01:32:54 pm

The longsword snapping was based on the massive amount of force needed to explode armoured parts into gore. Any sensible level of force would not break the sword, as you said.

Why does covering the arms cause the head to be covered?

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor (0.40.xx) - Revision 3b
Post by: Grimlocke on February 13, 2015, 02:28:19 pm

@Max Worth a shot I suppose, though these parts are already very small and generally get targeted by the AI when they get a 'lucky hit' roll that massively increases the odds of scoring a hit, which seem to happen regardless of the bodyparts size.

I also feel compelled to note that a Lucerne hammer is a polearm  :P


@Urist Tilaturist Upperbody clothing has two tokens used for stating how much of the body it covers: UBSTEP and LBSTEP. The first one decides how many bodyparts from the upper body it cover, the last one how many from the lower body. For the padded armors I used UBSTEP:MAX which covers everything safe for hands, heads and feet to account for any animal races/custom races. The thing is, the game does not actually stop applying the armor after it runs into a head, hand or foot. It just goes Upper body -> Neck -> Head, oh this is a head, not covering this! -> Nose, not a head or a hand! Covering this.

The whole problem would be solved if the face-bits would just be covered by the helmet instead, but the armor/clothing section of the game in particular is really old and clunky in a lot of places, it hardly changed at all since version .28, which was like 6 years ago at least. I do hope it and the entity equipment system get revised with the army arc update.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor (0.40.xx) - Revision 3b
Post by: Urist Tilaturist on February 15, 2015, 05:41:19 pm

How is the progress on the new changes?

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor (0.40.xx) - Revision 3b
Post by: Grimlocke on February 17, 2015, 08:54:38 am

Been messing around with descriptions and noses mostly. The latter not being particularly productive to be honest...

Also tried a few ASCII art image makers to see if I can get a somewhat legible picture into the game. Here's a few screenshots:

Description, there's more when you scroll down. For some reason the game only wants to display that many lines of info despite having much more room below.
(http://i.imgur.com/8AjHDwv.png)

Tried to put a picture from an old fighting manual in the ASCII art screen. Sort of works but only when you zoom out a lot.
(http://i.imgur.com/wx6fGPS.png)

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor (0.40.xx) - Revision 3b
Post by: Urist Tilaturist on February 17, 2015, 06:08:02 pm

A good effort, but I would put it below removing silly flat strikes and unnecessary explosions into gore on the priority list.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor (0.40.xx) - Revision 3b
Post by: Urist Tilaturist on February 20, 2015, 09:44:01 am

Any more progress on the next version?

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor (0.40.xx) - Revision 3b
Post by: Michael_Almeida on February 21, 2015, 12:54:15 am

So question: The latest revision seems to have a large number of new reactions in the entity files.

Code: [Select]


<><><><><><><><>    Reactions & Buildings <><><><><><><><>

[PERMITTED_BUILDING:PIT_BLOOMERY]
[PERMITTED_REACTION:1_IRON_ORE->-SMALL_BLOOM]
[PERMITTED_BUILDING:CHIMNEY_BLOOMERY]
[PERMITTED_REACTION:4_IRON_ORE->-LARGE_BLOOM]
[PERMITTED_BUILDING:BLAST_FURNACE]
[PERMITTED_BUILDING:MAGMA_BLAST_FURNACE]
[PERMITTED_REACTION:SMELT_IRON_ORE_BLAST_FURNACE]
[PERMITTED_REACTION:SMELT_IRON_ORE_BLAST_FURNACE_COKE]
[PERMITTED_BUILDING:CRUCIBLE_FURNACE]
[PERMITTED_REACTION:IRON->-RAW_CRUCIBLE_STEEL]
[PERMITTED_REACTION:MAKE_CRUCIBLE]
[PERMITTED_REACTION:GLASS->-GLASS_POWDER]
[PERMITTED_BUILDING:FINERY_FORGE]
[PERMITTED_BUILDING:MAGMA_FINERY_FORGE]
[PERMITTED_BUILDING:TRIP_HAMMER]
[PERMITTED_REACTION:4_PIG_IRON->-SMALL_BLOOM]
[PERMITTED_REACTION:16_PIG_IRON->-LARGE_BLOOM]
[PERMITTED_REACTION:RAW_BLOOM_SMALL->-BLOOM_SMALL]
[PERMITTED_REACTION:RAW_BLOOM_LARGE->-BLOOM_LARGE]
[PERMITTED_REACTION:RAW_BLOOM_LARGE->-RAW_BLOOM_SMALL]
[PERMITTED_REACTION:BLOOM_SMALL->-BARS]
[PERMITTED_REACTION:BLOOM_LARGE->-BARS]
[PERMITTED_REACTION:METEORITE->-BARS]
[PERMITTED_REACTION:IRON->-STEEL]
[PERMITTED_REACTION:IRON->-PIG_IRON]
[PERMITTED_REACTION:STEEL->-PIG_IRON]
[PERMITTED_REACTION:STEEL_PATTERNED_START]
[PERMITTED_REACTION:CONTINUE_HAMMERING_FINERY]
[PERMITTED_REACTION:CONTINUE_HAMMERING_TRIP_HAMMER]
[PERMITTED_REACTION:CHARCOAL->-CHARCOAL_POWDER]
[PERMITTED_REACTION:MAKE_STONE_ARROWS_LEAF]
[PERMITTED_REACTION:MAKE_STONE_ARROWS_BROADHEAD]
[PERMITTED_REACTION:ENT_IRON]
[PERMITTED_REACTION:ENT_STEEL_PATTERNED]
[PERMITTED_REACTION:ENT_STEEL_CRUCIBLE]
[PERMITTED_REACTION:ENT_METEORIC_IRON]
[PERMITTED_REACTION:RESERVE_1]
[PERMITTED_REACTION:RESERVE_2]
[PERMITTED_REACTION:RESERVE_3]
[PERMITTED_REACTION:RESERVE_4]
[PERMITTED_REACTION:RESERVE_5]
[PERMITTED_REACTION:RESERVE_6]
[PERMITTED_REACTION:RESERVE_7]
[PERMITTED_REACTION:RESERVE_8]
[PERMITTED_REACTION:RESERVE_9]
[PERMITTED_REACTION:RESERVE_10]

Considering that the files provided do not include reactions or buildings, I believe this might be something left in by mistake.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor (0.40.xx) - Revision 3b
Post by: Grimlocke on February 21, 2015, 11:37:48 am

Gah! Thought I removed that. Must have mixed up some files somewhere...

I have been rather more preoccupied than I though I would be the last few days, I can post a fix for the weapons right now if you want though. Nothing on the face-parts problem though, anything I change there just seems to make things worse. I might make an optional 'module' that just replaced them all (except teeth) with dummy bodyparts, though im not sure I can fully prevent them from showing up in weird places.

EDIT: Dropped an updated item_weapon file on the first post. Its got the flat strikes removed and a number of secondary attacks cleaned up and made consistent. It also turned out the one-handed axes had two flat strike attacks... not sure how that got there!

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor (0.40.xx) - Revision 3c
Post by: Urist Tilaturist on February 28, 2015, 03:51:11 pm

Installed the item_weapon file. Silly flat strikes are gone, but super strong eyelids still exist.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor (0.40.xx) - Revision 3c
Post by: Michael_Almeida on March 01, 2015, 01:03:59 pm

So these files effectively remove most clothing types for some reason, and the entity files actually seem to be supposed to give them clothes that don't exist.

Code: [Select]

[ARMOR:ITEM_ARMOR_SURCOAT:FORCED]
[ARMOR:ITEM_ARMOR_TABARD:FORCED]

I think you need to take a closer look at your files.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor (0.40.xx) - Revision 3c
Post by: Grimlocke on March 01, 2015, 04:21:47 pm

The tabard and surcoat are in item_body, they are overcoats like cloaks.

I'm not quite sure what you mean by removing clothing. All the vanilla clothing items are modified but still there with the same names.

I think something might have gone wrong installing it there, did you use all the files or just a few of them? If its the latter, keep in mind the armor file for instance only has actual armor in it now, body clothing is moved to item_body to save on clutter.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor (0.40.xx) - Revision 3c
Post by: Michael_Almeida on March 01, 2015, 05:23:45 pm

Now I see the problem. I was using winmerge and never noticed the item_body file.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor (0.40.xx) - Revision 3c
Post by: Urist Tilaturist on March 10, 2015, 08:23:37 am

Any more progress on super eyelids?

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor (0.40.xx) - Revision 3c
Post by: Max™ on March 11, 2015, 04:03:48 pm

I am actually aware that a lucerne hammer is a polearm, but it's the type of head and I can't find what that should be called to differentiate from the non-spiked war hammer types so I figured I'd just leave it since I know what I mean most of the time. :D

Also, I had the hilarious mental image of fiddling with making facial features less prone to being hit and getting weird results like whacking someone in the elbow and having teeth fly everywhere, what is wrong with me?

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor (0.40.xx) - Revision 3c
Post by: Grimlocke on March 16, 2015, 01:02:23 pm

Alright, follow some procrastination, experimentation and some test subjects dying from old age, this is where I arrived at:

I have made all face-bits internal safe for the eyes, reduced their size and removed lips and cheeks on creatures that use the 'FACIAL_FEATURES' bodypart entry, which is about all humanoid creatures at least. Somehow this does not actually seem to result in noticeable errors with the descriptions.

Its not perfect, as things like ears but also the tongue and mouth behave like internal organs, but all other solutions either require me to alter just about every creature entry in the game, or just plain don't work. Embedding them should work the same way it works for fingers and throats, but its bugged for helmets. Bodypart relations like the ones skulls use don't work reliably either. There is also no way to transfer damage to an embedded part to the parent bodypart. I tried removing all the completely superfluous bodyparts by just leaving their raw entry empty, but that generates a flood of errors.

The AI can at least no longer target lips and teeth and such, though it comes at the cost of silly combat reports like blows glancing off the helmet, doing no damage, yet still somehow tearing apart an ears, noses and... tongues. Which is also the reason I left eyes as they are. That and hitting eyes through a helmet actually makes sense. Teeth can still be damaged but stopped flying all over the place, kind of a shame but at least it doesn't render all your soldiers toothless after a while.

Replace the contents of body_default with this: http://pastebin.com/7ivj3nRt to give this a try, it will be released with the main mod after I'm done making vain attempts at a more graceful solution.

Also making ears into joints causes the AI to get stuck endlessly bending someone's ear, which is kind of funny.

The scratch attack does seem more glaringly silly now. It would be fairly trivial to remove on the entity and beast races...

Other stuff I have been working on is mostly minor weapon balance/bug corrections as well as slews of item descriptions. Looking forward to any feedback you may have!

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor (0.40.xx) - Revision 3c
Post by: Urist Tilaturist on March 16, 2015, 01:16:11 pm

Remove scratching if its effects are too daft.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor (0.40.xx) - Revision 3c
Post by: Urist Tilaturist on April 13, 2015, 02:02:49 pm

Has there been any more progress? You could try making a mod compatible with this mod:
http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=139049.0

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor (0.40.xx) - Revision 3c
Post by: Grimlocke on April 14, 2015, 06:40:25 pm

Not a whole lot of progress, I have been kept busy with various boring stuff. Got the worst part of the text descriptions done though.

That metallurgy mod is pretty neat, it should be fairly easy to make a compatibility patch too. All that needs doing is merging the entity and metal additions. Only problem I can see is that the time periods don't quite fit, this mod has the a 1450-ish cut-off at which point metallurgy did have a few developments like blast furnaces, watermill-powered hammers and various other things that uh, probably also won't integrate very well with dwarf fortress.

So yeah ill add it to the things to add to a next release, whenever that will be.

EDIT: The mod seems to be for a DF 34.xx. That means it also needs to be updated to work with the current version, shouldn't be a huge effort since not much changed in the way of reactions and such but a simple compatibility patch isn't going to do it.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor (0.40.xx) - Revision 3c
Post by: Urist Tilaturist on April 16, 2015, 05:32:40 am

Why will those other things not integrate well with Dwarf Fortress?

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor (0.40.xx) - Revision 3c
Post by: Vattic on April 16, 2015, 06:06:06 am

You could just name a workshop "Watermill-powered hammer", but you'd need DFHack if you wanted it to require power.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor (0.40.xx) - Revision 3c
Post by: Grimlocke on April 16, 2015, 06:43:04 am

DFhack can do that? Add one reason to find out of such sorcery works.

Raw modding at least is rather limited when it comes to adding industrial stuff. For instance I can't make a continuous reaction process for blast furnaces, can't make them multi-level, or require power. Sure you can make a workshop and call it blast furnace, but it will just behave like a bigger smelter.

Heat treatment, etching, gilding, etc. can be added but only with really clunky mechanisms where you won't be able to select what gets etched, you can only have it say 'it is decorated with etchings', and for heat treatment you would have to do something silly making reaction that heat treats bars which only then get forged into anything, which is just not how that's supposed to work.

Things like plate armor were historically made in very large workshops with numerous smiths all working a small number of specialized tasks, whereas in DF a single skilled smith can churn out armor faster than you can ever produce metal for. You could make a separate 'armorers workshop' or something, but there is no way to influence the time reactions take or any way to remove reactions from the stock forge and still have the metal be used for entity-generated stuff.

...

So uh yeah big headache, I wager DFhack can solve some of these problems though.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor (0.40.xx) - Revision 3c
Post by: Urist Tilaturist on April 17, 2015, 07:27:07 am

DFhack can achieve all kinds of things, but I am no expert with it.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor (0.40.xx) - Revision 3c
Post by: Vattic on April 17, 2015, 09:16:57 am

Quote from: Grimlocke on April 16, 2015, 06:43:04 am

DFhack can do that? Add one reason to find out of such sorcery works.

Here is the documentation for powered workshops (https://github.com/DFHack/dfhack/blob/master/Lua%20API.rst#building-hacks) using DFHack.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor (0.40.xx) - Revision 3c
Post by: Cryoshakespeare on April 20, 2015, 07:56:04 am

This is a very good weapon pack, and it seems to have a lot of potential to further realise the combat system of Dwarf Fortress. However, there are two specific points that I would like to make, which are not so much criticisms of your mod, but rather observations about the general combat system of Dwarf Fortress.

1. Weapon Speed

The speed of a weapon, in terms of how quickly one can strike with it, is often far less important than the speed-advantage that weapons with superior reach possess. Polearms of all sorts were the dominant military weapon for armies, as they had a considerable range advantage over shorter sidearms, such as swords, maces and axes. Swords became very popular in a historical context because of the ease with which they could be carried and their effectiveness in a non-military combat situation, in close-quarters and relatively domestic scenarios. However, by-and-large, polearms had superior advantages in battle over sidearms, but their disadvantage was that they were difficult to transport effectively, as a soldier needed space to carry provisions, clothes, and other such equipment while on a campaign. The problems with large two-handed swords (Bidenhänder or Doppelhänder used against pike-formations by primarily Swiss mercenary Doppelsoldners) were similar.

It seems to be an issue with the combat system in Dwarf Fortress that it cannot handle this intricacy. Using [ATTACK_PREPARE_AND_RECOVER:X:Y] to simulate this effect can make it tricky to do justice to the differences between the weapon types. A polearm-user will be able to use distance as a method of keeping his opponent's weapon away from him/her and to keep his/her weapon trained on the enemy. However, in a close-quarters environment, sidearms and smaller weapons will be able to attack more quickly due to the user not needing to spend time moving towards the opponent. A possible solution using [ATTACK_PREPARE_AND_RECOVER:X:Y] is to make the length of a weapon scale its prepare/recover ratio (ie. long-weapons are faster to prepare and slower to recover), which does a reasonable/mediocre job at simulating how a polearm/long-weapon user will utilise their reach advantage in combat. It also simulates how a sword user will need to maneuver him/herself past an enemy's spear-thrust (via parrying, grabbing and dodging) before being able to deliver a blow to the spear user.

------------------------------

Do you consider it possible to implement a reasonable system for this, given the current mechanics of DF combat? If you are curious, I have gathered the majority of my information from Scholagladiatoria, a (in my opinion) very reputable individual on Youtube who frequently posts content about this, I'd imagine you know of him.

------------------------------

2. Weapon Skills

The mechanics of swinging a one-handed sword, axe or mace/hammer are really quite similar. Granted, edge-alignment plays a somewhat more important role in sword-use, though it still is important with axes and at times with maces/hammers too.

We have eight melee-weapon skills at our disposal in DF, however in my opinion, being able to use a one-handed sword is much more like using a one-handed axe than it is using a longsword. In a similar vein, a two-handed axe is rather more similar to a two-handed mace than it is to a one-handed axe. The difference is moreso in how one grips the weapon and delivers strikes, rather than how exactly the weapon delivers its force in a strike.

So as a provisional idea for a revised weapon-skill system, I'd like to suggest the following:

Sidearms-User (for the use of one-handed sword, mace and flail)
Axe-User (as unfortunately weapons using the axe-skill are used for woodcutting... instead of it simply being a tag applied to a weapon -_-)
Spear-User (for spears intended to be used one-handed and with a shield, different enough from sidearms and different enough from a spear wielded with both hands)
Longspear-User(?) (for spears wielded with both hands, and potentially including pikes)
Longsword-User (for the use of longswords and possibly larger Bidenhänders)
Greatarms-User (for the use of larger two-handed axes and maces... getting slightly more into fantasy here :P )
Poleaxe-User (for the use of weapons such as glaives, halberds, voulges etc.)
Polehammer-User (for the use of polehammers, perhaps bec-de-corbins and the like)

Of course, the naming scheme leaves something to be desired, and unfortunately the only melee-weapon skill that generates users without a shield is the pike-skill, which makes classifying all weapons intended to be wielded with two-hands differently quite difficult... there are certainly challenges, but in my opinion it is an interesting idea that is worth considering.
 
------------------------------

Anyway, just thought I'd share some thoughts with you. While I am -by no means- an expert, in any way, shape or form, on this stuff, I have researched a whole lot on Scholagladiatoria's channel and he does seem to represent realistic combat in a way more similar to this. What are your thoughts?

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor (0.40.xx) - Revision 3c
Post by: Grimlocke on April 21, 2015, 01:38:00 pm

First off, thanks for the in-depth commentary! Posts like this and Urist's testing and commentary really help mods along, as I will undoubtedly miss flaws and potential opportunities.

I actually have seen most of Scholagladiatoria's stuff along with that of Lindybeige and Skallagrim, they make some very informative and entertaining stuff! Quite a bit of the research of this mod came from these guys, along with wikipedia, myarmory.com and various other sources.

Your points on weapon length are entirely correct. Sadly actually keeping enemies at bay with a longer weapon is just impossible to mod in right now, but the weapon length-to-prepare-time is actually already in the mod. Its just a bit hard to see from game itself. An arming sword for instance has 4:2 on both stabbing and slashing, whereas a halberd has 1:5 for stabbing and 1:7 for the hack/spike attack to account for the considerable momentum of the weapon.

Daggers and short one-handed weapons get 5 prepare time, medium length one-handed gets 4, short two-handed weapons (longswords, longaxe, etc) 3, medium-length polearms (most spears, poleaxes, etc) get 2 and long polearms (halberds, pikes, etc) get 1.

The item descriptions will make this a bit clearer, they give a short summary of the weapons properties and their attacks.

(This I all typed as I was thinking, sorry if its a bit rambly)

I was actually thinking of reducing the number of weapon skills for some future version, leaving weapon skill unused doesn't seem to have any particularly bad effects on the game.
What I was considering was just using the pike skill for all two-handed weapons, spear skill for one-handed spears and sword skill for the rest of the one-handed weapons. I didn't think of the tree-chopping problem, though I might be able to get around that by adding a felling axe as a tool instead of a weapon and renaming the axeman to 'woodsman' or something (or if that fails as a training weapon). I really don't want to make it possible to cut down a tree with a mace :P

I considered moving one-handed weapons to the dagger skill to force the AI to use them as side-arms but the entity soldiers and such don't actually spawns with dagger in the first place so that would only cause them to pretty much disappear from the game. Not really desirable or realistic, while less common dedicated swordsman did exist. I sadly have pretty much zero control over what the AI places on soldiers so better to have them in poor proportion then not having them at all.

There's a couple issues there though. For one, I have no idea what to do about the names. Invading squads are going to show up as an absolute mish-mash of weapons, etc etc.

On the weapon-skill sets you posted: I would at least merge sidearms+axes, longspear+poleaxe+polehammer and longsword+greatarms.
Axes because I can probably circumvent the wood axe somehow.
Two-handed polearms are all fairly similar, in fact the poleaxe, polehammer and bec-de-corbin/crow's beak are historically all referred to as 'pollaxe' and are described in single entry of the various arms treatises (the art of using them referred to as 'Jue de la Hache', or 'Axe Play'). The reason I split them up is because having five weapons with the same name would get all sorts of confusing.
Longsword and two-handed axe/warhammer/mace are... not entirely similar, but having longsword as a single skill seems inconsistent as the other skills cover a fairly large number of weapons.

I wouldn't mind splitting up two-handed non-polearms and two-handed polearms. At the very least it will make naming a bit easier, and Mount & Blade made it work so why wouldn't DF. Lets see...

Armsman (sword skill) - One-handed weapons.
Greatarmsman (axe skill) - Two-handed non-polearms. EDIT: derp, NOT axe skill, but mace or hammer.
Spearman (spear skill) - One-handed spears.
Stavesman (pike skill) - Two-handed polearms.

'man' can of course be replaced with 'dwarf' and such.

The problem with that however is as you mentioned that only the pike skill prevents the whole 'two-handed sword + shield' soldiers, which I kinda hate seeing. The whole entity equipment in general is sort of a trainwreck though. It just picks one single body armor, one single helmet and uses that for every soldier for that entity. No arm/leg protection, it will completely ignore armor levels (I have had them use a greathelm with a gambeson) and dagger don't actually seem to get used anywhere.

Regardless I think I will give this idea a try, at least after I finish up those item descriptions, address a few balance issues and do some work on entity equipment distribution (which is a bit of a mess now).

If anyone can think of a name covering all two-handed weapons, I'd gladly hear it!

EDIT: I wonder what it would do if I hijacked the blowgunner skill for one of the two-handed weapon classes... They don't get placed with shields, though also often not much armor...

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor (0.40.xx) - Revision 3c
Post by: Cryoshakespeare on April 21, 2015, 04:16:43 pm

Awesome Grimlocke!

My apologies, I had only briefly checked the raws but clearly I had missed that you had already incorporated the weapon timings! :O

Mount and Blade certainly does seem to handle weapon skills in a fairly elegant manner, and to be sure it's very important to view the skill layouts in the context of this being a game, not to pursue a kind of realism at the cost of all style and simplicity (though DF is hardly simplistic...). Anyway, you're right that having longsword as it's own separate skill is inconsistent with the rest of the changes. There was also another fairly considerable point I was ruminating on:

The development of weapons and armour has always been consistent with their associated historical context. In Dwarf Fortress, people are entering combat not only with other moderately-sized humanoids, but also with much greater foes, ie. semi-megabeasts and megabeasts. This would suggest that weapons, armour and skill-sets would develop accordingly to handle both these threats. Against humanoid enemies, weapons and armour would likely be similar to how they were in real-life, and so this mod currently addresses that part of the context very well. However, given that these greater foes do exist and seem to be a natural part of the world, is it not reasonable to suggest more specialized weapons, armour and skill-sets for handling these threats as well? You would be sacrificing real-life historical-accuracy for in-game realism.

Now, how exactly to go about approaching this from a design perspective is quite the matter, but I just thought I'd bring it up. Any thoughts?

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor (0.40.xx) - Revision 3c
Post by: Grimlocke on April 21, 2015, 07:53:52 pm

I can't imagine armor developing much different, as these were already developed around the limits of the human body. If armor could be made heavier without reducing the wearer to a crawl, they would have already done so in history.

Weapons might be a bit more interesting, I can see larger version of bear spears and catch poles being used against cave trolls and such but sadly weapons that grapple are not really possible as it is now. I could include a few extremely heavy polearms, 'beast halberd' or whatnot, and make it a really slow but hard-hitting weapon.

What I'm guessing the best way to fight giant monsters with medieval tech would be to build siege gear. They had mobile spike-barricades, giant pavise shields that got carried by a specialized guy (a very well paid one too!), and of course ballistas, catapults and all manner of towers, ladders and movable walkways. I wheelbarrow with some really long spikes attached should give giant charging animals a pause at least.

None of that is really possible to incorporate into the game though... Well there's traps, and I did add a few trap items, but nothing particularly innovative.

But if you have any suggestions id gladly hear them.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor (0.40.xx) - Revision 3c
Post by: Urist Tilaturist on April 22, 2015, 12:15:22 pm

Quote from: Grimlocke on April 21, 2015, 07:53:52 pm

I can't imagine armor developing much different, as these were already developed around the limits of the human body. If armor could be made heavier without reducing the wearer to a crawl, they would have already done so in history.

Weapons might be a bit more interesting, I can see larger version of bear spears and catch poles being used against cave trolls and such but sadly weapons that grapple are not really possible as it is now. I could include a few extremely heavy polearms, 'beast halberd' or whatnot, and make it a really slow but hard-hitting weapon.

What I'm guessing the best way to fight giant monsters with medieval tech would be to build siege gear. They had mobile spike-barricades, giant pavise shields that got carried by a specialized guy (a very well paid one too!), and of course ballistas, catapults and all manner of towers, ladders and movable walkways. I wheelbarrow with some really long spikes attached should give giant charging animals a pause at least.

None of that is really possible to incorporate into the game though... Well there's traps, and I did add a few trap items, but nothing particularly innovative.

But if you have any suggestions id gladly hear them.

Historical armour was as heavy as it could sensibly be, though super heavy troll armour in the same style as real horse and elephant armour would make goblins much more powerful and I think is within reach of modders.

Pretty much every adult except for those in the most primitive tribes should have a dagger to eat with, and it should always be available as a secondary weapon. Elves can have obsidian daggers if they hate metal for some reason.

Spider silk armour would be a good addition, since it has basis in real life, though not before 1400. Making it incredibly hard to weave, maybe even starting with the elves and spreading by civilisations inviting craftselves to work there (guilds were very secretive in the past and knowledge spread slowly, but DF worlds can have 1000 years of history), would balance its incredible lightness and resistance to anything except smashing.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor (0.40.xx) - Revision 3c
Post by: Cryoshakespeare on April 22, 2015, 03:21:43 pm

Quote from: Urist Tilaturist on April 22, 2015, 12:15:22 pm

Historical armour was as heavy as it could sensibly be...

That's a pretty misleading statement, and is quite dependent upon your interpretation of the word "sensible". Armor was designed to be as light as possible, while still providing adequate protection.

"For warfare, arms and armor must, above all, be practical, affording the utmost protection and functionality without impairing body movement because of excess weight or inflexible material. Even such practical equipment, however, was often decorated, care being taken that the decoration would not impede its function."

During the Renaissance, a considerable number of swords, maces, firearms, shields, and armor were made specifically for ceremonial purposes. They were intended to imitate the heroes of antiquity, but in truth were quite impractical. Unfortunately, these ceremonial items are often used as references in popular-culture, and are made out to be historically accurate depictions of arms and armor that were used in combat.

"Since these accoutrements were not intended to face the risk of damage or loss in battle, many of the functional and protective qualities of "normal" arms and armor—lightness, practicality, and the "glancing surface"—had been abandoned in favor of theatrical and symbolical effect."

The truth is, armor was consistently being redesigned to be made lighter and lighter (except in cases where a specialized compromise was required). As metallurgy and metalworking developed, armorsmiths found increasingly efficient ways to provide the same level of protection, while using less metal in their design. We often think of armor and weapons as relatively crude implements, but in reality their design was constantly being improved on, and armor progressed to quite a high degree of technological advancement, before it fell out of use with the firearms industry taking over.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor (0.40.xx) - Revision 3c
Post by: Urist Tilaturist on April 22, 2015, 05:21:26 pm

Armour only fell out of fashion for a few centuries. German sappers wore plate armour during World War 1, and US forces issued body armour to some units from the Korean War onwards. Now there is even talk of exoskeletons.

A 60kg suit of armour is not sensible except on a creature larger than human size. Fighting and moving in it would be exhausting and make the fighter near useless, never mind the massive cost. I would say the upper limit for sensible mass of armour is 30kg, about the same as modern military webbing.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor (0.40.xx) - Revision 3c
Post by: Grimlocke on April 23, 2015, 10:06:12 am

Sadly armoring pets and mounts is out of reach of raw modding at least, unless you do something odd like making a creature with an extra layer of steel skin you call armor.

Which might be a somewhat decent approach, except if you capture some and let them breed you get 'barded horse foal' and such. You can't armor any normals horses with a dead invader horse's armor either.

...

I wonder what the game will do if I make horses and trolls intelligent. Will it give them entity armor? Probably not I guess it would be more like the old glitch that gave animals in abandoned forts clothes. Once came across a camel with socks, shoes, coat and a hat of some sort.

Anyhow, dagger placement! Its already there for civilians in adventurer mode, if you look around you will see them with a variety of daggers, some eating knives and the occasional cudgel. If you look at various medieval art of cities and their various inhabitants you will notice that almost everyone is openly carrying a dagger of some sort. The game however cannot be convinced to actually put them on soldiers as a sidearm, quite annoying.

As I mentioned before the entity equipement system is kind of the worst enemy of this mod. I was recently adventuring about and came across '+bronze cudgel+', and later a silver mallet, which I give a volume a wooden mallet would have and as such weighed over 20kg. Gah! Just gah! The raws for those tool items have [MAT_WOOD] and no other material tag so at that point is game is just ignoring its own raws. The ones civilians carry around are mode of the proper material, but in city keeps and tombs there is chests with weapons that the game just makes out of whatever...

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor (0.40.xx) - Revision 3c
Post by: Urist Tilaturist on July 20, 2015, 12:02:11 pm

Coming back to this months later:

How much progress has been made towards the next version?

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor (0.40.xx) - Revision 3c
Post by: Urist Tilaturist on August 13, 2015, 04:34:49 pm

Since this seems to have gone dead for some reason, does anyone want to take this over? Weapon placement on characters in adventure mode and other features are still not complete, and my modding skills are poor to say the least.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor (0.40.xx) - Revision 3c
Post by: Urist Tilaturist on August 15, 2015, 04:00:24 pm

Severe bug here: partial plate armour is not covering the upper legs. Questions will be asked.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor (0.40.xx) - Revision 3c
Post by: Jazzeraint on August 17, 2015, 08:26:52 pm

Quote from: Urist Tilaturist on August 13, 2015, 04:34:49 pm

Weapon placement on characters in adventure mode and other features are still not complete, and my modding skills are poor to say the least.

Could you explain what that requires / entails, and what hasn't been done on it yet?

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor (0.40.xx) - Revision 3c
Post by: Grimlocke on August 20, 2015, 07:01:57 pm

Well, my post notification were emails were not going to the right place.

To answer a few questions: I have become rather severely mired in all this real life stuff, including work and studies at the same time and was left somewhat too mentally drained to make a decent effort at modding.

First and foremost if anyone want to continue/fork this mod by all means do so! It was made to be used and if anyone wants to put work in improving it then all the better. Just drop my name somewhere in the credits somewhere and be sure to ask here if you need help with anything.

For things like adventurer equipment placing, raw modding just won't do. It gives only very limited control what is used where and how. Right now the main problems is the game just sticks any random helmet and chest armor on a uniform which it uses for all of an entity's soldiers which... causes some stupid stuff. It's all hardcoded behavious so rither someone with some wicked memory hacking/scripting skills will have to come along, or we must pray to the Toady One to bless us with more elaborate equipment implementation.

The partial plate armor is... well partial. It does not cover the whole body and is to be worn over a coat of mail. It is the predecessor of the full plate armor, looking a bit like this:

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

(http://steel-mastery.com/images/products/full/armour-in-churburg-style-1.jpg)

This is one of the reasons I wanted the item descriptions, without it the game has no way of telling you how thick or what the coverage on a piece of armor is. Similar issues arise with weapons.

I think most of the text descriptions are finished actually, might finish those up after the next exam.

Anyhow for better or worse, I will have more free time around the end of the year. Perhaps we will have a new DF to work with too then.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor (0.40.xx) - Revision 3c
Post by: Urist Tilaturist on August 23, 2015, 04:06:54 pm

My fort cannot make mail shirts, full plate, or indeed any torso armour other than partial plate at the metalsmith's forge. It is a reclaimed fortress. Only 1 type of armour is available for each body part. What is causing this problem?

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor (0.40.xx) - Revision 3c
Post by: Grimlocke on August 23, 2015, 09:14:44 pm

sounds like your missing the needed token in the entity file. Partial plate uses one of the vanilla item identifiers, if that's the only one showing up then likely your entity only has the default armor tokens.

This can be partially fixed on an existing save game (no pun intended), what you need to do is open op the entity_default file, scroll down to the entity your playing as (dwarves are the top one) and replace everything from [WEAPON to [TRAPCOMP with the tokens from ent_tags file that come with this mod. You can remove weapons and armor from the list if they don't seem appropriate.

After this you will be able to make the new equipment in your fortress, but migrants (and possibly invaders) will still only bring the old stuff.

Alternately if your current entities are completely unmodded (beside this mod that is) you can just overwrite it with the entity_default file supplied with this mod. It might still have those annoying stray reactions tokens in it but they won't do anything other than spam up the errorlog.

Fixing the other entities as well might solve at least some of the rubbish equipment placement on entity characters, thought likely only on a new save.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor (0.40.xx) - Revision 3c
Post by: Urist Tilaturist on August 24, 2015, 09:05:40 am

I installed the replacement entity_default file. Things should be better now. Watch this space.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor (0.40.xx) - Revision 3c
Post by: EuchreJack on September 01, 2015, 06:43:36 am

I've created a mod that combines these awesome toys with beastfolk, with full credit to this mod.  Let me know your thoughts.

It is all based upon the game Anamnesis, of Renascents and Monsters (http://blog.anamnesis.co/) that featured beastfolk with roughly a Victorian era feel (very roughly: Tech varies abundantly in the game).  I thought adding these mods together might be fun, and they are.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor (0.40.xx) - Revision 3c
Post by: Grimlocke on September 01, 2015, 11:49:55 am

I like the sound of it! If its fun then I am in full support  :P

This mod is not quite set in early renaissance but since there's late medieval things in there it could be pretty easily retrofitted.

I actually made an attempt at making a hand cannon at some point, by basically making a super-powerful crossbow with no ranged weapon skill. It had the horrendous accuracy and fire rate, but entities didn't equip it right and it spammed up the error log and that didnt really suffice. There's plenty other people who made better attempts I think though.

For weapon sizes, these two tokens are relevant: [TWO_HANDED:160000] and [MINIMUM_SIZE:50000]
In that case, every creature below size 160000 will need to wield this with two hands or get a combat penalty, and need to be above 50000 size to use it at all.

Humans are 70000, dwarves, elves and goblins are 60000.

Keep it mind that a creature's variation in height and broadness change the size variable used for weapons, but not for armor.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor (0.40.xx) - Revision 3c
Post by: EuchreJack on September 01, 2015, 04:30:53 pm

Thanks for the thoughts!

Actually, "Late Medieval" is probably the correct term.  Although I always felt "Early Renaissance" sounded cooler.

I have had similar problems with firearms, and will probably decide to leave them out.
Sure, I could just steal from some gunpowder mod, but to be honest firearms never fit well in Dwarf Fortress, plus they tend to overshadow whatever mods feature them.

EDIT: It appears we are both absolutely right, and thank you for the information on the tokens to both understand and fix!
Proof:

Code: [Select]

[ITEM_WEAPON:ITEM_WEAPON_PICK]
[NAME:pick:picks]
[SIZE:280]
[SKILL:MINING]
[TWO_HANDED:47500]
[MINIMUM_SIZE:42500]
I'm sure the axes are the same thing.  So I'll just mod in Spades and Hatchets, and my Hamsterfolk can Strike the Earth!

EDIT2: Done and updated.  Hamsterfolk unite!

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor (0.40.xx) - Revision 3c
Post by: Urist Tilaturist on September 06, 2015, 06:33:22 pm

Quote from: EuchreJack on September 01, 2015, 04:30:53 pm

Thanks for the thoughts!

Actually, "Late Medieval" is probably the correct term.  Although I always felt "Early Renaissance" sounded cooler.

I have had similar problems with firearms, and will probably decide to leave them out.
Sure, I could just steal from some gunpowder mod, but to be honest firearms never fit well in Dwarf Fortress, plus they tend to overshadow whatever mods feature them.

EDIT: It appears we are both absolutely right, and thank you for the information on the tokens to both understand and fix!
Proof:

Code: [Select]

[ITEM_WEAPON:ITEM_WEAPON_PICK]
[NAME:pick:picks]
[SIZE:280]
[SKILL:MINING]
[TWO_HANDED:47500]
[MINIMUM_SIZE:42500]
I'm sure the axes are the same thing.  So I'll just mod in Spades and Hatchets, and my Hamsterfolk can Strike the Earth!

EDIT2: Done and updated.  Hamsterfolk unite!

Firearms fit in Dwarf Fortress if they are of a sort which existed before 1400, so fire lances, hand cannon, and cannon.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor (0.40.xx) - Revision 3c
Post by: EuchreJack on September 08, 2015, 11:59:42 am

Quote from: Urist Tilaturist on September 06, 2015, 06:33:22 pm

Quote from: EuchreJack on September 01, 2015, 04:30:53 pm

Thanks for the thoughts!

Actually, "Late Medieval" is probably the correct term.  Although I always felt "Early Renaissance" sounded cooler.

I have had similar problems with firearms, and will probably decide to leave them out.
Sure, I could just steal from some gunpowder mod, but to be honest firearms never fit well in Dwarf Fortress, plus they tend to overshadow whatever mods feature them.

EDIT: It appears we are both absolutely right, and thank you for the information on the tokens to both understand and fix!
Proof:

Code: [Select]

[ITEM_WEAPON:ITEM_WEAPON_PICK]
[NAME:pick:picks]
[SIZE:280]
[SKILL:MINING]
[TWO_HANDED:47500]
[MINIMUM_SIZE:42500]
I'm sure the axes are the same thing.  So I'll just mod in Spades and Hatchets, and my Hamsterfolk can Strike the Earth!

EDIT2: Done and updated.  Hamsterfolk unite!

Firearms fit in Dwarf Fortress if they are of a sort which existed before 1400, so fire lances, hand cannon, and cannon.

I actually meant that firearms don't fit in Dwarf Fortress mechanically.  The game just wasn't build to accommodate firearms, with their metallic-only ammo.  Trying to get the firearms not to use wood or bone ammo generally introduces new problems, such as civs not actually using the firearms, or not being able to fire the firearms.

Plus, my concern again is that even if firearms were possible without the above problems, they would take attention away from the rest of my mod.  Focus would be on the guns instead of the Elephantmen wielding them.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor (0.40.xx) - Revision 3c
Post by: Grimlocke on September 08, 2015, 04:01:37 pm

I must admit though, an elephant man in full plate armor wielding a bombard would be pretty hilarious  :P

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor (0.40.xx) - Revision 3c
Post by: DoomOnion on September 11, 2015, 04:07:21 pm

Quote from: Grimlocke on September 08, 2015, 04:01:37 pm

I must admit though, an elephant man in full plate armor wielding a bombard would be pretty hilarious  :P

That's not hilarious, that's scary as hell.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor (0.40.xx) - Revision 3c
Post by: Swords-Otter on October 17, 2015, 02:13:52 am

I'm sorry but I have to call BS on removing leather armour. I have seen leather armour, made with historical techniques, and it is actually almost as good as metal armour in terms of protection.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor (0.40.xx) - Revision 3c
Post by: peasant cretin on October 17, 2015, 03:18:48 am

He didn't remove it completely. Grimlocke has an entry for leather cuir bouilli armor in this mod. It does have a 500 layer size to make it work. I'd wager the guess that the [UBSTEP:0] means it's a cuirass of sorts.

What Grimlocke may have been getting at, was the idea of generic leather referenced by most games/cable series/books, which owe some of their lineage to Gygax's D&D and Tolkien (who may or may not have had the "everything armor is mail" baggage of the Victorians). Gygax didn't have the easy access to information we have now, so Gygax went with what he went with--but then he did that quite a lot with things he wasn't well versed in, which is what we all might do. He'd need Matt Easton to travel back in time...

Leather, in the period referenced, was also used in lamellar/laminar armor. I did notice the lamellar used here is only [METAL], [SCALED], [BARRED], but not leather which makes sense if the layer size is going to be 10. For leather lamellar to "sort of" work, the layer size would have to be rather high and require a separate entry.

----------


One other thing: this is a great mod and this thread has been fantastic :D Much thanks!

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor (0.40.xx) - Revision 3c
Post by: Grimlocke on October 17, 2015, 08:26:19 am

Heheh, pretty much what peasant said above.

Though you could argue cuir bouilli is not actually leather. It is not cured like regular leather is and although the exact method was lost in time, various people made attempts at reproducing it and it yield a material a bit like hard plastic. How exactly or from when it was used is really hard to tell, but I made it to be cuirass wearable over mail coats.

Its not hugely protective on its own so it seems far more likely to be used as additional layer of protection, like a precursor to the coat of plates.

Edit: Oh and thanks for the kind words ^^

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor (0.40.xx) - Revision 3c
Post by: The13thRonin on October 30, 2015, 09:55:46 am

Quote from: Grimlocke on December 19, 2014, 08:08:20 pm

Removed leather armors - No kids, regular tanned leather doesn't protect you for a damns worth.

This is simply not true. Throughout the Middle Ages leather was treated with materials such as beeswax to harden it. It was actually pretty decent at stopping cutting and to a lesser extent piercing attacks. It was not as good at protecting against chopping or blunt attacks though.

Also you're discrediting it as an armor solely based on its protective value... But how much value would you place on an armor allowing you not to get hit in the first place? Leather armor was lighter and more flexible allowing soldiers to be more speedy on the offense and defense during battle.

In the Middle Ages usually anywhere from 50-90% of armies were made up of peasantry who could not afford and did not have the training to buy and make use of plate mail. Many soldiers wore leather armor, arming shirts underneath and a shirt of chain-mail if they were really lucky.

Soldiers lives were certainly saved throughout history in many battles due to having the rudimentary protection that leather armour provides.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor (0.40.xx) - Revision 3c
Post by: EuchreJack on October 30, 2015, 11:39:38 am

Well, I'm not going to fight Grimlocke's battle for him, but as a mod designer, he ultimate has to decide what he believes should be included.

In the time period that he set the mod, peasant armies were starting to be replaced by mercenaries and leather armor was being replaced by the Cuir Bouilli armor that he included.  The leather armor seen on movies is just that: Hollywood magic.  Plus, ability to move was not very useful in the massed peasant levies that would be using it.

At least that is my 2 cents.  Its not like I was present for any of the Middle Ages.

...
Transitioning into a favor: Grimlocke, my knowledge of the weapon design system in Dwarf Fortress is...lacking.  And in my mod,  Of MultiBeasts and Renassance, the smaller beastfolk can not use all the wonderful weapons you've not objected to the blatant theft allowed to be incorporated into my mod.  I'm looking for a few more of the smaller weapons of the late Middle Ages, weapons that Men-At-Arms would call sidearms but HamsterMen-At-Arms would use as primary weapons.  If I run across anything specific, I'll let you know.

I'm also thinking of implementing firearms+ammo that can be purchased but not created.  Once I figure out what a small early Renaissance firearm would be called (Spermwhale Men could carry cannons into battle and fire them like crossbows).

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor (0.40.xx) - Revision 3c
Post by: Grimlocke on October 31, 2015, 07:26:54 am

@The13thRonin: Which is why I mentioned regular tanned leather. Leather used for protection would most likely not be tanned but boiled before the step of tanning it, the exact process is unknown but the resulting material was supposedly a hard but somewhat brittle material. I think in some parts of Europe it was worn as lamellar armor, but more common in west-europe was the cuirrass, likely because the cuir bouilli gave at least a limited amount of protection against blunt impact.

The argument about 'nibleness' is... not completely rubbish, but as its often understood still mostly rubbish. If a man at arms wanted to be nimble, he would get a brigandine instead of a plate cuirrass. Possibly replace a hounskull helmet for a kettle helm for visibility, but anything below that would almost certainly not have been done to be more nimble. You have to keep in mind that as a soldier in the middle ages, there not a lot of one on one combat. There was a whole lot of getting shot at, poked at by pikes and other polearms and getting run down by cavalry before there was even any hand to hand combat at all, and for none of that your niblety would be much use at all. Archers and crossbowmen intently aimed for formations with less armor and being in that formation would be an absolute hell nobody would be in voluntarily. Games often hugely overstate the encumbrance of heavier armor and give all sorts of contrived advantages to the leather-clad fellow with daggers because they want to strike a gameplay balance, not because of any historic precedent.

The most common protection for the poor folk was quilted cloth, or sometimes coats with densely stuffed horse hair. These are in the mod as the gambeson, aketon and various other items, and they were not actually such terrible protection.

It is also important to note that as EuchreJack mentions by the late middle ages, say end of the 100 years war or war of the roses, pretty much everyone going to battle had at least some form of metal armor. Metalworking advanced had advanced a lot, people became richer and military leaders started to realize the value of professional, well equipped soldiery. Though the vicious peasant revolts in that era did make up for the lack of peasant slaughtering (poor, poor peasants...)

Anyhow, my main reasons for not including much leather armor: Padded cloth armor was far more common, likely more effective and easier to make in larger numbers. Also the weird studded leather fetish game and movie makers seem to have for anything medieval really needs to stop.


@EuchreJack: Most of the one-handed weapons in this mod were generally used as a sidearm. So the daggers but also one-handed warhammers, estocs, arming swords, etc. Longbows are obviously out of the questions but crossbows should be ok (and might be your best bet as ranged weapon damage is not affected by creature size).

You could have them use the lighter onehanded weapons with two hands like this, if your human is 70000 size and your hamsterman 20000 size:

Code: [Select]

[ITEM_WEAPON:ITEM_WEAPON_SWORD_SHORT]
[NAME:modern arming sword:modern arming swords]
[ADJECTIVE:short]
[SIZE:105]
[SKILL:SWORD]
[TWO_HANDED:40000]
[MINIMUM_SIZE:15000]
[CAN_STONE]
[MATERIAL_SIZE:3]
[ATTACK:EDGE:250:5500:slash:slashes:NO_SUB:900]
[ATTACK_PREPARE_AND_RECOVER:5:1]
[ATTACK:EDGE:9:5000:stab:stabs:NO_SUB:400]
[ATTACK_PREPARE_AND_RECOVER:5:1]
[ATTACK:BLUNT:30:0:strike:strikes:pommel:1400]
[ATTACK_PREPARE_AND_RECOVER:5:1]
This arming sword could be used by any creature larger 15000, but they will get a stat penalty for not holding it with two hands unless they are larger than 40000.

Keep in mind, creatures have a variable size. Length and broadness apply a multiplier to the creature size so a particularly short and skinny hamsterman may be below 15000 size and unable to wield the sword still.

Portable firearms of the time where the handgonne (also called hand cannon) and arquebus (also called hackbut).
The handgonne was basically tiny cannon, either socket mounted onto a staff or mounted on top of a crossbow stock. They were fired in various ways, some over the shoulder, some against the shoulder, against the chest, etc. They were the very first hand-held firearm, VERY inaccurate and and at most a had simple serpentine as firing mechanism (an S shaped bit of metal with a lit fuse on the end, hinged in the middle so the gunner could hold the gun with both hands while firing it). They were almost only useful in sieges and were often used along with a pavise and other sorts of wooden defenses. There is a also some pictures of riders using a staff-mounted handgonne as a mace, which I suppose makes sense.

Arquebuses were a bit more advanced, they had a narrower barrel and a full stock. It generally looked like a shorter musket. It more commonly came with a firing mechanism, usually a snap-matchlock (a small metal arm with a fuse, held up by a spring and released by a trigger), but there are still some examples that just had to be fired just by pressing a fuse to it.

Both of these were used alongside in the 15th century, and it is important to note that these still had trouble piercing well-made plate armor.

Implementing them into DF might be a bit of a pain, the way I did it was to make a ranged weapon with no ranged skill but it confused the game and the handgunners never brought ammo with them.


Well, this post ended up being long. I hope its interesting for someone!

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor (0.40.xx) - Revision 3c
Post by: EuchreJack on October 31, 2015, 01:00:28 pm

Oh, it was very interesting!

For the record, the following weapons can usually be used by all beastfolk, regardless of size, since minimum size is around 35000 (beastfolk size is the average of the animal and 70000, which is human-sized)

Code: [Select]

[WEAPON:ITEM_WEAPON_SWORD_SHORT_EARLY]
[WEAPON:ITEM_WEAPON_SWORD_SHORT]
[WEAPON:ITEM_WEAPON_SWORD_ESTOC]
[WEAPON:ITEM_WEAPON_DAGGER_LARGE]
[WEAPON:ITEM_WEAPON_DAGGER_RONDEL_MISERICORDE]
[WEAPON:ITEM_WEAPON_AXE_BATTLE_NARROW]
[WEAPON:ITEM_WEAPON_AXE_BATTLE]
[WEAPON:ITEM_WEAPON_AXE_CRESCENT]
[WEAPON:ITEM_WEAPON_AXE_CRESCENT_HEAVY]
[WEAPON:ITEM_WEAPON_AXE_STABBING]
[WEAPON:ITEM_WEAPON_MACE_SHODCLUB]
[WEAPON:ITEM_WEAPON_MACE]
[WEAPON:ITEM_WEAPON_MACE_FLANGED]
[WEAPON:ITEM_WEAPON_MACE_SPIKEDCLUB]
[WEAPON:ITEM_WEAPON_MORNINGSTAR]
[WEAPON:ITEM_WEAPON_HAMMER_WAR_LIGHT]
[WEAPON:ITEM_WEAPON_HAMMER_WAR]
[WEAPON:ITEM_WEAPON_HAMMER_PICK]
[WEAPON:ITEM_WEAPON_WHIP_FLAIL_BALL]
[WEAPON:ITEM_WEAPON_SPEAR]
[WEAPON:ITEM_WEAPON_SPEAR_AWLPIKE]
[WEAPON:ITEM_WEAPON_SPEAR_BEAR]
[WEAPON:ITEM_WEAPON_BOW]
[WEAPON:ITEM_WEAPON_BLOWGUN]
[WEAPON:ITEM_WEAPON_SPADE]
[WEAPON:ITEM_WEAPON_HATCHET]

Spade and Hatchet are my inventions to allow woodcutting and mining, although the Hatchet is redundant as there actually are usable axes.
Interesting facts:
Smaller beastfolk can not use crossbows, but can use bows.
Smaller beastfolk have access to at least one weapon of each type (after adding Spades for the miners).

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor (0.40.xx) - Revision 3c
Post by: Grimlocke on October 31, 2015, 05:07:09 pm

*checks* hmmm, it seems I neglected to give the crossbows a more sensible minimum size.

Bows need a certain arm length to be drawn, the little hamstermen just won't be able to pull the bow string far enough for the arrow to do much at all. Crossbows have no such limitation.

Pickaxes are generally also not all that large and heavy, someone has to swing them around all day in a tight space after all. If you want, you are of course completely free to adjust the weapons and armor to your needs. I didn't give a whole lot of consideration to tiny creatures when making this mod, so if you can sort this out nicely I could even 'steal' your changes back and have a more widely applicable mod  :P

Also if you find a way to separate logging axes and war axes, do let me know. Its a very silly thing to try and cut down a tree with a battleaxe, they are far too lightly build for that.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor (0.40.xx) - Revision 3c
Post by: EuchreJack on October 31, 2015, 07:11:56 pm

I guess if a battleaxe was listed as a polearm, it wouldn't be used to cut down trees.  Otherwise, I do not have any solutions.

I used Meat Cleavers as a template for the Hatchets, so their dimensions are probably inaccurate.

I actually believe the pickaxes are probably too large for the little guys, and have no problems with them using Spades instead.

Actually, I was considering creating Pocket or Small Crossbows, as they were not all of a uniform size in the Middle Ages.  Blowguns aren't exactly ideal versus armored foes.  They were used in cultures with little armor, after all.

I'll probably do some Arena testing with the Hamsterfolk.

In case you are curious, I added the following two Aztec armors:

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Code: [Select]

[ITEM_ARMOR:ITEM_ARMOR_ESCAUPIL]
[NAME:escaupil:escaupils]
[ARMORLEVEL:2]
[UBSTEP:0]
[LBSTEP:1]
[LAYER:ARMOR]
[COVERAGE:600]
[LAYER_SIZE:4]
[LAYER_PERMIT:10]
[MATERIAL_SIZE:8]
[SOFT]
[STRUCTURAL_ELASTICITY_WOVEN_THREAD

[ITEM_ARMOR:ITEM_ARMOR_EAGLE]
[NAME:eagle suit:eagle suits]
[ARMORLEVEL:1]
[UBSTEP:MAX]
[LBSTEP:MAX]
[LAYER:OVER]
[COVERAGE:250]
[LAYER_SIZE:4]
[LAYER_PERMIT:10]
[MATERIAL_SIZE:6]
[SOFT]
[LEATHER]
[STRUCTURAL_ELASTICITY_WOVEN_THREAD]


Armor from similar time period but different culture.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor (0.40.xx) - Revision 3c
Post by: Grimlocke on November 01, 2015, 11:49:00 am

If want the Aztec armor to be a substantial protection, you may want to increase the coverage or layer size a good bit. Armor layer thickness is directly taken from its total volume, regardless of how many limbs it covers. Which is a really weird system but oh well.

The gambeson has a total volume multiplier of 13140, the aketon of 8750. This is the value I use to balance out individual armor pieces and its calculated like this: LAYER_SIZE * COVERAGE * 1.25 ( UPSTEP + LBSTEP + UBSTEP )

So the escaupil would have 4 * 600 * 1.25 = 3000, and the eagle suit 4 * 250 * 2.5 = 2500

Also note that it is possible to wear 3 eagle suits at once like that heheh. It would be fanciness overload!

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor (0.40.xx) - Revision 3c
Post by: EuchreJack on November 02, 2015, 05:58:42 pm

Thanks for the advice: I was wondering how to make the Aztec armors outperform standard Vests.

Proposed edits that I basically threw together:

Code: [Select]

[NAME:escaupil:escaupils]
[ARMORLEVEL:2]
[UBSTEP:0]
[LBSTEP:1]
[LAYER:ARMOR]
[COVERAGE:600]
[LAYER_SIZE:14]
[LAYER_PERMIT:15]
[MATERIAL_SIZE:8]
[SOFT]
[STRUCTURAL_ELASTICITY_WOVEN_THREAD

[ITEM_ARMOR:ITEM_ARMOR_EAGLE]
[NAME:eagle suit:eagle suits]
[ARMORLEVEL:1]
[UBSTEP:MAX]
[LBSTEP:MAX]
[LAYER:OVER]
[COVERAGE:450]
[LAYER_SIZE:6]
[LAYER_PERMIT:10]
[MATERIAL_SIZE:6]
[SOFT]
[LEATHER]
[STRUCTURAL_ELASTICITY_WOVEN_THREAD]
What I'm looking for:
Escaupil should be able to stop some arrows, preferably metal ones.
Eagle Suits are mainly for show, but should provide some protection combined with Escaupil.

Dimensions:
Escaupil should be small but thick.
Eagle Suits should be large but thin.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor (0.40.xx) - Revision 3c
Post by: Grimlocke on November 04, 2015, 03:10:58 pm

To make them more effective, just make them bigger. I would recommend just using the same total volume as the gambeson, so setting the coverage to 750.

At that point they will stop some arrows, though not all. I don't really like how it works right now though as there seems to be little to no damage falloff at range, so you either have a bow and arrow that go through something every single time, or not at all. Right now ranged weapons are more powerful than they realistically are, and there is little to no reason to use any other projectile than the armor piercing ones. The broadhead arrows and bolts do more tissue damage, but are largely useless against armor and were historically also used only to hunt. Also plant fiber are kind of rubbish for cloth armors right now.

So uh, might be some work to be done there for me, though some of it (like ranged damage falloff) is well out of my control.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor (0.40.xx) - Revision 3c
Post by: EuchreJack on November 05, 2015, 01:02:45 pm

I changed the coverage for both to 750.  Not sure if that will make the Eagle Suits more protective than the Escaupil, which is the opposite of what I would like, but I suspect both will be mostly terrible armor and thus the player won't notice much difference.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor (0.40.xx) - Revision 3c
Post by: Urist Tilaturist on November 13, 2015, 01:40:57 pm

I think armour stacking should be reduced, if not eliminated. Wearing 3 eagle suits should at least heavily restrict mobility.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor (0.40.xx) - Revision 3c
Post by: Max™ on November 13, 2015, 03:25:11 pm

I think Stal used the trick of setting the layer permit and layer size values to limit that.

It even works to enforce armor ordering. I can't wear a hauberk (just a renamed mail shirt) with leather armor and a dress and a breastplate, but I can wear a breastplate with a dress, though if I'm wearing the breastplate it prevents putting on a hauberk, while doing it the other way works.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor (0.40.xx) - Revision 3c
Post by: Grimlocke on November 15, 2015, 01:54:04 pm

@Max™ and @Urist Tilaturist: This mod eliminates all non-realistic armor stacking. Meaning you can never wear two of the same type of armor, or stack armor that would get in each other's way, but you can for instance wear a surcoat over a coat of plates, over a mail coat, an aketon and an undershirt. This is how this particular armor was worn.

In fact I really would not recommend wearing just armor. It would be hideously uncomfortable and very susceptible to blunt impact damage. And that's not even considering certain parts getting stuck between plate armor joints, brrrr!

The way this is done is weirdly enough by setting the layer size higher than the layer permit, as layer permit is read from the higher layer of armor/clothing already worn.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor (0.40.xx) - Revision 3c
Post by: Urist Tilaturist on November 27, 2015, 12:34:39 pm

Thank you for clarifying the stacking issue.

How is gunpowder implementation going? Obviously there would have to be a gunpowder industry, involving potash and charcoal.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor (0.40.xx) - Revision 3c
Post by: Grimlocke on November 29, 2015, 09:35:42 am

Gunpowder industry is not really possible to fully mod in.

It requires a whole lot of workarounds to even get small-arms to work, including some DFhack sorcery to make the weapons behave remotely realistically. Getting the game to requires both gunpowder and a bullet is not going to happen, so I would have to make a weird, anachronistic bullet and power cartridge. I could possible get the reload times to be longer, but getting the AI to realize that when it gets attacked in a melee they need to stop reloading and actually defend themselves is likely impossible.

And the actual main use of medieval gunpowder, bombards and cannons, are just sadly infeasible as it is.

Of course of anyone knows a way to get around any of this, do tell!

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor (0.40.xx) - Revision 3c
Post by: Cthulhu_Pakabol on December 01, 2015, 06:32:17 pm

Eagerly awaiting a 42.01 version!

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor (0.40.xx) - Revision 3c
Post by: DrunkGamer on December 01, 2015, 07:01:15 pm

Quote from: Cthulhu_Pakabol on December 01, 2015, 06:32:17 pm

Eagerly awaiting a 42.01 version!

I think this version is compatible with 42.01, but I'm not 100% sure. I mean, there wasn't any modifications on the weapon item raws as far as I know.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor (0.40.xx) - Revision 3c
Post by: Cthulhu_Pakabol on December 01, 2015, 08:06:44 pm

I installed it. You just have to manually assign the entity stuff, as I believe entities were greatly changed in the update. It's just a matter of putting the weapon and armor tags where they need to go.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor (0.40.xx) - Revision 3c
Post by: Grimlocke on December 02, 2015, 01:32:58 pm

Poking through the raws right now, seems only the entity file really needs any modifying, but who knows there might be some new stuff I could use to solve some of the existing problems.

EDIT: Seems like the material templates file needs some minor editing, ill put it up as soon as its done.

Even more EDIT: Ok, there were actually quite a few files that needed updating, mostly ones that were related to the combat rebalancing part of the mod. Parchment and sweet drunkenness is at stake here! But panic not, I have updated to mod and put up a new revision on the first post.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor (0.42.xx) - Revision 4
Post by: Cthulhu_Pakabol on December 13, 2015, 05:47:31 pm

Any forthcoming updates, Grim?

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor (0.42.xx) - Revision 4b
Post by: Grimlocke on December 14, 2015, 10:11:36 pm

Whelp, got one right now, I just found out when making an extra test game dir that I didn't make the download package right and mixed some stock files in there, causing some stupid duplicate gauntlets to happen.

Updated the download once more.

For actual new content, I am a bit... with not much to do with this new DF version, cool as it is it doesn't enable this mod to do anything new.

For now it should at least work.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor (0.42.xx) - Revision 4b
Post by: sv-esk on December 16, 2015, 10:49:24 am

It seems, you forgot to modify bismuth bronze

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor (0.42.xx) - Revision 4b
Post by: KillzEmAllGod on December 17, 2015, 05:48:13 pm

Quote from: Grimlocke on December 19, 2014, 08:08:20 pm

Replaces the stock weapons and armor with historically accurate late 14th, early 15th ones from the European continent.
Alters combat to be both more realistic and interesting.

Was hoping for more 2nd century setting, might try it at some point.
Shame that there's no mounted combat yet, then it would really be worth trying.

Though how do crossbows fair?

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor (0.42.xx) - Revision 4b
Post by: Urist Tilaturist on December 29, 2015, 08:46:56 am

A 2nd century setting would still feature iron armour and steel swords, but in different models to what was seen later.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor (0.42.xx) - Revision 4b
Post by: Taffer on December 29, 2015, 05:16:40 pm

I've generally avoided mods for Dwarf Fortress in the past, but after spending a few hours with this mod I'm in love with it. It helps out combat descriptions, adds more variety to weaponry, helps arm the general populace, and of course adds a very nice variety of weapons and armor to the game. Everything seems to fit in with the setting, in my opinion. I combined your body changes with the Modest Mod's optional Modest Bodies module, and I quite like the results. Thank you kindly! I hope that you continue developing this mod, even if only to just keep the RAWs updated to new versions. I've linked here in my tileset's description. If you do decide to start using DFHack, would it be too much trouble to make that optional? I don't use it, personally.

The only issue I've noticed is this error message: WORM_MAN:Attack PUNCHY seems to have correct format but could not find proper BPs in any caste, so not added.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor (0.42.xx) - Revision 4b
Post by: Grimlocke on December 29, 2015, 08:12:13 pm

Thank you for the kind words and linkage, and your welcome  ;D

And I will at the very least keep this mod functioning at the current DF version, time permitting. I do eventually want to make some modifications to make the mod a bit more accurate to a specific period, rather than the 2 century span it has now.

What would be really neat is if I could make a make the technology actually progress during play, and let the player run their own little arms factories in a kind of Milanese style, but thats kind of a far-off pipe dream as it is. I already have a mostly-functioning 'historic metallurgy and metalsmithing' mod, but wasnt really satisfied about what I could do with the 40.xx version. I might have another shot at it with 42.xx.

I have a long long list of descriptions that can be used with a DFhack plugin to give ingame descriptions of items (useful, as some of the names and functions are rather obscure), but it will be an optional part and should not interfere with much else. As much as I would like to use DFhack to fix some of the more undesirable oddities in the game, I really haven't a clue how to heheh.

The error is most likely due to some conflicting stuff from the Modest Bodies mod, I might look into making a patch for the modest mod stuff as it seems to match this mod fairly well.

So yeah no shortage of stuff for me to tinker with. Slight shortage on time and self discipline though hehe.


@KillzEmAllGod crossbow fair largely the same as hand bows, with slightly more armor penetration potential and slightly less damage surface. The reason its all fairly slight is because I can't change anything about reload time, damage falloff, range, etc. This is also the reason there are currently no gunpowder weapons.

Mounted combat would of course be nice but that's up to Toady One to implement I'm afraid.

And you are entirely free to port this mod to any setting you like, if you need advice on how to balance it feel free to ask anytime.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor (0.42.xx) - Revision 4b
Post by: Taffer on December 30, 2015, 08:41:35 am

Quote from: Grimlocke on December 29, 2015, 08:12:13 pm

The error is most likely due to some conflicting stuff from the Modest Bodies mod, I might look into making a patch for the modest mod stuff as it seems to match this mod fairly well.

I identified the source of the error: 0.42.04 changed c_variation_default.txt, and the changes haven't been merged into this mod.

Thanks again!

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor (0.42.xx) - Revision 4b
Post by: Grimlocke on December 30, 2015, 10:12:52 pm

Ah. That would explain it, I'm still on an older version.

I'll patch that out along with some other minor changes later.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor (0.42.xx) - Revision 4b
Post by: Highwayleopard on January 01, 2016, 04:31:58 am

G'day! So uhm, I'm a pretty.. well, not great dwarf fortresser, and certainly new to exploring modifications. I saw yours and my interest was piqued. I enjoyed playing with immensely, but for some reason, whenever I load up a save game made with this mod, it crashes. This is using the latest 42.03 LNP build. I am not sure if there's some info I can do to help figure it out, but I just wanted to know if I was missing something blindingly obvious?

Sorry if my problem isn't specific enough!

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor (0.42.xx) - Revision 4b
Post by: Grimlocke on January 01, 2016, 05:07:04 am

Oh that's always annoying. If you can post the contents on error.log file which can be found in the same folder with the game's .exe (post just the last couple dozen lines if its any larger) then I will have a look once I get home.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor (0.42.xx) - Revision 4b
Post by: Highwayleopard on January 01, 2016, 07:50:32 am

I did another clean install just to make sure it had no contaminated results. Despite the fact that I've done a clean install twice prior before posting this, it appears to be working.

It's a mystery!

I'm sorry to have bothered ya, hopefully it keeps working. Cheers again!

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor (0.42.xx) - Revision 4b
Post by: Grimlocke on January 01, 2016, 08:17:30 am

Heheh, it might just have been some obscure worldgen glitch not even related to the mod. Its fairly close after the major release after all, those things can happen.

Either way, have Fun  :P

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor (0.42.xx) - Revision 4b
Post by: Highwayleopard on January 01, 2016, 09:38:57 pm

AND AFTER SAYING THAT.

It crashed again.

Idk if it's because I fiddled a bit with entity_default copy+pasting the tags a bit to customise who gets what weapons and the like, but this is what I got in the error log.

Duplicate Object: item ITEM_GLOVES_GLOVES
Duplicate Object: item ITEM_GLOVES_GAUNTLETS


Pretty clear cut seeming, but I don't know where to go to fix this.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor (0.42.xx) - Revision 4b
Post by: Grimlocke on January 02, 2016, 02:02:52 am

What in the... ok, I fixed that before, but looking at the download file it still has the broken version there. That is just plain annoying.

For now this can be fixed by removing the duplicate glove items, by replacing the entire contents of item_gloves in the raws folder with this:

Code: [Select]

item_gloves

[OBJECT:ITEM]
[ITEM_GLOVES:ITEM_GLOVES_MITTENS]
[NAME:mitten:mittens]
[LAYER:COVER]
[COVERAGE:300]
[LAYER_SIZE:8]
[LAYER_PERMIT:0]
[MATERIAL_SIZE:1]
[SOFT]
[LEATHER]
[STRUCTURAL_ELASTICITY_WOVEN_THREAD]
Sadly this likely won't work with an existing save, duplicate objects like this usually cause all sorts of weirdness.

Pardon the wasted time and confusion. I'm really not sure why the download file didn't update properly but I will be replacing it with this fix and a couple other fixed later today.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor (0.42.xx) - Revision 4c
Post by: Grimlocke on January 02, 2016, 09:20:28 pm

Updated! See main post for changes. All should work without any annoying duplicate gloves now.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor (0.42.xx) - Revision 4c
Post by: Highwayleopard on January 02, 2016, 11:30:27 pm

Thanks very much mate! You're a legend!

Just checked the 4c Item_Gloves. Just making sure, as your fix previous suggested just having the mittens, this one has

[ITEM_GLOVES:ITEM_GLOVES_GLOVES]
   [NAME:glove:gloves]
   [LAYER:UNDER]
   [COVERAGE:2500]10000
   [LAYER_SIZE:4]
   [LAYER_PERMIT:2]
   [MATERIAL_SIZE:1]
   [SOFT]
   [LEATHER]
   [STRUCTURAL_ELASTICITY_CHAIN_METAL]

[ITEM_GLOVES:ITEM_GLOVES_MITTENS]
   [NAME:mitten:mittens]
   [LAYER:OVER]
   [COVERAGE:167]
   [LAYER_SIZE:12]
   [LAYER_PERMIT:10]
   [MATERIAL_SIZE:4]
   [SOFT]
   [LEATHER]
   [STRUCTURAL_ELASTICITY_CHAIN_METAL]


Is that correct? Danke.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor (0.42.xx) - Revision 4c
Post by: Grimlocke on January 02, 2016, 11:48:13 pm

Should be good now, I moved the gloves back from the armor file to there. Can't quite remember why I even put them there.

Of course, you can always keep a look at the errorlog file if you want to be sure, especially if you ever start adding in more mods.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor (0.42.xx) - Revision 4c
Post by: Taffer on January 18, 2016, 01:20:22 am

Here's my fixed c_variation_default.txt file. Works for me: all 42.04 changes were merged into your old c_variation_default.txt, as confirmed with diff. I started working on a new body_default.txt with Modest Mod's renamed body parts, but I ran out of steam partway.

Considering that the renamed body parts are more specific rather than the generic "upper/lower" convention and there are some new creature variations, I wasn't completely sure that the new body part names would always fit. I'd also want to do some combat testing before adding in the new joints, as well.

body_default.txt nonsense aside, here it is. Thank you again for the mod. Hopefully you don't run out of steam to update this. I would consider dropping the "stock material version" to minimize workload.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

c_variation_default

[OBJECT:CREATURE_VARIATION]

Order of application:
Remove tags are applied starting from the bottom, then convert tags from the bottom, then add tags from the top.

Arguments:
If APPLY_CREATURE_VARIATION in the creature raws sends in arguments, you can use them below as !ARG1, !ARG2, etc.  The GAIT variations below have some examples.  In the creature raws, if an argument is of the form "5|6", for example, it'll be converted to "5:6" in the creature variation, so you can handle variable-token arguments with the | character.

Conditional tags:
Change TAG to CTAG and add, for example, CV_REMOVE_CTAG:1:YES:<regular stuff> to require !ARG1 to be YES to execute the changes.

[CREATURE_VARIATION:ANIMAL_PERSON]
   [CV_REMOVE_TAG:NAME]
   [CV_REMOVE_TAG:GENERAL_CHILD_NAME]
   [CV_REMOVE_TAG:GENERAL_BABY_NAME]
   [CV_REMOVE_TAG:CASTE_NAME]
   [CV_REMOVE_TAG:CHILDNAME]
   [CV_REMOVE_TAG:BABYNAME]
   [CV_REMOVE_TAG:SMALL_REMAINS]
   [CV_REMOVE_TAG:DESCRIPTION]
   [CV_REMOVE_TAG:CREATURE_TILE]
   [CV_REMOVE_TAG:COLOR]
   [CV_REMOVE_TAG:MAXAGE]
   [CV_REMOVE_TAG:SOUND]
   [CV_REMOVE_TAG:PET]
   [CV_REMOVE_TAG:PETVALUE]
   [CV_REMOVE_TAG:PENETRATEPOWER]
   [CV_REMOVE_TAG:VERMIN_EATER]
   [CV_REMOVE_TAG:VERMIN_HATEABLE]
   [CV_REMOVE_TAG:VERMIN_GROUNDER]
   [CV_REMOVE_TAG:VERMIN_FISH]
   [CV_REMOVE_TAG:VERMIN_SOIL]
   [CV_REMOVE_TAG:VERMIN_SOIL_COLONY]
   [CV_REMOVE_TAG:VERMIN_ROTTER]
   [CV_REMOVE_TAG:VERMIN_NOTRAP]
   [CV_REMOVE_TAG:FISHITEM]
   [CV_REMOVE_TAG:IMMOBILE_LAND]
   [CV_REMOVE_TAG:TRIGGERABLE_GROUP]
   [CV_REMOVE_TAG:MOUNT]
   [CV_REMOVE_TAG:PET_EXOTIC]
   [CV_REMOVE_TAG:MOUNT_EXOTIC]
   [CV_REMOVE_TAG:NOT_BUTCHERABLE]
   [CV_REMOVE_TAG:SPEED]
   [CV_REMOVE_TAG:SWIM_SPEED]
   [CV_REMOVE_TAG:MUNDANE]
   [CV_REMOVE_TAG:POPULATION_NUMBER]
   [CV_REMOVE_TAG:CLUSTER_NUMBER]
   [CV_REMOVE_TAG:ATTACK]
   [CV_REMOVE_TAG:ATTACK_SKILL]
   [CV_REMOVE_TAG:ATTACK_VERB]
   [CV_REMOVE_TAG:ATTACK_CONTACT_PERC]
   [CV_REMOVE_TAG:ATTACK_PRIORITY]
   [CV_REMOVE_TAG:ATTACK_FLAG_WITH]
   [CV_REMOVE_TAG:ATTACK_PENETRATION_PERC]
   [CV_REMOVE_TAG:ATTACK_PREPARE_AND_RECOVER]
   [CV_REMOVE_TAG:ATTACK_FLAG_EDGE]
   [CV_REMOVE_TAG:ATTACK_FLAG_CANLATCH]
   [CV_REMOVE_TAG:SPECIALATTACK_INJECT_EXTRACT]
   [CV_REMOVE_TAG:SPECIALATTACK_SUCK_BLOOD]
   [CV_REMOVE_TAG:ATTACK_VELOCITY_MODIFIER]
   [CV_REMOVE_TAG:GAIT]
   [CV_REMOVE_TAG:UBIQUITOUS]
   [CV_CONVERT_TAG]
      [CVCT_MASTER:BODY]
      [CVCT_TARGET:QUADRUPED]
      [CVCT_REPLACEMENT:HUMANOID]
   [CV_CONVERT_TAG]
      [CVCT_MASTER:BODY]
      [CVCT_TARGET:QUADRUPED_FRONT_GRASP]
      [CVCT_REPLACEMENT:HUMANOID]
   [CV_CONVERT_TAG]
      [CVCT_MASTER:BODY]
      [CVCT_TARGET:QUADRUPED_NECK]
      [CVCT_REPLACEMENT:HUMANOID_NECK:3FINGERS]
   [CV_CONVERT_TAG]
      [CVCT_MASTER:BODY]
      [CVCT_TARGET:QUADRUPED_NECK_FRONT_GRASP]
      [CVCT_REPLACEMENT:HUMANOID_NECK]
   [CV_CONVERT_TAG]
      [CVCT_MASTER:BODY]
      [CVCT_TARGET:QUADRUPED_HOOF]
      [CVCT_REPLACEMENT:HUMANOID_HOOF:3FINGERS]
   [CV_CONVERT_TAG]
      [CVCT_MASTER:BODY]
      [CVCT_TARGET:QUADRUPED_NECK_HOOF]
      [CVCT_REPLACEMENT:HUMANOID_NECK_HOOF:3FINGERS]
   [CV_CONVERT_TAG]
      [CVCT_MASTER:BODY]
      [CVCT_TARGET:HUMANOID_ARMLESS]
      [CVCT_REPLACEMENT:HUMANOID:4FINGERS]
   [CV_CONVERT_TAG]
      [CVCT_MASTER:BODY]
      [CVCT_TARGET:HUMANOID_ARMLESS_NECK]
      [CVCT_REPLACEMENT:HUMANOID_NECK:4FINGERS]
   [CV_CONVERT_TAG]
      [CVCT_MASTER:BODY]
      [CVCT_TARGET:BODY_WITH_HEAD_FLAG]
      [CVCT_REPLACEMENT:HUMANOID:3FINGERS]
   [CV_CONVERT_TAG]
      [CVCT_MASTER:BODY]
      [CVCT_TARGET:BASIC_1PARTBODY:BASIC_HEAD]
      [CVCT_REPLACEMENT:HUMANOID:3FINGERS]
   [CV_CONVERT_TAG]
      [CVCT_MASTER:BODY]
      [CVCT_TARGET:BASIC_2PARTBODY:BASIC_HEAD]
      [CVCT_REPLACEMENT:HUMANOID:3FINGERS]
   [CV_CONVERT_TAG]
      [CVCT_MASTER:BODY]
      [CVCT_TARGET:BASIC_1PARTBODY:BASIC_HEAD_NECK]
      [CVCT_REPLACEMENT:HUMANOID_NECK:3FINGERS]
   [CV_CONVERT_TAG]
      [CVCT_MASTER:BODY]
      [CVCT_TARGET:BASIC_2PARTBODY:BASIC_HEAD_NECK]
      [CVCT_REPLACEMENT:HUMANOID_NECK:3FINGERS]
   [CV_CONVERT_TAG]
      [CVCT_MASTER:BODY]
      [CVCT_TARGET:INSECT]
      [CVCT_REPLACEMENT:HUMANOID_4ARMS:3FINGERS]
   [CV_CONVERT_TAG]
      [CVCT_MASTER:BODY]
      [CVCT_TARGET:INSECT_4LEGS_2ARMS]
      [CVCT_REPLACEMENT:HUMANOID:3FINGERS]
   [CV_CONVERT_TAG]
      [CVCT_MASTER:BODY]
      [CVCT_TARGET:SPIDER]
      [CVCT_REPLACEMENT:HUMANOID_6ARMS:3FINGERS]
   [CV_CONVERT_TAG]
      [CVCT_MASTER:BODY]
      [CVCT_TARGET:5TOES_FQ_FINGERS]
      [CVCT_REPLACEMENT:5FINGERS]
   [CV_CONVERT_TAG]
      [CVCT_MASTER:BODY]
      [CVCT_TARGET:4TOES_FQ_FINGERS]
      [CVCT_REPLACEMENT:4FINGERS]
   [CV_CONVERT_TAG]
      [CVCT_MASTER:BODY]
      [CVCT_TARGET:3TOES_FQ_FINGERS]
      [CVCT_REPLACEMENT:3FINGERS]
   [CV_CONVERT_TAG]
      [CVCT_MASTER:BODY]
      [CVCT_TARGET:5TOES_FQ_REG]
      [CVCT_REPLACEMENT:5FINGERS]
   [CV_CONVERT_TAG]
      [CVCT_MASTER:BODY]
      [CVCT_TARGET:4TOES_FQ_REG]
      [CVCT_REPLACEMENT:4FINGERS]
   [CV_CONVERT_TAG]
      [CVCT_MASTER:BODY]
      [CVCT_TARGET:3TOES_FQ_REG]
      [CVCT_REPLACEMENT:3FINGERS]
   [CV_CONVERT_TAG]
      [CVCT_MASTER:BODY]
      [CVCT_TARGET:5TOES_RQ_ANON]
      [CVCT_REPLACEMENT:5TOES]
   [CV_CONVERT_TAG]
      [CVCT_MASTER:BODY]
      [CVCT_TARGET:4TOES_RQ_ANON]
      [CVCT_REPLACEMENT:4TOES]
   [CV_CONVERT_TAG]
      [CVCT_MASTER:BODY]
      [CVCT_TARGET:3TOES_RQ_ANON]
      [CVCT_REPLACEMENT:3TOES]
   [CV_CONVERT_TAG]
      [CVCT_MASTER:BODY]
      [CVCT_TARGET:5TOES_RQ_REG]
      [CVCT_REPLACEMENT:5TOES]
   [CV_CONVERT_TAG]
      [CVCT_MASTER:BODY]
      [CVCT_TARGET:4TOES_RQ_REG]
      [CVCT_REPLACEMENT:4TOES]
   [CV_CONVERT_TAG]
      [CVCT_MASTER:BODY]
      [CVCT_TARGET:3TOES_RQ_REG]
      [CVCT_REPLACEMENT:3TOES]
   [CV_NEW_TAG:LARGE_ROAMING]
   [CV_NEW_TAG:SAVAGE]
   [CV_NEW_TAG:SELECT_CASTE:ALL]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:GRAVITATE_BODY_SIZE:70000]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:CHANGE_FREQUENCY_PERC:10]
   [CV_NEW_TAG:CAN_LEARN]
   [CV_NEW_TAG:CAN_SPEAK]
   [CV_NEW_TAG:EQUIPS]
   [CV_NEW_TAG:CANOPENDOORS]
   [CV_NEW_TAG:LOCAL_POPS_CONTROLLABLE]
   [CV_NEW_TAG:LOCAL_POPS_PRODUCE_HEROES]

[CREATURE_VARIATION:ANIMAL_PERSON_LEGLESS]
   [CV_REMOVE_TAG:NAME]
   [CV_REMOVE_TAG:GENERAL_CHILD_NAME]
   [CV_REMOVE_TAG:GENERAL_BABY_NAME]
   [CV_REMOVE_TAG:CASTE_NAME]
   [CV_REMOVE_TAG:CHILDNAME]
   [CV_REMOVE_TAG:BABYNAME]
   [CV_REMOVE_TAG:SMALL_REMAINS]
   [CV_REMOVE_TAG:DESCRIPTION]
   [CV_REMOVE_TAG:CREATURE_TILE]
   [CV_REMOVE_TAG:COLOR]
   [CV_REMOVE_TAG:MAXAGE]
   [CV_REMOVE_TAG:SOUND]
   [CV_REMOVE_TAG:PET]
   [CV_REMOVE_TAG:PETVALUE]
   [CV_REMOVE_TAG:PENETRATEPOWER]
   [CV_REMOVE_TAG:VERMIN_EATER]
   [CV_REMOVE_TAG:VERMIN_HATEABLE]
   [CV_REMOVE_TAG:VERMIN_GROUNDER]
   [CV_REMOVE_TAG:VERMIN_FISH]
   [CV_REMOVE_TAG:VERMIN_SOIL]
   [CV_REMOVE_TAG:VERMIN_SOIL_COLONY]
   [CV_REMOVE_TAG:VERMIN_ROTTER]
   [CV_REMOVE_TAG:VERMIN_NOTRAP]
   [CV_REMOVE_TAG:FISHITEM]
   [CV_REMOVE_TAG:IMMOBILE_LAND]
   [CV_REMOVE_TAG:TRIGGERABLE_GROUP]
   [CV_REMOVE_TAG:PET_EXOTIC]
   [CV_REMOVE_TAG:NOT_BUTCHERABLE]
   [CV_REMOVE_TAG:SPEED]
   [CV_REMOVE_TAG:SWIM_SPEED]
   [CV_REMOVE_TAG:MUNDANE]
   [CV_REMOVE_TAG:POPULATION_NUMBER]
   [CV_REMOVE_TAG:CLUSTER_NUMBER]
   [CV_REMOVE_TAG:ATTACK]
   [CV_REMOVE_TAG:ATTACK_SKILL]
   [CV_REMOVE_TAG:ATTACK_VERB]
   [CV_REMOVE_TAG:ATTACK_CONTACT_PERC]
   [CV_REMOVE_TAG:ATTACK_PRIORITY]
   [CV_REMOVE_TAG:ATTACK_FLAG_WITH]
   [CV_REMOVE_TAG:ATTACK_PENETRATION_PERC]
   [CV_REMOVE_TAG:ATTACK_PREPARE_AND_RECOVER]
   [CV_REMOVE_TAG:ATTACK_FLAG_EDGE]
   [CV_REMOVE_TAG:ATTACK_FLAG_CANLATCH]
   [CV_REMOVE_TAG:SPECIALATTACK_INJECT_EXTRACT]
   [CV_REMOVE_TAG:SPECIALATTACK_SUCK_BLOOD]
   [CV_REMOVE_TAG:ATTACK_VELOCITY_MODIFIER]
   [CV_REMOVE_TAG:GAIT]
   [CV_REMOVE_TAG:UBIQUITOUS]
   [CV_CONVERT_TAG]
      [CVCT_MASTER:BODY]
      [CVCT_TARGET:QUADRUPED]
      [CVCT_REPLACEMENT:HUMANOID_LEGLESS]
   [CV_CONVERT_TAG]
      [CVCT_MASTER:BODY]
      [CVCT_TARGET:QUADRUPED_NECK]
      [CVCT_REPLACEMENT:HUMANOID_LEGLESS_NECK:3FINGERS]
   [CV_CONVERT_TAG]
      [CVCT_MASTER:BODY]
      [CVCT_TARGET:QUADRUPED_HOOF]
      [CVCT_REPLACEMENT:HUMANOID_LEGLESS:3FINGERS]
   [CV_CONVERT_TAG]
      [CVCT_MASTER:BODY]
      [CVCT_TARGET:QUADRUPED_NECK_HOOF]
      [CVCT_REPLACEMENT:HUMANOID_LEGLESS_NECK:3FINGERS]
   [CV_CONVERT_TAG]
      [CVCT_MASTER:BODY]
      [CVCT_TARGET:HUMANOID_ARMLESS]
      [CVCT_REPLACEMENT:HUMANOID_LEGLESS:4FINGERS]
   [CV_CONVERT_TAG]
      [CVCT_MASTER:BODY]
      [CVCT_TARGET:HUMANOID_ARMLESS_NECK]
      [CVCT_REPLACEMENT:HUMANOID_LEGLESS_NECK:4FINGERS]
   [CV_CONVERT_TAG]
      [CVCT_MASTER:BODY]
      [CVCT_TARGET:BODY_WITH_HEAD_FLAG]
      [CVCT_REPLACEMENT:HUMANOID_LEGLESS:3FINGERS]
   [CV_CONVERT_TAG]
      [CVCT_MASTER:BODY]
      [CVCT_TARGET:BASIC_1PARTBODY:BASIC_HEAD]
      [CVCT_REPLACEMENT:HUMANOID_LEGLESS:3FINGERS]
   [CV_CONVERT_TAG]
      [CVCT_MASTER:BODY]
      [CVCT_TARGET:BASIC_2PARTBODY:BASIC_HEAD]
      [CVCT_REPLACEMENT:HUMANOID_LEGLESS:3FINGERS]
   [CV_CONVERT_TAG]
      [CVCT_MASTER:BODY]
      [CVCT_TARGET:BASIC_1PARTBODY:BASIC_HEAD_NECK]
      [CVCT_REPLACEMENT:HUMANOID_LEGLESS_NECK:3FINGERS]
   [CV_CONVERT_TAG]
      [CVCT_MASTER:BODY]
      [CVCT_TARGET:BASIC_2PARTBODY:BASIC_HEAD_NECK]
      [CVCT_REPLACEMENT:HUMANOID_LEGLESS_NECK:3FINGERS]
   [CV_CONVERT_TAG]
      [CVCT_MASTER:BODY]
      [CVCT_TARGET:INSECT]
      [CVCT_REPLACEMENT:HUMANOID_LEGLESS_4ARMS:3FINGERS]
   [CV_CONVERT_TAG]
      [CVCT_MASTER:BODY]
      [CVCT_TARGET:SPIDER]
      [CVCT_REPLACEMENT:HUMANOID_LEGLESS_6ARMS:3FINGERS]
   [CV_CONVERT_TAG]
      [CVCT_MASTER:BODY]
      [CVCT_TARGET:5TOES_FQ_FINGERS]
      [CVCT_REPLACEMENT:5FINGERS]
   [CV_CONVERT_TAG]
      [CVCT_MASTER:BODY]
      [CVCT_TARGET:4TOES_FQ_FINGERS]
      [CVCT_REPLACEMENT:4FINGERS]
   [CV_CONVERT_TAG]
      [CVCT_MASTER:BODY]
      [CVCT_TARGET:3TOES_FQ_FINGERS]
      [CVCT_REPLACEMENT:3FINGERS]
   [CV_CONVERT_TAG]
      [CVCT_MASTER:BODY]
      [CVCT_TARGET:5TOES_FQ_REG]
      [CVCT_REPLACEMENT:5FINGERS]
   [CV_CONVERT_TAG]
      [CVCT_MASTER:BODY]
      [CVCT_TARGET:4TOES_FQ_REG]
      [CVCT_REPLACEMENT:4FINGERS]
   [CV_CONVERT_TAG]
      [CVCT_MASTER:BODY]
      [CVCT_TARGET:3TOES_FQ_REG]
      [CVCT_REPLACEMENT:3FINGERS]
   [CV_CONVERT_TAG]
      [CVCT_MASTER:BODY]
      [CVCT_TARGET:5TOES_RQ_ANON]
   [CV_CONVERT_TAG]
      [CVCT_MASTER:BODY]
      [CVCT_TARGET:4TOES_RQ_ANON]
   [CV_CONVERT_TAG]
      [CVCT_MASTER:BODY]
      [CVCT_TARGET:3TOES_RQ_ANON]
   [CV_CONVERT_TAG]
      [CVCT_MASTER:BODY]
      [CVCT_TARGET:5TOES_RQ_REG]
   [CV_CONVERT_TAG]
      [CVCT_MASTER:BODY]
      [CVCT_TARGET:4TOES_RQ_REG]
   [CV_CONVERT_TAG]
      [CVCT_MASTER:BODY]
      [CVCT_TARGET:3TOES_RQ_REG]
   [CV_NEW_TAG:LARGE_ROAMING]
   [CV_NEW_TAG:SAVAGE]
   [CV_NEW_TAG:SELECT_CASTE:ALL]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:GRAVITATE_BODY_SIZE:70000]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:CHANGE_FREQUENCY_PERC:10]
   [CV_NEW_TAG:CAN_LEARN]
   [CV_NEW_TAG:CAN_SPEAK]
   [CV_NEW_TAG:EQUIPS]
   [CV_NEW_TAG:CANOPENDOORS]
   [CV_NEW_TAG:LOCAL_POPS_CONTROLLABLE]
   [CV_NEW_TAG:LOCAL_POPS_PRODUCE_HEROES]

[CREATURE_VARIATION:PUNCH_ATTACK]
   [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK:PUNCHY:BODYPART:BY_CATEGORY:HAND]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_SKILL:GRASP_STRIKE]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_VERB:punch:punches]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_CONTACT_PERC:2000]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_PREPARE_AND_RECOVER:3:3]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_PRIORITY:MAIN]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_FLAG_WITH]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_VELOCITY_MODIFIER:500]

[CREATURE_VARIATION:KICK_ATTACK]
   [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK:KICKY:BODYPART:BY_TYPE:STANCE]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_SKILL:STANCE_STRIKE]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_VERB:kick:kicks]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_CONTACT_PERC:2000]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_PREPARE_AND_RECOVER:4:4]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_FLAG_WITH]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_PRIORITY:SECOND]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_FLAG_BAD_MULTIATTACK]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_VELOCITY_MODIFIER:500]

[CREATURE_VARIATION:KICK_HIGHVEL_ATTACK]
   [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK:KICK:BODYPART:BY_TYPE:STANCE]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_SKILL:STANCE_STRIKE]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_VERB:kick:kicks]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_CONTACT_PERC:1000]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_PREPARE_AND_RECOVER:4:4]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_FLAG_WITH]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_PRIORITY:SECOND]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_VELOCITY_MODIFIER:1000]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_FLAG_BAD_MULTIATTACK]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_VELOCITY_MODIFIER:500]

[CREATURE_VARIATION:TAIL_ATTACK]
   [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK:SLAP:BODYPART:BY_CATEGORY:TAIL]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_SKILL:STANCE_STRIKE]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_VERB:slap:slaps]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_CONTACT_PERC:100]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_PREPARE_AND_RECOVER:4:4]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_PRIORITY:MAIN]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_FLAG_WITH]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_VELOCITY_MODIFIER:500]

[CREATURE_VARIATION:HOOF_ATTACK]
   [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK:KICK:BODYPART:BY_CATEGORY:HOOF]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_SKILL:STANCE_STRIKE]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_VERB:kick:kicks]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_CONTACT_PERC:100]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_PREPARE_AND_RECOVER:4:4]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_PRIORITY:MAIN]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_FLAG_WITH]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_FLAG_BAD_MULTIATTACK]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_VELOCITY_MODIFIER:500]

[CREATURE_VARIATION:NAIL_MATERIALS]
   [CV_NEW_TAG:USE_MATERIAL_TEMPLATE:NAIL:NAIL_TEMPLATE]
   [CV_NEW_TAG:USE_TISSUE_TEMPLATE:NAIL:NAIL_TEMPLATE]
   [CV_NEW_TAG:TISSUE_LAYER:BY_CATEGORY:FINGER:NAIL:FRONT]

[CREATURE_VARIATION:NAIL_SCRATCH_ATTACK]
   CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK:SCRATCH:CHILD_TISSUE_LAYER_GROUP:BY_TYPE:GRASP:BY_CATEGORY:ALL:NAIL]
      CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_SKILL:GRASP_STRIKE]
      CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_VERB:scratch:scratches]
      CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_CONTACT_PERC:100]
      CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_PENETRATION_PERC:100]
      CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_FLAG_EDGE]
      CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_PREPARE_AND_RECOVER:3:3]
      CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_PRIORITY:SECOND]
      CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_VELOCITY_MODIFIER:500]

[CREATURE_VARIATION:CLAW_SCRATCH_ATTACK]
   [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK:SCRATCH:CHILD_TISSUE_LAYER_GROUP:BY_TYPE:GRASP:BY_CATEGORY:ALL:CLAW]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_SKILL:GRASP_STRIKE]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_VERB:scratch:scratches]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_CONTACT_PERC:100]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_PENETRATION_PERC:100]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_FLAG_EDGE]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_PREPARE_AND_RECOVER:3:3]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_PRIORITY:SECOND]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_VELOCITY_MODIFIER:500]

[CREATURE_VARIATION:TOOTH_BITE_ATTACK]
   [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK:BITE:CHILD_BODYPART_GROUP:BY_CATEGORY:HEAD:BY_CATEGORY:TOOTH]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_SKILL:BITE]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_VERB:bite:bites]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_CONTACT_PERC:100]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_PENETRATION_PERC:100]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_FLAG_EDGE]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_PREPARE_AND_RECOVER:3:3]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_PRIORITY:SECOND]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_FLAG_CANLATCH]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_VELOCITY_MODIFIER:500]

[CREATURE_VARIATION:TOOTH_BITE_VENOM_ATTACK]
   [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK:BITE:CHILD_BODYPART_GROUP:BY_CATEGORY:HEAD:BY_CATEGORY:TOOTH]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_SKILL:BITE]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_VERB:bite:bites]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_CONTACT_PERC:100]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_PENETRATION_PERC:100]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_FLAG_EDGE]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_PREPARE_AND_RECOVER:3:3]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_PRIORITY:MAIN]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_FLAG_CANLATCH]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:SPECIALATTACK_INJECT_EXTRACT:LOCAL_CREATURE_MAT:VENOM:LIQUID:100:100]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_VELOCITY_MODIFIER:500]

[CREATURE_VARIATION:TAIL_STING_VENOM_ATTACK]
   [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK:STING:BODYPART:BY_CATEGORY:STINGER]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_SKILL:STANCE_STRIKE]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_VERB:sting:stings]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_CONTACT_PERC:5]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_PENETRATION_PERC:100]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_FLAG_EDGE]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_PREPARE_AND_RECOVER:4:4]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_PRIORITY:MAIN]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:SPECIALATTACK_INJECT_EXTRACT:LOCAL_CREATURE_MAT:VENOM:LIQUID:100:100]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_VELOCITY_MODIFIER:500]

[CREATURE_VARIATION:MOUTH_BITE_ATTACK]
   [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK:BITE:BODYPART:BY_CATEGORY:MOUTH]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_SKILL:BITE]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_VERB:bite:bites]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_CONTACT_PERC:100]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_PREPARE_AND_RECOVER:3:3]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_PRIORITY:MAIN]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_FLAG_CANLATCH]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_VELOCITY_MODIFIER:500]

[CREATURE_VARIATION:MOUTH_SUCK_ATTACK]
   [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK:BITE:BODYPART:BY_CATEGORY:MOUTH]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_SKILL:BITE]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_VERB:bite:bites]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_CONTACT_PERC:100]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_PREPARE_AND_RECOVER:3:3]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_PRIORITY:MAIN]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_FLAG_CANLATCH]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:SPECIALATTACK_SUCK_BLOOD:25:50]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_VELOCITY_MODIFIER:500]

[CREATURE_VARIATION:PROBOSCIS_SUCK_ATTACK]
   [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK:BITE:BODYPART:BY_CATEGORY:PROBOSCIS]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_SKILL:BITE]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_VERB:bite:bites]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_CONTACT_PERC:100]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_FLAG_EDGE]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_PREPARE_AND_RECOVER:3:3]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_PRIORITY:MAIN]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_FLAG_CANLATCH]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:SPECIALATTACK_SUCK_BLOOD:25:50]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_VELOCITY_MODIFIER:500]

[CREATURE_VARIATION:MOUTH_BITE_EDGE_ATTACK]
   [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK:BITE:BODYPART:BY_CATEGORY:MOUTH]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_SKILL:BITE]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_VERB:bite:bites]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_CONTACT_PERC:100]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_FLAG_EDGE]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_PREPARE_AND_RECOVER:3:3]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_PRIORITY:MAIN]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_FLAG_CANLATCH]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_VELOCITY_MODIFIER:500]

[CREATURE_VARIATION:MOUTH_BITE_VENOM_ATTACK]
   [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK:BITE:BODYPART:BY_CATEGORY:MOUTH]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_SKILL:BITE]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_VERB:bite:bites]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_CONTACT_PERC:100]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_FLAG_EDGE]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_PREPARE_AND_RECOVER:3:3]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_PRIORITY:MAIN]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_FLAG_CANLATCH]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:SPECIALATTACK_INJECT_EXTRACT:LOCAL_CREATURE_MAT:VENOM:LIQUID:100:100]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_VELOCITY_MODIFIER:500]

[CREATURE_VARIATION:BEAK_BITE_ATTACK]
   [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK:BITE:BODYPART:BY_CATEGORY:BEAK]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_SKILL:BITE]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_VERB:bite:bites]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_CONTACT_PERC:100]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_PENETRATION_PERC:100]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_FLAG_EDGE]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_PREPARE_AND_RECOVER:3:3]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_PRIORITY:MAIN]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_FLAG_CANLATCH]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_VELOCITY_MODIFIER:500]

[CREATURE_VARIATION:TALON_SCRATCH_ATTACK]
   [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK:SCRATCH:CHILD_TISSUE_LAYER_GROUP:BY_TYPE:STANCE:BY_CATEGORY:ALL:TALON]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_SKILL:STANCE_STRIKE]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_VERB:snatch at:snatches at]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_CONTACT_PERC:100]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_PENETRATION_PERC:100]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_FLAG_EDGE]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_PREPARE_AND_RECOVER:3:3]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_PRIORITY:SECOND]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_FLAG_WITH]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_FLAG_BAD_MULTIATTACK]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_VELOCITY_MODIFIER:500]

[CREATURE_VARIATION:TUSK_STAB_ATTACK]
   [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK:STAB:BODYPART:BY_CATEGORY:TUSK]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_SKILL:BITE]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_VERB:stab:stabs]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_CONTACT_PERC:100]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_PRIORITY:MAIN]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_FLAG_EDGE]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_PREPARE_AND_RECOVER:3:3]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_FLAG_WITH]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_VELOCITY_MODIFIER:500]

[CREATURE_VARIATION:PINCER_ATTACK]
   [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK:PINCER:BODYPART:BY_CATEGORY:PINCER]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_SKILL:GRASP_STRIKE]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_VERB:snatch:snatches]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_CONTACT_PERC:100]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_PENETRATION_PERC:100]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_FLAG_EDGE]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_PREPARE_AND_RECOVER:3:3]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_PRIORITY:MAIN]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_FLAG_CANLATCH]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_FLAG_WITH]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_VELOCITY_MODIFIER:500]

[CREATURE_VARIATION:ARM_LOWER_SNATCH_ATTACK]
   [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK:SNATCH:BODYPART:BY_CATEGORY:ARM_LOWER]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_SKILL:GRASP_STRIKE]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_VERB:snatch:snatches]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_CONTACT_PERC:100]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_FLAG_EDGE]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_PREPARE_AND_RECOVER:3:3]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_PRIORITY:MAIN]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_FLAG_CANLATCH]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_FLAG_WITH]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_VELOCITY_MODIFIER:500]

[CREATURE_VARIATION:TGORE]
   [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK:TGORE:BODYPART:BY_CATEGORY:TUSK]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_SKILL:BITE]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_VERB:gore:gores]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_CONTACT_PERC:100]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_PREPARE_AND_RECOVER:3:3]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_PRIORITY:MAIN]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_FLAG_WITH]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_VELOCITY_MODIFIER:500]
      
[CREATURE_VARIATION:HGORE]
   [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK:HGORE:BODYPART:BY_CATEGORY:HORN]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_SKILL:BITE]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_VERB:gore:gores]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_CONTACT_PERC:100]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_PREPARE_AND_RECOVER:3:3]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_FLAG_WITH]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_PRIORITY:MAIN]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:ATTACK_VELOCITY_MODIFIER:500]
      
[CREATURE_VARIATION:GIANT]
   [CV_REMOVE_TAG:NAME]
   [CV_REMOVE_TAG:GENERAL_CHILD_NAME]
   [CV_REMOVE_TAG:GENERAL_BABY_NAME]
   [CV_REMOVE_TAG:CASTE_NAME]
   [CV_REMOVE_TAG:CHILDNAME]
   [CV_REMOVE_TAG:BABYNAME]
   [CV_REMOVE_TAG:POPULATION_NUMBER]
   [CV_REMOVE_TAG:CLUSTER_NUMBER]
   [CV_REMOVE_TAG:COLOR]
   [CV_REMOVE_TAG:MOUNT]
   [CV_REMOVE_TAG:MOUNT_EXOTIC]
   [CV_REMOVE_TAG:SOUND]
   [CV_REMOVE_TAG:SMALL_REMAINS]
   [CV_REMOVE_TAG:DESCRIPTION]
   [CV_REMOVE_TAG:CREATURE_TILE]
   [CV_REMOVE_TAG:PET]
   [CV_REMOVE_TAG:PETVALUE]
   [CV_REMOVE_TAG:PENETRATEPOWER]
   [CV_REMOVE_TAG:VERMIN_EATER]
   [CV_REMOVE_TAG:VERMIN_HATEABLE]
   [CV_REMOVE_TAG:VERMIN_GROUNDER]
   [CV_REMOVE_TAG:VERMIN_FISH]
   [CV_REMOVE_TAG:VERMIN_SOIL]
   [CV_REMOVE_TAG:VERMIN_SOIL_COLONY]
   [CV_REMOVE_TAG:VERMIN_ROTTER]
   [CV_REMOVE_TAG:VERMIN_NOTRAP]
   [CV_REMOVE_TAG:FISHITEM]
   [CV_REMOVE_TAG:TRIGGERABLE_GROUP]
   [CV_REMOVE_TAG:PET_EXOTIC]
   [CV_REMOVE_TAG:NOT_BUTCHERABLE]
   [CV_REMOVE_TAG:PREFSTRING]
   [CV_REMOVE_TAG:SPEED]
   [CV_REMOVE_TAG:SWIM_SPEED]
   [CV_REMOVE_TAG:MUNDANE]
   [CV_REMOVE_TAG:GAIT]
   [CV_REMOVE_TAG:UBIQUITOUS]
   [CV_NEW_TAG:LARGE_ROAMING]
   [CV_NEW_TAG:SAVAGE]
   [CV_NEW_TAG:SELECT_CASTE:ALL]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:CHANGE_BODY_SIZE_PERC:200]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:CHANGE_FREQUENCY_PERC:50]

[CREATURE_VARIATION:STANDARD_BIPED_GAITS]
   GAIT:type:name:full speed:build up time:turning max:start speed:energy use
      use NO_BUILD_UP if you jump immediately to full speed
      these optional flags go at the end:
         LAYERS_SLOW - fat/muscle layers slow the movement (muscle-slowing counter-acted by strength bonus)
         STRENGTH - strength attribute can speed/slow movement
         AGILITY - agility attribute can speed/slow movement
         STEALTH_SLOWS:<n> - n is percentage slowed
         it would be interesting to allow quirky attributes (like mental stats), but they aren't supported yet
   [CV_NEW_TAG:GAIT:WALK:Sprint:!ARG4:10:3:!ARG2:50:LAYERS_SLOW:STRENGTH:AGILITY:STEALTH_SLOWS:50]
   [CV_NEW_TAG:GAIT:WALK:Run:!ARG3:5:3:!ARG2:10:LAYERS_SLOW:STRENGTH:AGILITY:STEALTH_SLOWS:20]
   [CV_NEW_TAG:GAIT:WALK:Jog:!ARG2:NO_BUILD_UP:5:LAYERS_SLOW:STRENGTH:AGILITY:STEALTH_SLOWS:10]
   [CV_NEW_TAG:GAIT:WALK:Walk:!ARG1:NO_BUILD_UP:0]
   [CV_NEW_TAG:GAIT:WALK:Stroll:!ARG5:NO_BUILD_UP:0]
   [CV_NEW_TAG:GAIT:WALK:Creep:!ARG6:NO_BUILD_UP:0]

[CREATURE_VARIATION:STANDARD_QUADRUPED_GAITS]
   [CV_NEW_TAG:GAIT:WALK:Gallop:!ARG4:10:3:!ARG2:50:LAYERS_SLOW:STRENGTH:AGILITY:STEALTH_SLOWS:50]
   [CV_NEW_TAG:GAIT:WALK:Canter:!ARG3:5:3:!ARG2:10:LAYERS_SLOW:STRENGTH:AGILITY:STEALTH_SLOWS:20]
   [CV_NEW_TAG:GAIT:WALK:Trot:!ARG2:NO_BUILD_UP:5:LAYERS_SLOW:STRENGTH:AGILITY:STEALTH_SLOWS:10]
   [CV_NEW_TAG:GAIT:WALK:Walk:!ARG1:NO_BUILD_UP:0]
   [CV_NEW_TAG:GAIT:WALK:Stroll:!ARG5:NO_BUILD_UP:0]
   [CV_NEW_TAG:GAIT:WALK:Creep:!ARG6:NO_BUILD_UP:0]

[CREATURE_VARIATION:STANDARD_WALKING_GAITS]
   [CV_NEW_TAG:GAIT:WALK:Fastest Walk:!ARG4:10:3:!ARG2:50:LAYERS_SLOW:STRENGTH:AGILITY:STEALTH_SLOWS:50]
   [CV_NEW_TAG:GAIT:WALK:Faster Walk:!ARG3:5:3:!ARG2:10:LAYERS_SLOW:STRENGTH:AGILITY:STEALTH_SLOWS:20]
   [CV_NEW_TAG:GAIT:WALK:Fast Walk:!ARG2:NO_BUILD_UP:5:LAYERS_SLOW:STRENGTH:AGILITY:STEALTH_SLOWS:10]
   [CV_NEW_TAG:GAIT:WALK:Walk:!ARG1:NO_BUILD_UP:0]
   [CV_NEW_TAG:GAIT:WALK:Slow Walk:!ARG5:NO_BUILD_UP:0]
   [CV_NEW_TAG:GAIT:WALK:Slowest Walk:!ARG6:NO_BUILD_UP:0]

[CREATURE_VARIATION:STANDARD_CLIMBING_GAITS]
   [CV_NEW_TAG:GAIT:CLIMB:Scramble:!ARG4:10:3:!ARG2:50:LAYERS_SLOW:STRENGTH:AGILITY:STEALTH_SLOWS:50]
   [CV_NEW_TAG:GAIT:CLIMB:Faster Climb:!ARG3:5:3:!ARG2:10:LAYERS_SLOW:STRENGTH:AGILITY:STEALTH_SLOWS:20]
   [CV_NEW_TAG:GAIT:CLIMB:Fast Climb:!ARG2:NO_BUILD_UP:5:LAYERS_SLOW:STRENGTH:AGILITY:STEALTH_SLOWS:10]
   [CV_NEW_TAG:GAIT:CLIMB:Climb:!ARG1:NO_BUILD_UP:0]
   [CV_NEW_TAG:GAIT:CLIMB:Slow Climb:!ARG5:NO_BUILD_UP:0]
   [CV_NEW_TAG:GAIT:CLIMB:Creep:!ARG6:NO_BUILD_UP:0]

[CREATURE_VARIATION:STANDARD_SWIMMING_GAITS]
   [CV_NEW_TAG:GAIT:SWIM:Maximum Swim Speed:!ARG4:10:3:!ARG2:50:LAYERS_SLOW:STRENGTH:AGILITY:STEALTH_SLOWS:50]
   [CV_NEW_TAG:GAIT:SWIM:Faster Swim:!ARG3:5:3:!ARG2:10:LAYERS_SLOW:STRENGTH:AGILITY:STEALTH_SLOWS:20]
   [CV_NEW_TAG:GAIT:SWIM:Fast Swim:!ARG2:NO_BUILD_UP:5:LAYERS_SLOW:STRENGTH:AGILITY:STEALTH_SLOWS:10]
   [CV_NEW_TAG:GAIT:SWIM:Swim:!ARG1:NO_BUILD_UP:0]
   [CV_NEW_TAG:GAIT:SWIM:Slow Swim:!ARG5:NO_BUILD_UP:0]
   [CV_NEW_TAG:GAIT:SWIM:Creeping Swim:!ARG6:NO_BUILD_UP:0]

[CREATURE_VARIATION:STANDARD_CRAWLING_GAITS]
   [CV_NEW_TAG:GAIT:CRAWL:Scramble:!ARG4:10:3:!ARG2:50:LAYERS_SLOW:STRENGTH:AGILITY:STEALTH_SLOWS:50]
   [CV_NEW_TAG:GAIT:CRAWL:Faster Crawl:!ARG3:5:3:!ARG2:10:LAYERS_SLOW:STRENGTH:AGILITY:STEALTH_SLOWS:20]
   [CV_NEW_TAG:GAIT:CRAWL:Fast Crawl:!ARG2:NO_BUILD_UP:5:LAYERS_SLOW:STRENGTH:AGILITY:STEALTH_SLOWS:10]
   [CV_NEW_TAG:GAIT:CRAWL:Crawl:!ARG1:NO_BUILD_UP:0]
   [CV_NEW_TAG:GAIT:CRAWL:Slow Crawl:!ARG5:NO_BUILD_UP:0]
   [CV_NEW_TAG:GAIT:CRAWL:Creep:!ARG6:NO_BUILD_UP:0]
   [CV_NEW_TAG:CAN_DO_INTERACTION:BATTLE_FERVOUR]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:CDI:ADV_NAME:battle fervour]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:CDI:CAN_BE_MUTUAL]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:CDI:USAGE_HINT:ATTACK]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:CDI:TARGET:B:SELF_ALLOWED]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:CDI:TARGET_RANGE:B:25]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:CDI:MAX_TARGET_NUMBER:B:1]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:CDI:WAIT_PERIOD:100]
      [CV_NEW_TAG:CDI:FREE_ACTION]
   [CV_CONVERT_TAG]
      [CVCT_MASTER:ATTACK_CONTACT_PERC]
      [CVCT_TARGET:100]
      [CVCT_REPLACEMENT:1136]
      
[CREATURE_VARIATION:STANDARD_FLYING_GAITS]
   [CV_NEW_TAG:GAIT:FLY:Maximum Flight Speed:!ARG4:10:3:!ARG2:50:LAYERS_SLOW:STRENGTH:AGILITY:STEALTH_SLOWS:50]
   [CV_NEW_TAG:GAIT:FLY:Faster Flight:!ARG3:5:3:!ARG2:10:LAYERS_SLOW:STRENGTH:AGILITY:STEALTH_SLOWS:20]
   [CV_NEW_TAG:GAIT:FLY:Fast Flight:!ARG2:NO_BUILD_UP:5:LAYERS_SLOW:STRENGTH:AGILITY:STEALTH_SLOWS:10]
   [CV_NEW_TAG:GAIT:FLY:Fly:!ARG1:NO_BUILD_UP:0]
   [CV_NEW_TAG:GAIT:FLY:Slow Flight:!ARG5:NO_BUILD_UP:0]
   [CV_NEW_TAG:GAIT:FLY:Hover:!ARG6:NO_BUILD_UP:0]

[CREATURE_VARIATION:STANDARD_WALK_CRAWL_GAITS]
   [CV_NEW_TAG:GAIT:WALK:Scramble:!ARG4:10:3:!ARG2:50:LAYERS_SLOW:STRENGTH:AGILITY:STEALTH_SLOWS:50]
   [CV_NEW_TAG:GAIT:WALK:Faster Crawl:!ARG3:5:3:!ARG2:10:LAYERS_SLOW:STRENGTH:AGILITY:STEALTH_SLOWS:20]
   [CV_NEW_TAG:GAIT:WALK:Fast Crawl:!ARG2:NO_BUILD_UP:5:LAYERS_SLOW:STRENGTH:AGILITY:STEALTH_SLOWS:10]
   [CV_NEW_TAG:GAIT:WALK:Crawl:!ARG1:NO_BUILD_UP:0]
   [CV_NEW_TAG:GAIT:WALK:Slow Crawl:!ARG5:NO_BUILD_UP:0]
   [CV_NEW_TAG:GAIT:WALK:Creep:!ARG6:NO_BUILD_UP:0]

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor (0.42.xx) - Revision 4c
Post by: Haruspex on January 20, 2016, 03:07:12 pm

I liked the mod a lot, but i got a question: why all blunt weapons have "edged" bash attack? That makes them act weird against unarmored targets. I've tried to replace it with "blunt" in raws for maul, and it behaves roughly same as with "edge" (tested it against opponent in full plate steel armor with leather and cloth underwear, cloak and coat).

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor (0.42.xx) - Revision 4c
Post by: Grimlocke on January 21, 2016, 01:31:54 am

Its because the blunt and edged attacks are very annoyingly tied to AI behavior.

If there is any EDGE attack present, it will use that attack as a primary attack, but if all the attacks are BLUNT it will only use the actual main attack a 4th of the time, making the weapon rather useless unless your using it as an adventurer.

You may have noticed all the 'edged' blunt attacks have little to no penetration depth, which will make them behave like a blunt weapon, only the combat announcements get weird here and there. Its not a perfect solution but I figured it was the least imperfect one hehe.


@Taffer: awesome, thanks! I will have a look once I get home. The modest mod joints shouldn't have a huge impact on combat as they cannot actually be target with regular attacks, though it would be good to check if they don't break too easily when covered in armor. I will have a look at that sometime soon and put out as an optional patch.

In case anyone is curious, I have been mucking around with replacing specific weapon skills with general skills for one-handed, two-handed and polearm weapons (shamelessly ripping off mount & blade? maaaybe...), as I always found it somewhat stupid that my dwarves have to completely re-learn fighting when switching from an axe to a hammer.
It does have some undesirable consequences, such as wood cutting needing some workarounds, and I have been considering merging the two-handed and polearms skills just to get the NPC equipment to make some sense for once. (right now NPCs with two-handed weapons always lug around a shield as well and use the weapon one-handed)

If I have something I find satisfactory I may put up a poll to see if anyone actually wants this.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor (0.42.xx) - Revision 4c
Post by: cyberTripping on January 25, 2016, 05:54:36 am

if I could give my two cents, I'd think it would be better from a realism standpoint to not divide it up so cleanly, as in, into one hand/ two hand/ polearm. For instance, I could see someone who is well versed in using a hatchet also being able to use a hammer just as effectively. The techniques and form are generally the same. However, I couldn't see this same person picking up an epee for the first time and using it just as flawlessly, as would work out in such a division. It would probably be better to divide skills into "groups" of general combat techniques, somehow. Obviously things wouldn't be perfect, but it would make more sense than the current setup, at least in my opinion.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor (0.42.xx) - Revision 4c
Post by: Grimlocke on January 26, 2016, 02:52:52 am

I vaguely considered that at some point, but I kinda ran into a lot walls when trying to actually bring it into practice.

Mostly because melee weapons tend to have a lot of different aspects to them, some similar to other, some not at all. Making a separate class for them all would put me well over the number of skills DF has.

Naming also gets awkward really quick, and actually not period accurate for naming at all. For instance if I were to make a class 'cut-and-thrust polearms' class I would I end up with names like 'dabbling cut-and-thrust polearm dwarf'? Even more so with things like 'thrust-centric swordsgoblin' or 'far-centre-of-mass one-handed weapon dwarf'.

Though having meticulously specific yet rather cumbersome names is kind of in the spirit of DF...

Know what, I will give it some more thought when I'm not being plagued by toothache and under the influence of scottish painkiller, might even throw all these alternate weapon skill ideas in a poll somewhere.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor (0.42.xx) - Revision 4c
Post by: Urist Tilaturist on February 10, 2016, 04:28:22 pm

Are you going to add Taffer's c_variation_default.txt to the base mod?

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor (0.42.xx) - Revision 4c
Post by: Grimlocke on February 11, 2016, 04:21:13 am

It will be incorporated it in the 42.06 version update, assuming there is anything to update there.

As for other progress, I have been messing around with some experimental stuff like giving goblins armor with no armor class to try and get them to wear it as clothes, making a cave-dwelling entity for my old armor man creature, running DF on a mac through ncurses over ssh just for the heck of it (ncurses works and fun was had with messing with the iTerm2 font and ASCII colors, but I can't recommend mac for DF as a lot of the key bindings don't work).

I have also still been poking around with the idea of removing weapon-specific skills.

There is actually less issues with that than I thought there would be as entities with no weapon of a certain class do not use the class at all. Wood cutting is annoying though, I had to make a work-around-y 'felling axe' training weapon.

Still not entirely sure what to name 'one-handed weapon user' and 'two-handed weapon user'. Right now I got 'dwarf-at-arms' and 'heavy dwarf-at-arms' for those skills respectively, or 'armsdwarf' and 'heavy armsdwarf'. Both sound a bit contrived in my ears... suggestions would be quite welcome. 'Stavesdwarf' can stay if I keep polearms separate from the shorter two-handed weapons.

I'm also playing with the idea of reviving my old, half-finished 'Historic metallurgy overhaul' mod since there is some more control over reactions and stock buildings/reactions.

Sooo... Lots of stuff with not that much to show for it as of now, but I'm still here at least :P

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor (0.42.xx) - Revision 4c
Post by: peasant cretin on February 11, 2016, 11:50:27 am

I'd suggest leaving the other weapons professions as they are.

For example, in my mod I've done something similar for polearms/two-handed weapons users by using a hex editor to rename pikeman to footman (footdwarf, footelf, etc).

This seemed like a success until I noticed that a character who wields say a pollaxe will mention their pride in improving pike -_-

The misfortune is you can't rename a skill. Well, one of the misfortunes of modding.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor (0.42.xx) - Revision 4c
Post by: Urist Tilaturist on February 14, 2016, 06:11:14 am

Quote from: Grimlocke on February 11, 2016, 04:21:13 am

It will be incorporated it in the 42.06 version update, assuming there is anything to update there.

As for other progress, I have been messing around with some experimental stuff like giving goblins armor with no armor class to try and get them to wear it as clothes, making a cave-dwelling entity for my old armor man creature, running DF on a mac through ncurses over ssh just for the heck of it (ncurses works and fun was had with messing with the iTerm2 font and ASCII colors, but I can't recommend mac for DF as a lot of the key bindings don't work).

I have also still been poking around with the idea of removing weapon-specific skills.

There is actually less issues with that than I thought there would be as entities with no weapon of a certain class do not use the class at all. Wood cutting is annoying though, I had to make a work-around-y 'felling axe' training weapon.

Still not entirely sure what to name 'one-handed weapon user' and 'two-handed weapon user'. Right now I got 'dwarf-at-arms' and 'heavy dwarf-at-arms' for those skills respectively, or 'armsdwarf' and 'heavy armsdwarf'. Both sound a bit contrived in my ears... suggestions would be quite welcome. 'Stavesdwarf' can stay if I keep polearms separate from the shorter two-handed weapons.

I'm also playing with the idea of reviving my old, half-finished 'Historic metallurgy overhaul' mod since there is some more control over reactions and stock buildings/reactions.

Sooo... Lots of stuff with not that much to show for it as of now, but I'm still here at least :P

Historic metallurgy overhaul should be part of this mod.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor (0.42.xx) - Revision 4c
Post by: Urist Tilaturist on February 20, 2016, 05:34:56 pm

Is the current release 42.06 compatible?

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor (0.42.xx) - Revision 4c
Post by: Grimlocke on February 21, 2016, 02:46:50 pm

Yes, I have been playing for a while with the version that came out during .04

Hmm think it would a good idea to clarify this in the title?

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor (0.42.xx) - Revision 4c
Post by: Urist Tilaturist on February 24, 2016, 02:15:37 pm

Yes.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor (0.42.xx) - Revision 4c
Post by: Taffer on February 24, 2016, 08:24:33 pm

I'm more interested in the arms and armor than the metallurgy and skill modifications, personally. It would better integrate with other mods, and be easier to update. I like your mod either way, though. Thank you!

Changed my mind, after some thought. I'd quite enjoy a realistic metallurgy overhaul.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor (0.42.xx) - Revision 4c
Post by: Grimlocke on February 25, 2016, 12:01:58 am

I've put the skill modifications on ice for now, the metallurgy parts will be fairly easy to keep as a separate module.

One things to keep in mind though, is that this mod already modifies the stock metals, and relies on any other weapon/armor materials (including cloth) to be modified in the same way (a substantially increased impact elasticity and yield point for all of them and substantially reduced shear strengths on cloth), so keep in mind that with mods that introduce new materials/modify existing ones, some manual fitting needs to be done.

Next up will be some rearranging of armor layering to work out a few bugs/oddities and some extra armor items. (an ocular kettle helm, because they look way too cool to omit, and possibly cuir bouilli arm/leg/head armor. As soon as figure out whether the scant evidence for their existence is compelling enough. It should be noted that knowledge on cuit bouilli is pretty spotty in general, as it has a nasty habit of completely decomposing and was used in an era where surcoats were still in use, making it quite hard to see what they are wearing underneath).

I also noticed a particularly vicious looking polearm that I want to include in a number of medieval paintings, supposedly from different times and artists. It look like the bastard child of a longsword, spear and a cleaver. Just got to find out what it could be called and be sure it was not just some artists getting creative.

Oh and, your welcome, glad you like it ^^

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor (0.42.xx) - Revision 4c
Post by: Urist Tilaturist on February 25, 2016, 02:02:38 pm

Quote from: Taffer on February 24, 2016, 08:24:33 pm

I'm more interested in the arms and armor than the metallurgy and skill modifications, personally. It would better integrate with other mods, and be easier to update. I like your mod either way, though. Thank you!

This mod would already have incompatibility issues anyway due to modding the metals in the game. I support the addition of historical metallurgy.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor (0.42.xx) - Revision 4c
Post by: Max™ on February 26, 2016, 07:48:22 pm

Show us on the doll which one... touched you.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

(http://i.imgur.com/GfxGqfq.jpg)

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor (0.42.xx) - Revision 4c
Post by: Grimlocke on March 01, 2016, 08:31:04 am

Quote from: Max™ on February 26, 2016, 07:48:22 pm

Show us on the doll which one... touched you.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

(http://i.imgur.com/GfxGqfq.jpg)

Hahah nice one  :P

But in the internet spirit of answering a joke sincerely (and since they are so nicely chronologically lined up), id say its around 4 and 5.

...

Small I'm-not-dead update: Bloomeries give good use for all that wood we get since .42, I cannot seem to make bog iron actually appear in bogs only (sad face) and shoe layering does not want to work with me, at all. This might explain various issues I and other have with dwarf mode soldiers only wearing a single boot.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor (0.42.xx) - Revision 4c
Post by: Max™ on March 01, 2016, 08:53:10 pm

Oh baby, I was trying to see why my head wanted to say berdiche but it didn't quite feel right and found this:
(http://i.imgur.com/pQCopun.jpg)

Sexily informative!

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor (0.42.xx) - Revision 4c
Post by: Grimlocke on March 02, 2016, 05:56:21 am

Hehe and that isn't even all of them. No English bills, forks, various spears, pikes, pollaxes, etc. The omission of poleaxes makes sense though since its 'development of commoner forms'. Poleaxes are no commoner's weapon.

One thing to keep in mind for this is that names for polearms (and the vast majority of other old weapons, armor and whatnot) are not really an exact science. Names got used for different things in different times and places, lots of names got made up and used wrong well after the fact often by inexpert people (like Victorian historians and role playing game writers), and lots of things have no specific name as far as we know and just got named 'sword' or 'axe'.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor (0.42.xx) - Revision 4c
Post by: Taffer on March 02, 2016, 09:46:03 am

Quote from: Grimlocke on March 02, 2016, 05:56:21 am

Hehe and that isn't even all of them. No English bills, forks, various spears, pikes, pollaxes, etc. The omission of poleaxes makes sense though since its 'development of commoner forms'. Poleaxes are no commoner's weapon.

One thing to keep in mind for this is that names for polearms (and the vast majority of other old weapons, armor and whatnot) are not really an exact science. Names got used for different things in different times and places, lots of names got made up and used wrong well after the fact often by inexpert people (like Victorian historians and role playing game writers), and lots of things have no specific name as far as we know and just got named 'sword' or 'axe'.

Lindybeige has good mini-rants about this subject here (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Dj5fWYvSx8) and here (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=92_TKngfYFQ). Seems to agree with you: there's little point in getting particular about poleaxe naming: if you are, you'll end up with loads of unnamed poleaxes because you've "been too precious with your definitions". (He has a few snarky comments (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RssIl2v0C1k) about insisting that chainmail be called mail, or worse, maille).

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor (0.42.xx) - Revision 4c
Post by: Taffer on March 02, 2016, 02:03:12 pm

Now for a more helpful post: Grimlocke's body_default.txt (http://pastebin.com/raw/bSBmv9q3), with the renamed body parts from the Modest Mod added in. The joints weren't merged. The result is nicely readable combat logs, in my opinion. No more "left lower arm" and "left upper leg" nonsense, for example, when "left forearm" and "left thigh" will suffice.

Hopefully you find this helpful. Please keep up the great work. I edited my earlier comment in regards to metallurgy: I am interested in this after all, if you have the time.

Some suggestions for cuir bouilli armour: change [ARMORLEVEL:2] to [ARMORLEVEL:1], then remove [HARD] to remove all metal cuir bouilli armour. This makes more sense to me: if it has metal covering it, surely it would warrant a different name? It's also missing [MATERIAL_PLACEHOLDER:leather]. (I also have "fur cuir bouilli armour" because I merged in Kazoo's furrier mod along with the modest mod, which amuses me)

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor (0.42.xx) - Revision 4c
Post by: Max™ on March 02, 2016, 09:24:04 pm

Metal in it would be a brigandine or one of the jack types wouldn't it?

I think commoner in there just meant most common, not commoner as in farmers/villagers/whatnot. I like that it just kinda has the general "stuff like this would usually be associated with this type" of layout and the evolutionary tree.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor (0.42.xx) - Revision 4c
Post by: Taffer on March 02, 2016, 09:48:55 pm

Quote from: Max™ on March 02, 2016, 09:24:04 pm

Metal in it would be a brigandine or one of the jack types wouldn't it?

I was thinking simpler: It's odd seeing "iron cuir bouilli" right alongside "mule leather cuir bouilli" in the lists. It implies that the leather armour is made entirely of iron, or at least that there's so much iron that whatever leather is underneath is considered unimportant. Both interpretations are silly in my opinion.

I also renamed it "boiled armor", which I much prefer to "cuir bouilli". I'm personally not a fan of arbitrarily using foreign names when there's a servicable translation, and "mule leather cuir bouilli armour" just means "mule leather boiled leather armour", which is redundant.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor (0.42.xx) - Revision 4c
Post by: Grimlocke on March 03, 2016, 04:14:25 am

Included the new body_default file as a compatibility patch, thanks!

For the cuir bouilli armor: I somehow didnt even notice the silly metal versions. That was not supposed to happen... Boiled leather is not at all suited to thinks like brigandines and coats of plates either as its a fairly hard and brittle material. Its odd that it happened too as it does not actually have a [METAL] tag in there.

I at some point considered calling 'cuir boilli' 'boiled leather' instead, but it made it sound a bit like the armor was the thing that got boiled, rather than the leather.

Getting rid of the creature-specific names entirely would probably be best but I haven't found any way to get entities to use a specific material for a specific item. I could also make 'boiled' an adjective, meaning it would become 'boiled donkey leather armor'... As long as you look past that sounding a bit like 'armor made from boiled donkeys', it sounds kind of alright.

As an aside, arbitrarily using foreign words to describe a specific thing is fairly common practice. Take 'hatchet, mallet or katana' for instance. Translated back to their original language they just mean 'axe, hammer, sword'.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor (0.42.xx) - Revision 4c
Post by: Taffer on March 03, 2016, 11:38:18 pm

Is there any clean way to make the new skills applicable to all creatures by default? While a minor issue, I definitely notice the old lasher skill in the Object Testing Arena, and with multi-racial forts now that would imply that at the very least, all animal men should probably get the revised skills.

If necessary, this could be done in the animal man variation in c_variation, but if there's a cleaner approach that would be preferable.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor (0.42.xx) - Revision 4c
Post by: EuchreJack on March 04, 2016, 01:33:02 am

Hm, instead of naming by weapon usage, you might try naming by typical weapon user.

Example: a one-handed weapon user would also most likely be using a shield (why else wouldn't they be using a bigger weapon, since DF really doesn't reward dual-weapon users).  Hence, Legionnaire/Bulwark/Shield-Bearer would be completely appropriate.

Users of a larger two-handed weapon could be called Berserker/Zweihander.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor (0.42.xx) - Revision 4c
Post by: Grimlocke on March 04, 2016, 07:22:45 am

@Taffer: A couple posts up someone mentioned renaming the skills themselves with a memory editor, but beside that and doing the same with DFhack there isn't any way I am aware of.

Including the animal men with skill renames would be a good idea though.

@EuchreJack: Those names would work for fantasy mods, but using these for a historical mod would seem rather out of place. Sadly most historical terms I know of (footman, man-at-arms, mounted knight, sergeant, disposable peasant levy) mostly denote class and whether or not they are mounted, which is a problem since DF societies simply don't have any class structure to them and mounted combat is nearly non-existent.

Terms like 'footman' and 'man-at-arms' are a bit more suited, though neither denote what kind of weapons are used. I am vaguely considering giving both two-handed and one-handed skills the same name, using footman for lower skills and man-at-arms for 'master' skills. I could still prefix the two-handed skill with 'heavy' or something.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor (0.42.xx) - Revision 4c
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on March 04, 2016, 07:46:59 pm

Would it be possible for me to utilize this mod within the a More Mundane World (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=156642.0) mod I am working upon?

Title: Re: Grimlocke's Historic Arms & Armor (0.42.xx) - Revision 4c
Post by: Grimlocke on March 05, 2016, 08:50:26 am

Sure you may! If you need any help with adding new items and such, feel free to ask. Metals and weapons do need some modifications compared to the vanilla ones, else balance can get severely wonky.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.42.06) - Revision 5a
Post by: Grimlocke on March 17, 2016, 08:12:58 pm

Huzzah, revision 5 released!

Ended up changing way more than I though I would, especially in the armor department, but I feel the game is now a good bit closer to actual history.

Full changelog is up in the OP as usual.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.42.06) - Revision 5a
Post by: Max™ on March 17, 2016, 09:11:05 pm

Collarbones make a lot of sense.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.42.06) - Revision 5a
Post by: Grimlocke on March 17, 2016, 10:13:53 pm

Which is very convenient because I was first trying to hack in an invisible dummy bodypart that seperate the arms one step from the upper body. Didn't work at all since it kept showing up in combat logs, and then I figured the body part I was looking for actually exists in reality.

Also released a fix for some stupid SHAPED tags being in places they shouldn't be. I swear the moment you hit the 'post' button for anything you suddenly become twice as likely to notice botched things in said post.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.42.06) - Revision 5a
Post by: Taffer on March 17, 2016, 10:35:13 pm

Looking forward to playing with this mod when I finish writing creature descriptions.

Quote from: Grimlocke on March 17, 2016, 10:13:53 pm

I swear the moment you hit the 'post' button for anything you suddenly become twice as likely to notice botched things in said post.

Almost every time. Every other release or so, including the first time I made my topic and put somebody else's tileset in the description.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.42.06) - Revision 5a
Post by: Zanzetkuken The Great on March 17, 2016, 11:02:10 pm

Quote from: Grimlocke on March 17, 2016, 10:13:53 pm

Also released a fix for some stupid SHAPED tags being in places they shouldn't be. I swear the moment you hit the 'post' button for anything you suddenly become twice as likely to notice botched things in said post.

Which helmets were they in, by the way?  I had picked up 5a for the Mundane World mod beforehand and if it is that small, I can make the adjustment myself.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.42.06) - Revision 5a
Post by: Grimlocke on March 18, 2016, 12:19:10 am

The bevor (non-mail one) and mailed bascinet. They can have other helmets worn over them, which the shaped tag prevents.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.42.06) - Revision 5a
Post by: KillzEmAllGod on April 04, 2016, 05:10:29 pm

So where do I find out how this metallurgy mod for this works?

Also your changes to material_template_default.txt break modest mod for skin so its not possiable to tan hides.

Added modest mod's change to the file (http://pastebin.com/raw/CRjdNkxJ), took a while. Just hope theres no other issues yet to come across.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.42.06) - Revision 5a
Post by: 123nick on April 05, 2016, 03:20:33 pm

why do the iron millecorde quincella things or whatever they are called have very slow attack speed ? arent they supposed too be like, quick dagger-sword things?

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.42.06) - Revision 5a
Post by: KillzEmAllGod on April 05, 2016, 10:44:02 pm

c_variation_default was missing Modest Mod's creature attacks, here (http://pastebin.com/raw/jWdwMApB).

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.42.06) - Revision 5a
Post by: Grimlocke on April 05, 2016, 11:52:33 pm

Clarification on the modest mod patch: Its for modest bodies only. Modest mod attacks would break much of the balancing done by this mod and likely not fit in the first place.

I do really need to write up a guide/manual on the metallurgy mod and all the weapons and armor. Ill write up a quick guide somewhere in the next 24-ish hours.

@123nick mmm, sounds like food of some sort. In more seriousness, the daggers are not actually slower. Weapons get a longer wind-up time the shorter they are, and a shorter wind-down time to compensate. The total attack speed is still lower than the larger weapons but sadly the in-game attack menu doesn't reflect this in any way.

It may sound odd, but think of it this way: Between a guy with a long spear and a guy with a little dagger, who takes the longest to get a stab at the other?

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.42.06) - Revision 5a
Post by: KillzEmAllGod on April 06, 2016, 04:56:35 am

The attacks were just for animals.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.42.06) - Revision 5a
Post by: 123nick on April 07, 2016, 10:00:38 pm

Quote from: Grimlocke on April 05, 2016, 11:52:33 pm

Clarification on the modest mod patch: Its for modest bodies only. Modest mod attacks would break much of the balancing done by this mod and likely not fit in the first place.

I do really need to write up a guide/manual on the metallurgy mod and all the weapons and armor. Ill write up a quick guide somewhere in the next 24-ish hours.

@123nick mmm, sounds like food of some sort. In more seriousness, the daggers are not actually slower. Weapons get a longer wind-up time the shorter they are, and a shorter wind-down time to compensate. The total attack speed is still lower than the larger weapons but sadly the in-game attack menu doesn't reflect this in any way.

It may sound odd, but think of it this way: Between a guy with a long spear and a guy with a little dagger, who takes the longest to get a stab at the other?

ah i see, so its like, simulating reach somehow? because the long spear can easily and quickly stab you with a quick jab, where as dagger have too get close in and make quick arm movements?

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.42.06) - Revision 5a
Post by: KillzEmAllGod on April 08, 2016, 12:41:45 am

Quote from: Grimlocke on April 05, 2016, 11:52:33 pm

Clarification on the modest mod patch: Its for modest bodies only. Modest mod attacks would break much of the balancing done by this mod and likely not fit in the first place.

I should clarify that I used your files and added in the modest mod's changes for materials were just boiling and melting points (so undead would melt) and the leather changes MM did. the c_variation_default mainly adds secondary attacks for animal people. So they really shouldn't impact balance that much.

Metallurgy could just use a chart like this (http://dwarffortresswiki.org/images/1/14/MetalIndustry3.jpg), other then that it was figuring out how to use the crucble funace and the whole finery options wasn't clear ended up with alot of pattern-welded steel bars which seem to have no use. Appears that they can be used for weapons but not armor.
What appears to be a bug for metallurgy, it wasn't showing up the iron ores as a metal(s) in the embark screen, though that could be MM's fault. The ores did also come up in other stone for dfhack.

Are there plans to add more crossbow varriants such as the repeating crossbow quick shots low accuracy and penetration to the arbalest?

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.42.06) - Revision 5a
Post by: Grimlocke on April 08, 2016, 02:34:05 pm

Flow charts are kind of how I planned on doing this yes, especially the armor would get... wordy if I had to describe every possible layering combination.

The ore part was probably my doing. I had to remove the default metal ore tag to keep the game from generating a smelter job for them, which would bypass the bloomeries and blast furnaces. Its another case where one tag is used to do a whole bunch of things at once, which is a big posterial pain for modders. If anyone can figure out a way around this I'd be glad to hear it.

I did consider new crossbows, but so far there is no way to control ranged weapon behaviours like range, accuracy, rate of fire, etc. At least not with raw modding. DFhack may be able to do more, but I still need to figure out how to use that to any effect. Having arbalests and such would be pretty cool though...

Anyhow, Ill be including your modest mod patches to the next release and give you a mention in the credit line, thanks for the contribution!


@123nick Pretty much! A good opening tactic would be to move into range, block the first attack and then riposte. Its still kind of simplified compared to real life, where going up against a spear with a dagger is pretty much suicide, but it does give long weapons an edge (heh).

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.42.06) - Revision 5a
Post by: KillzEmAllGod on April 11, 2016, 12:16:53 am

Theres just 3 problems both of them can be rather annoying, the naming of the weapons causes them to not show the length they are the adjective is isn't shown untill after its created so its problematic for the ones that are short and long. The other problems is some items just don't belong to a stockpile such as slag and its variations and will just be put in any stockpile.
The other being adrenaline simulation with it being activated rather oddly, every dwarf seems to do it at the same time throughout the game might be more of a side effect of it existing.

What do I need to do to make goblins only show up in armor?

A few of the buildings seem redudent, I do remember masterwork had an interesting way of progress for things and that was done through trading designs of some of the buildings, though that might be too annoying to do. Crucible can be very annoying to use because of all the bags required.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.42.06) - Revision 5a
Post by: Grimlocke on April 11, 2016, 03:46:13 am

Thanks for the feedback!

I have actually been considering moving the weapon adjective to the rest of the name, but am haven't because it looks rather clunky in the actual item name.

The adrenaline part is sadly out of my control, I don't know why its going off like that but its apparently how the game handles interactions with the attack usage hint. I might turn off the tile blinking though, it was intended to make clear a dwarf was in or near a fight, but as it is it goes off for the whole fortress whenever another stupid bird flies over it.

Goblins showing up with hardly any armor is kind of a game-wide defect. Armies are almost entirely consistent of unskilled, poor soldiers and armor uniforms that are set per-civilization for lord knows what reason never use any limb armor. I have been pondering the option of making a separate set of armor for goblins that is basically just metal clothes and padded armor. The naming would get weird and your civilians will also think its clothing and replace their xPigtail Dressx with a goblin plate cuirrass, but the added weirdness might be worth it if it makes sieges an actual challenge again.

I do plan on expanding the requirements for the more advanced buildings and reactions, making a simple fort start out with pit bloomeries and simple wrought iron and working their way out to a full-fledged metal industry. Ideally, I want to this to require a skilled architect and furnace operator, but raw modding isn't going to suffice for it.

Slag is just a stone type, it can be stockpiles as any other boulder.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.42.06) - Revision 5a
Post by: KillzEmAllGod on April 11, 2016, 06:54:17 pm

The naming doesn't matter so much you pretty much have to use truetype when forging, funny enough the adjective does show up on the uniform screen.

Sounds like that might be worthwhile to do for goblins, should also add the ambusher tag back to them so they attack way more often.

I was talking about the iron-rich slag which doesn't belong to any type of stone category.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.42.06) - Revision 5a
Post by: Grimlocke on April 12, 2016, 09:06:14 am

Ah, right. I made the iron-rich slag just a rock of iron, to save on having to make a new material for each in every metal in the future.

Did not consider stockpiling. Looks like I'll have to make a metal ore material for them after all...

The issue with the adjective-names is not so much the length, but just that I think 'steel long arming sword' sounds a lot more awkward than 'long steel arming sword'.

I'll do some science of the goblins, and see if there is a satisfactory minimum weirdness solution to it. Would be good to have something to use all this new stuff on  :P

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.42.06) - Revision 5a
Post by: KillzEmAllGod on April 20, 2016, 05:51:31 am

With the name you're not going to be able to change it seeing as DF does items first by what its made of.

Done anything with the goblins so far? I do remember seeing goblins showing up with metal helms, think someone may have got their goblins in their mod by removing clothing options. 

Where do you stand on fantasy metals or is that just not your thing?

An easy way to do a guide for doing correct uniforms would just be to list the Size, Permit, and layering for armor rather then just all the combos. Would just need to tell us the max for the limbs etc.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.42.06) - Revision 5a
Post by: Grimlocke on April 20, 2016, 08:57:49 pm

The adjective actually lets us get around that 'material name, item name' thing as it goes before the material name. But yeah, it doesn't show up in the workshop menu, likely to save on space and since the game uses the adjectives only in front of already unique names.

I have given the goblins a bunch of faux-clothing armor (basically armor with no armor level), which should in theory show up the same way as masks and such do. Sadly in my test world the goblins still manage to scrounge regular clothes from lord knows where, its certainly not in their entity files. Yesterday I gave it some thought and figured the goblins I saw may have been conquered and somehow ended up under a human entity, so I'm giving that another try with some added playable race tags to gobbos. On the off chance that this works, I need some names to distinguish the goblin armor that don't sound overly fantasy. Right now I just made it all 'Crude plate cuirass' and such, but I'm certainly open to suggestions.


As for fantasy metals, I'm no huge fan of the rather... overused tolkien-esque metals (mithril and such), mostly because I don't find them all that interesting. They quickly obsolete real-world metals just by virtue of 'its majik, snort' yet somehow they feel so utterly mundane.

I like magic to be a bit more dark, unstable and dangerous to use. Something that would take considerable knowledge and skill to get right, and always carries the risks of something going horrendously wrong. I wouldn't object to magical materials that are difficult and risky to make, and actually have properties that make them both unique and balanced against real-world metals. For instance, Possesed Iron could make for good armor, but would give the wearer an increased tendency for hallucination and other fits of madness.

Magic should be like twisting the laws of nature out of shape and like said laws fighting back.

Though obviously none of that has much of a place in a 'History & Realism' mod, that's not to say this is the only mod I'll make.


The armor layering sizes are of course visible in the raws, but won't be all that... readable without knowing exactly how these interact. A flow chart would probably be a lot clearer.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.42.06) - Revision 5a
Post by: Taffer on May 10, 2016, 10:35:05 pm

I'd intended to update the mod but only item_tool.txt and reaction_other.txt changed this release.

Don't have any time to play with things at the moment, but thank you for the historic metallurgy addition and the nice update.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.42.06) - Revision 5a
Post by: Grimlocke on May 11, 2016, 02:52:46 am

This mod should still be fully compatible with the new version, though I will be adding the additional shields to the new adventurer carpentry reactions and adding the wooden weapons for the fun of it. Too bad we can't place spike traps yet.

I will be releasing that with an update to the mod which will include substantially up-armored goblins (got the 'civilian armor' trick to work!) and some minor tweaks here and there.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.42.06) - Revision 5a
Post by: Taffer on May 22, 2016, 11:33:36 pm

Hopefully the pain fixes in the current release should improve the remaining combat issues, with toes and such causing excessive pain. I had to double-check to see if the mod is currently editing that, but I don't think so: there's some size adjustments to faces, but I think that's to make creatures target the face less than due to pain.

Quote from: Toady One

• Made pain from broken tissues depend on relative part size

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.42.06) - Revision 5a
Post by: Grimlocke on May 24, 2016, 08:54:55 am

The adjustements to face bits was more to reduce the odds of the AI constantly targeting and smashing them somehow without being affected by the helmet at all.

There is an interaction in the mod which substantially increases willpower while in combat, as a simulation of adrenaline. It should still be of use now since the game still won't account for the fact that people fighting or running for their life do not generally feel much pain at all.

Sadly interactions have gotten a bit... janky since I made that. In fortress mode it keeps getting used by creature who are not in combat and in adventurer mode enemies seem unable to use it at all. Your own adventurer will still have it and in fortress mode fights don't generally end with a 'giving into pain' until a combatant took enough damage that they wouldn't be able to fight for much anyway.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.42.06) - Revision 5a
Post by: Taffer on June 20, 2016, 05:33:51 pm

Quote from: Grimlocke on May 24, 2016, 08:54:55 am

The adjustements to face bits was more to reduce the odds of the AI constantly targeting and smashing them somehow without being affected by the helmet at all.

There is an interaction in the mod which substantially increases willpower while in combat, as a simulation of adrenaline. It should still be of use now since the game still won't account for the fact that people fighting or running for their life do not generally feel much pain at all.

Sadly interactions have gotten a bit... janky since I made that. In fortress mode it keeps getting used by creature who are not in combat and in adventurer mode enemies seem unable to use it at all. Your own adventurer will still have it and in fortress mode fights don't generally end with a 'giving into pain' until a combatant took enough damage that they wouldn't be able to fight for much anyway.

If interactions have gotten a bit "janky", it might be worth undoing the change and minimizing changes to the DF raws? Up to you. At any rate, the latest release appears to have rebalanced and fixed some of the things your mod already tried to rebalance. I don't see any relevant RAW changes, implying that numbers considered unbalanced earlier might now be balanced and rebalanced numbers might now be unbalanced. If I had time I'd investigate further and do some combat arena testing.

I'm thinking of changes like:

Quote from: Toady One

• Made people wear more armor according to their roles again
• Made combat damage weapon and armors depending on material differences etc.
• Reduced clothing stopping power based on penetration depth

This fix isn't necessary anymore:

Quote from: Grimlocke

Made finger and toes internal. For some reason they do not come up in combat logs at all now. I think is slightly better then losing a hand because a child scratched your thumb off.

Reasoning:

Quote from: Toady One

• Made pain from broken tissues depend on relative part size

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.42.06) - Revision 5a
Post by: Grimlocke on June 21, 2016, 01:24:41 pm

I'll have to test the new armor stuff (time permitting, been a bit swamped), see if the AI now finally puts the right armor on the right bits and if they also cover all of said bits. I can remove the finger/toe/face bits changes if they are covered properly and do not explode at the first angry glare anymore.

As for the pain interaction and small bodypart adjustments, I would for now rather leave the interaction in. Its jankyness still seems preferably over the rather disappointing and unrealistic behavior of combatants passing out after the first broken bone. That's not a thing that people fighting for their lives do. The adjustment made for pain to be relative to bodypart size is a step in the right direction, but not quite there yet as far as I'm concerned.

I do hope my changes to armor materials does not end up flaking out the equipment breakage, and might have to counteract the clothing change for the cloth armor.

All in all this should be a more interesting update than most for this mod.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.42.06) - Revision 5a
Post by: KillzEmAllGod on June 28, 2016, 06:33:21 am

Oh god the combat its just far more brutal mainly because of the damage through the armor... had an Adamant lion inflict a a lot of wounds before making the dwarf give into pain then breaking the Iron great helm the dwarf was wearing only for it to have to keep destroying the mail bevor. It Said the dwarf bleed to death while the Adamant lion was shaking its head around.

Just the more I read it the more bloody the fight was just seemed so real with all that happened.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.42.06) - Revision 5a
Post by: KillzEmAllGod on June 28, 2016, 11:34:15 pm

Quote from: Grimlocke on June 21, 2016, 01:24:41 pm

I do hope my changes to armor materials does not end up flaking out the equipment breakage, and might have to counteract the clothing change for the cloth armor.

Looks like you just need to play around in arena because they seem to be wearing the armor correctly in adventure mode, so that just means pain and materials might need a bit of adjusting.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

(http://i.imgur.com/mSAoviO.png)

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.42.06) - Revision 5a
Post by: Grimlocke on June 30, 2016, 04:08:00 am

The update seems to have caused some... balance issues. Peasant punches and melee strikes from wooden crossbows are suddenly able to break joints through armor, which is kind of rubbish. Cloth armor also seems to have been nerfed in some unspecified way which is definitely not something I want.

Equipment breakage seems sensible for the most part, though in the case of weapons its kind of weirdly inconsistent, daggers seem to break way quicker than spears for instance. Possibly the damage gets scaled with item volume which?

Bites also seem to magically translate through armor, with bites somehow still 'latching on' even when the it glances off. I'm pretty sure that wasn't always the case.

@KillzEmAllGod: Heheh, ouch. I'm not entirely sure what an Adamant Lion is but it sounds vicious enough that it should be able to do that to a less well trained dwarf.

I can't help but notice a 'pig tail partial plate leg harness' though... I don't recall that being a thing before. Was that entity generated armor or did you make that in fortress mode?

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.42.06) - Revision 5a
Post by: KillzEmAllGod on July 01, 2016, 01:41:33 am

Pretty sure that was generated, I wouldn't be worried about that too much.
Sounds like you a fair bit of work to do with balancing melee if that even can be done given that wood sounds overpowered, seemed like it would be a good change for ballistas given that they were rather worthless. 

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.42.06) - Revision 5a
Post by: wickys on July 02, 2016, 08:40:20 pm

What's better? This mod or Stal's Armoury Pack. Just looking for the best and realistic option there is, along with a vast assortment of different clothes,armours and weapons

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.42.06) - Revision 5a
Post by: Grimlocke on July 03, 2016, 06:24:33 pm

Having not player with Stal's mod and possibly being a bit biased, I can't say all that much  :P

Stal's mod does seem to have a better collection of clothes. I have been a bit stuck on clothes since medieval fashion got... really prolific around the period both of these mods are set in (1350-1450-ish). Not kidding, just look up '15th century Burgundian Fashion'. Styles changed every few years and each place of any significance had its own signature styles, which were also marketed as such and sold all over Europe.

That and the plethora of clothing dyes available at the time make for lots of clothing pieces, and since DF has no fashion sense whatsoever or even selects based on gender, it would result in Medieval Fashion Crime Simulator.

...

That all said, the clothes in this mod are just the stock clothes with a added surcoats and tabards. Its really mostly military stuff. Stal probably has me beat there. I do seem to have more armor pieces and made some more fundamental changes to combat, but quantity is not quality of course. Someone who has tried both would know more, or if not you can always just gab both and see which suits you best.

Stal's mod seems to be in need of some updating, though not much of the weapons and armor stuff changed since version 40.xx so it might still work alright.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.42.06) - Revision 5a
Post by: wickys on July 05, 2016, 12:07:52 pm

Somehow my worlds don't contain any iron anymore. No iron ores anywhere. I checked with prospect all. Did I fuck up installation?

I'm also using modest mod and blackpowder mod

Why are you deleting reactions for pig iron and steel making?

I don't understand what is happening in the raws for metallurgy. You remove brass,bronze,bismuth bronze, pig iron and steel making for some reason?

Did you remove the iron ore generations too?

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.42.06) - Revision 5a
Post by: Grimlocke on July 07, 2016, 11:28:08 am

The 'no iron ores' is probably because I had to get rid of the metal ore tag in iron ores, and the utility doesn't know how to handle that.

It still works as ore but gets sorted under 'economic rock'. I had to remove the metal ore tag as it quite annoyingly generates a smelter reaction, which the metallurgy mod is there to replace.

All unmodified metal reactions such as bronze, pewter, etc are still in reaction_smelter, iron and steel making is modified to make historic standards.

Keep in mind, the metallurgy part is optional. If you just want the weapons, armor and combat mod you can leave it out.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.42.06) - Revision 5a
Post by: Thuellai on July 07, 2016, 12:24:53 pm

I'll give you silver, but bronze was still a functional and viable weapons material into the medieval age.  Its falling out of use was more about availability - once iron working was easy and common, bronze was less needed and unnecessarily expensive since it required native access to both copper and tin.  It wasn't that bronze was no longer useful in that role, it just didn't compete with widespread access to iron as metallurgy advanced and made iron easier to smelt.  Plus, both copper and tin had other uses that became more attractive once bronze was no longer the best metal for those uses.  I think bronze should probably still be allowed for weapons and armor.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.42.06) - Revision 5a
Post by: Grimlocke on July 08, 2016, 02:57:54 pm

By the late middle ages the mod is set in, bronze seems to have been entirely relegated to tools, statues and other non-military stuff. I at least couldn't find any finds of weapons or armor made of bronze from 1400-1500.

Its easy enough to add back in, I mostly took it out because 'moderation' is not really the game's dictionary and it ends up with making loads and loads of bronze items everywhere in adventurer mode which just doesn't feel fitting for the time period.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.42.06) - Revision 5a
Post by: wickys on July 08, 2016, 07:43:00 pm

With all the new armours and weird names, what is the maximum combination of stuff I can put on a soldier dwarf?

Is a shirt, gambeson, mail coat, coat of plates, tabard and cloak maximum for armor and most protective? Will it even work? I can't tell.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.42.06) - Revision 5a
Post by: Grimlocke on July 08, 2016, 08:30:39 pm

I need to write up a proper info sheet for that, but in general you can wear together what you could wear together in real life.

For the body I used four layers so for instance you can wear a shirt (Under), aketon (Over), mail coat (Armor) and brigandine (Cover).

A gambeson is a lot thicker, and will take up the Over and Armor layer.

Full plate armor is the strongest single piece of armor, but too tightly fitted to be worn with mail, covering both the Armor and Cover layer.

Mail coat, longsleeve mail coat and mail shirt al behave the same layer wise, they just cover more or less bodyparts and costs more or less metal.

Brigandines, coats of plates and partial plate mail also only use the Cover layer, coats of plates are thicker but more expensive, partial plate is thicker yet but does not fully cover the body (needing to be worn with a mail coat).


The partial limb armor can also be worn over padded armor, the full plate version only with gloves and shoes.


Both kettle helmets and both sallets can be worn with a bevor (plate armor covering the neck and lower part of the face), great helms can be worn with a mail coif and mailed bascinet as well. Keep in mind that of these, only the great helmets fully cover the head, and those are not a thick as the other helmets.

Armets and hounskulls are both too large and tightly fitted to be worn with anything else, but offer good thickness and full coverage.

...

Sooo the simplest set would probably be: Aketon + Plate armor (body), Armet (head), gloves + plate arm harness (arms), shoes + plate leg harness (legs). Keep in mind there are no more 'armor pants', since those are silly and caused some layering issues.

But there are trade-offs to each piece. Some cannot be worn with others, other are simply a lot cheaper to make (brigandines cost half of a plate cuirass).

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.42.06) - Revision 5a
Post by: wickys on July 08, 2016, 10:54:07 pm

Quote from: Grimlocke on July 08, 2016, 08:30:39 pm

Brigandines, coats of plates and partial plate mail also only use the Cover layer, coats of plates are thicker but more expensive, partial plate is thicker yet but does not fully cover the body (needing to be worn with a mail coat).

So partial plate plus mail coat is better?

Assume I have an infinite amount of steel and leather and cloth. Which actual entire suit of armor down to the loincloth and socks would give me the 100% BEST armor.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.42.06) - Revision 5a
Post by: Grimlocke on July 09, 2016, 06:26:29 am

Honestly I'm kind of hoping there isn't one. This mods central concept is to emulate reality as much as possible, and reality has no 'absolute best'.


If you have plenty of metal to spare, go with full plate or partial plate + mail. Full plate is more consistent, but partial has more layers and a wounded soldier might have more luck surviving after being wounded. RNG and skill difference make the equipment difference pretty unimportant. In any case, do NOT leave out cloth armor (aketon, padded coif, etc) as they are an important barrier against blunt damage.

Do not worry too much about loincloths, shirts and cloaks. Their protection value is negligible. I did add some extra thickness to gloves, shoes and possibly socks (don't quite remember).


Having a single OP equipment set to spam to victory has honestly never been very interesting to me. Having to make careful considerations, weighing cost and benefit, and finding out the results in terms of bodycount has always been much more Fun in my opinion!

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.42.06) - Revision 5a
Post by: DaSwayza on August 16, 2016, 07:59:52 pm

hey so I saw this mod in Masterwork 43.03, so with what release is this compatible? How would I go about adding something like Wanderer's Friend to this mod? because if I have to choose, yours wins

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.42.06) - Revision 5a
Post by: Grimlocke on August 23, 2016, 07:57:56 pm

I'm glad you like the mod! It should be compatible with 43.04 (tested) and probably also 43.05, there's some behaviors I'm not particularly happy about but those also happen in the vanilla game.

Did a bit of rooting around in the masterwork raws, the Masterwork version of this mod seems to have been pretty well tailored to get along with everything else.

Items overlapping with other mods and vanilla stuff seem to have been culled, though the ones that replace them stick to the same balancing principles as the non-MW of this mod so they should not feel all weirdly out of place.

If you want to use the standalone of the Arms & Armor mod with the Masterwork version of Wanderer's friend (I can't find a recent standalone version of it?), then it should be a matter of copying both over to a vanilla DF game, and going through the reaction raws making sure the item references such as ARMOR:ITEM_ARMOR_BREASTPLATE match up with something in item_weapons, item_armor or item_tools (or any other item files). You will probably also want to modify/add to the item production and breakdown reactions to match the Arms & Armor item. Right now all the wanderer's reaction just point to vanilla items.

The metallurgy module should be compatible, since that still uses the same material tokens that Wanderer's refers to.

Also the history nut in me is insisting I add that forging plate armor with nothing but some rocks and sticks is not realistic or historically accurate  :P

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.42.06) - Revision 5a
Post by: Urist Tilaturist on September 05, 2016, 03:40:20 pm

How is the progress on smelting metals other than iron?

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.42.06) - Revision 5a
Post by: Grimlocke on September 07, 2016, 02:24:40 am

Its mostly stuck in research phase, and me trying to figure out how to expand on the metallurgy mod as a whole.

Research-wise, accurate information of medieval non-ferric metallurgy is kind of limited. There is references to it being smelted here and there, but often little details on how exactly they went about it.

The other part is that for doing some of the other things I want in the metallurgy mod (replacing the forging mechanics mostly, by replacing it with a number of tech levels for armor and weapon productions, maybe with tempering and variation in item quality), I need to use DFhack. How exactly I go about all that influences how I go about the non-ferric metals.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.42.06) - Revision 5a
Post by: pikachu17 on September 07, 2016, 01:25:42 pm

PTW

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.42.06) - Revision 5a
Post by: DaSwayza on September 15, 2016, 02:18:13 am

So another quick question: How are civilians  supposed to arm themselves with those daggers? Because when I make them, they just sit in a stockpile, and my civies run around knife-less

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.42.06) - Revision 5a
Post by: Grimlocke on September 15, 2016, 06:46:06 pm

It needs to be a tool, not a weapon, with these tags: [TOOL_USE:MEAT_SLICING] [TOOL_USE:MEAT_CARVING] [TOOL_USE:MEAT_BONING]

Toady apparently didn't feel like using a separate tag for this, so they will also show up in night creature caves and such. You don't need to actually define the material tag as weapon metal, if you only use a wood material tag then they will be generated with wood. You can make cudgels and such.

Keep in mind though that these are only placed entity generated characters, you'll mostly run into them in adventure mode. There's no solution for civilian weapons in fortress mode other than the clumsy put-everyone-in-squads thing, where again you can't assign tools as items either.

I also recently found out for whatever reason tool-type weapons wear out significantly faster. I broke a minecart over someone's head which was fun and all, but bonking someone in armor with a cudgel just broke my cudgel =/

I'd really wish toady would remove the distinction between tools and weapons though, right now tools have some neat functionality which weapons could really use as well (like the civilian placement and better material definitions). But oh well, this is what we have, use it as you will.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.42.06) - Revision 5a
Post by: 123nick on September 16, 2016, 11:43:11 am

Quote from: Grimlocke on September 15, 2016, 06:46:06 pm

It needs to be a tool, not a weapon, with these tags: [TOOL_USE:MEAT_SLICING] [TOOL_USE:MEAT_CARVING] [TOOL_USE:MEAT_BONING]

Toady apparently didn't feel like using a separate tag for this, so they will also show up in night creature caves and such. You don't need to actually define the material tag as weapon metal, if you only use a wood material tag then they will be generated with wood. You can make cudgels and such.

Keep in mind though that these are only placed entity generated characters, you'll mostly run into them in adventure mode. There's no solution for civilian weapons in fortress mode other than the clumsy put-everyone-in-squads thing, where again you can't assign tools as items either.

I also recently found out for whatever reason tool-type weapons wear out significantly faster. I broke a minecart over someone's head which was fun and all, but bonking someone in armor with a cudgel just broke my cudgel =/

I'd really wish toady would remove the distinction between tools and weapons though, right now tools have some neat functionality which weapons could really use as well (like the civilian placement and better material definitions). But oh well, this is what we have, use it as you will.

honestly, a cudgel breaking after hitting someone with it seems a bit relastic, no? its just a glorified wooden stick.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.42.06) - Revision 5a
Post by: Grimlocke on September 16, 2016, 02:49:34 pm

Its not even that glorified :P

But wooden sticks shouldn't be underestimated, a wooden flail can give even someone in full armor severe headache.

Also the breaking also happens with metal weapons, sadly enough.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.42.06) - Revision 5a
Post by: DaSwayza on September 16, 2016, 10:38:08 pm

Btw how has the new update of force translating through armor effect your mod? Does padding from different layers help cushion blows?

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.42.06) - Revision 5a
Post by: Grimlocke on September 16, 2016, 11:01:59 pm

The padding still works, but the joints and such needed some adjustments here and there to make them not silly levels of weak.

Ill put up the details of that once I release the update for this mod, which is mostly done safe for some info sheets I'm (finally) getting around to.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.42.06) - Revision 5a
Post by: Taffer on September 23, 2016, 10:49:31 pm

Minor fix to the body_default file that I provided: search for left foot:right feet, and replace it with left foot:left feet. (2 times).

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.42.06) - Revision 5a
Post by: Grimlocke on September 26, 2016, 05:53:58 pm

Thanks, good find!

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.42.06) - Revision 5a
Post by: Taffer on October 08, 2016, 05:53:09 pm

Here's (https://www.dropbox.com/s/y0r48cwznrbvskw/body_default.txt?dl=0) a newer version of the body_default.txt file. I'm not sure if it was intentional or not, but two [FLIER] tags were missing. This should be completely in line now with DF 0.43.05, aside from in-scope changes.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.42.06) - Revision 5a
Post by: Taffer on October 09, 2016, 10:08:43 pm

Just a quick note that I made a new, cleaned up version (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=148265.msg7209809#msg7209809) of the Modest Mod that includes some of your changes: your edit to head tissue, the removal of nail scratches from combat, and reduced velocity of attacks, from memory. It's not compatible with your mod to my knowledge at present, but it should be much easier to make them compatible now. You expressed dislike (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=146737.msg6918580#msg6918580) of modest mod's attacks, but these should fit in surprisingly well in my opinion. Their velocity has been reduced and most of them involve reducing the likelihood of certain attacks (such as biting).

Thank you for the mod!

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.42.06) - Revision 5a
Post by: KillzEmAllGod on October 19, 2016, 04:32:04 am

The attacks mostly seemed just for animal people so they shouldn't really imbalance anything much.

Thanks for cleaning them up Taffer, love modest mod and this mod most of all.   

Hows the armor breaking been Grimlocke?

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.42.06) - Revision 5a
Post by: Grimlocke on October 20, 2016, 10:31:38 am

Its breaking at mostly the right timed again :P unless its hit with a much stronger material, then it kind of comes apart like papier-mache. I've been meaning to look into reducing the difference in shear strengths because carving through iron like it isn't even there is not really a possible thing, at all.

I've spent the rest of my modding time getting the weapons balanced a bit more carefully, buffing blunt attacks which seemed to have became a bit anemic with 45.04 and making the various weapons a more varied in their properties (different 'lengths', weight and attack speeds).

I got joints to break only when hit with substantial force rather then when being punched by a child. Bite attacks seem mysteriously phase through armor though... not entirely sure how to fix that. For the coming while I advice killing things with a tendency to bite as quickly and messily as possible!

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.42.06) - Revision 5a
Post by: Taffer on November 16, 2016, 01:12:41 pm

Quote from: Grimlocke on October 20, 2016, 10:31:38 am

Bite attacks seem mysteriously phase through armor though... not entirely sure how to fix that.

Stal's Armory Pack and now my cleaned Modest Mod help address this by removing bite attacks entirely from the main races. I'm polishing my "Modest Wanderer" mod into a new mod, and on the agenda is removing bite attacks from almost every creature save for those for whom bite attacks make some degree of sense. It's better than nothing, at least.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.42.06) - Revision 5a
Post by: Grimlocke on November 20, 2016, 08:42:41 am

I suppose that's one way to do it.

I would miss being able to bite someone's nose off in adventurer mode but it seems like a fair trade-off in general, what with cats and children no longer incapacitating fully armored warriors.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.42.06) - Revision 5a
Post by: DaSwayza on January 05, 2017, 02:50:15 pm

Hey, we discussed before that this mod was compatible with 43.05, but when I enter fortress mode, I can't use your metallurgy buildings, and I would like to. I put them in the raws as instructed, but the buildings are't showing up in the menu to be built. Do I need to roll back, or what seems to be going on?

**EDIT**

I rolled back to 43.03 and the buildings work perfectly, so it was that. The weapons and armor work for the most recent update though

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.42.06) - Revision 5a
Post by: Grimlocke on January 06, 2017, 06:07:22 pm

Hmmm that's strange, I havn't had that problem myself. As far as I know nothing really changed about the way buildings are handled in the last version.

Will check when I'm back at home.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.42.06) - Revision 5a
Post by: DaSwayza on January 06, 2017, 10:51:17 pm

I'll do some testing with a clean copy of DF 43 05 and see if I messed up the install, I'll let you know what I find

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.42.06) - Revision 5a
Post by: DaSwayza on January 06, 2017, 11:14:29 pm

The issue corrected when I reinstalled everything, so I must have mucked something up the first time. Everything is looking good!

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.42.06) - Revision 5a
Post by: Grimlocke on January 09, 2017, 11:14:09 am

Ah good, was worried something might have mucked up with older savegame compatibility, which I didn't recall whether or not I tested.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.42.06) - Revision 5a
Post by: vixeyrose on January 16, 2017, 06:23:03 pm

Does this mod effect when quivers and backpacks are equipped in regards to layers? I am using this mod, and enjoying it. But, i am noticing that my dwarves are not wearing quivers or packs? I haven't played DF in a while so i could have missed a patch note here and there.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.42.06) - Revision 5a
Post by: Grimlocke on January 16, 2017, 06:32:55 pm

Hm... If I recall correctly, those should all just 'attach' to the outer upper body clothing item the same way flasks and holstered weapons do. Nothing much changed about that in this mod (not that it could, its hardcoded) or recent DF versions.

I'll verify in my own game whether its borked.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.42.06) - Revision 5a
Post by: vixeyrose on January 17, 2017, 12:09:52 am

Quote from: vixeyrose on January 16, 2017, 06:23:03 pm

Does this mod effect when quivers and backpacks are equipped in regards to layers? I am using this mod, and enjoying it. But, i am noticing that my dwarves are not wearing quivers or packs? I haven't played DF in a while so i could have missed a patch note here and there.

They seem to be working now. I must have been doing something wrong on my end. Poor dwarf management most likely. TY for the mod, keep up the good work.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.42.06) - Revision 5a
Post by: Grimlocke on January 17, 2017, 04:34:38 pm

Guud guud, glad your enjoying it!

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.42.06) - Revision 5a
Post by: vixeyrose on February 01, 2017, 07:31:46 pm

When I try to make a spear at the forge. I get two choices that both say "iron spear". Can you change it so it says long, short, bear, etc. (whatever the civ can forge) under the workshop menu?

Other then that, enjoying the mod. Lost two recruits to a trap room. Wooden Spears to the neck causing an open artery. They didn't make it across the hall before falling.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.42.06) - Revision 5a
Post by: Grimlocke on February 01, 2017, 09:06:00 pm

Hehehe, yeah you will want to give them padded armor at least before having them train in the danger room. Especially if you use non-training wooden spears which still have an edge.

I have been planning on changing those weapon names due to that borked forge display. It doesn't display adjectives so 'long steel spear' and 'short steel spear' turn into 'steel spear'. I will be correcting those to 'steel longspear' and such.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.42.06) - Revision 5a
Post by: vixeyrose on February 02, 2017, 06:13:57 pm

Good to know... As far as the training casualties, they had full boiled with leather cloaks and a copper mail bevor. I lost a total of 3 military from throat cuts before shutting it down. I was using wooden training spears in a spike trap that was triggered with a pressure plate. Not a complaint or anything, just an observation. Probly best anyhow for realism. Danger rooms may be a time saver and may also be considered an exploit.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.42.06) - Revision 5a
Post by: StagnantSoul on February 02, 2017, 06:26:22 pm

Hoping to get back into using this soon, loved it when I did, especially since I knew most of the stuff and what they did, and therefore how weird my soldiers looked.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.42.06) - Revision 5a
Post by: Grimlocke on February 04, 2017, 05:22:21 pm

Ah, the leather armors do not give 100% coverage, much like the historic ones which were basically just breastplates, bracers, etc that were worn over mail armor. As far as we know at least... historic evidence for boiled leather armor is kind of sketchy as it mostly comes from descriptions, receipts and depictions.

Bevors should cover the throat, but due to limitations with the game they only cover part of the head. Sadly there is nothing I could do about that so right now body armor defends the throat. With regular combat you might be able to get away with using only leather, but the danger room will hit your dwarves lots and lots of times so if there is any chance at all of something bypassing armor and hitting the throat, it eventually will.

Mind you, I haven't actually tested danger rooms in the last version. It could be that something about the 43.05 changes made training spear traps considerably more dangerous. Hmm, maybe ill subject some of my own dwarves and see what happens. For uh... science! yes.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.42.06) - Revision 5a
Post by: KillzEmAllGod on February 28, 2017, 08:10:34 pm

How far off a 43.05 release?

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.42.06) - Revision 5a
Post by: Grimlocke on March 01, 2017, 05:56:40 pm

I've been having a fight with the weapon/armor materials which... gave me kind of a partial victory?

I didn't like how steel was able to cut through iron like it was stale bread, and the same for crucible steel vs regular steel. I've mitigated that with each step up in metal performs better, but doesn't outright render lower quality armor useless. I did it by setting the shear yield on all of the materials to the same, to 450000. Even just setting it to 450001 had the lower grade metal turn to 'simulate gingerbread' mode.

One issue is, weapon quality no longer matters at all for armored fighting. I currently can't see any way to fix that, not without turning to DFhack which I plan to save for Future Plans.

Anyhow, other changes are there being actual documentation for the weapons/armor, some minor edits to the metallurgy and a weapon re-balance which adds a bit more variance to each individual weapon. I have also bumped out some of the more anachronistic items (saved a last version of them in a legacy file for those who don't agree). I also gave some 'civilian' armor to the goblins, which will have their poorer cannon fodder showing up with munitions grade armor. Danger rooms still worked with full-coverage metal armor, getting coverage mixed up might be less common with the armor layering chart I made.

Should be done once I give everything a once-over and hunt down and remove any of my experimental edits. I won't promise an exact time, but should be soon-ish.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.42.06) - Revision 5a
Post by: KillzEmAllGod on March 09, 2017, 11:15:34 pm

Was the 'civilian' armor even needed after the fix (http://www.bay12games.com/dwarves/mantisbt/view.php?id=3838)?

Though the weapon quality sounds like a bug or unintended side effect from the armor changes.

Looking forward to it, seems like it was a lot of work testing all the changes.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.42.06) - Revision 5a
Post by: Grimlocke on March 12, 2017, 01:35:56 am

I moved the civilian armor form 'fix' to 'additional feature' ;)

While not essential, it does help with having even the poor-as-dirt goblins show up with at least some sort of armor, which roughly reflects how things were in the 15th century. At that point in time armor had become cheap and widespread enough that not all that many soldiers showed up to a battle without at least some hastily churned out armor or older secondhand kit.

I'll probably wrap up and a do a release today or tomorrow, without an optional, arms & armor themed entity I was going to include, which fell victim to some feature creep and borky bodypart relation mechanics (they just plainly don't work in most cases, not even some of the vanilla implementations...)

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.43.05) - Revision 6a
Post by: Grimlocke on March 13, 2017, 04:15:16 pm

Bump of Updating!

Download and changelist on the main post as usual, where I will run out of character eventually, but not yet.

Feedback as always is highly appreciated be it about things I messed up, could add, or whatever else may be on your mind!

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.43.05) - Revision 6a
Post by: Urist Tilaturist on March 14, 2017, 05:36:54 pm

A few questions, coming back to this after a long absence:

How good are arrows at piercing armour? Longbow arrows could pierce maille and gambeson, but not plate (see this video here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HMvz-z1SPLQ). Archers defeated knights by killing their horses and creating a pile-up as horses tripped over each other.

You said earlier that gambesons counted as clothing and armour, but they were often worn under maille and plate, so it should be fairly easy for dwarves to wear them under armour.
Are overheating and fatigue implemented? These would be serious problems in heavy armour in hot weather.

Finally, if the technology cutoff is the 15th century, are primitive firearms in the mod? Hand cannons and bombards existed by this point. They should have a small chance of exploding, of course, so dwarves can die like James II of Scotland.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.43.05) - Revision 6a
Post by: Taffer on March 15, 2017, 11:11:06 am

Thank you kindly for the update! I'll look into things more closely soon. Do you mind if I merge the new balance changes back into DF Revised? Does the "iron vs adamantine" balance pass only make sense in context of your metallurgy module, or is some of that easily applied back to "vanilla" DF?  I'd give credit and really don't intend to "steal anybody's thunder".

Thank you updating a fantastic mod, in any case.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.43.05) - Revision 6a
Post by: Grimlocke on March 15, 2017, 04:47:26 pm

@Urist: Mail armor will be hurt by arrows, though mostly by blunt damage. Right now making mail easier to pierce will make it pretty ineffective as armor which isn't really accurate to how it was either.

Bolts and arrows have a chance of doing blunt damage to plate armor as well, as long as your using either the bodkin arrows or non-broadhead bolts.

Handheld firearms, overheating, fatigue and movement impairment of armor and sight/breathing impairment of helmets will depend on DFhack support. None of these are really viable with regular raw modding, so I'm hoping DFhack support for 43.05 will be available... sooner rather than later. Once that is there, these should be doable enough.

Bombards and cannons are not going to happen until toady implements more advanced artillery. Random exploding of poorly made guns sounds fun though, poor James, he was doing so well until he bought a crappy cannon and had to stand near it.


@Taffer: Your free to any thunder that strikes your fancy ;)

However, most of the changes will be fairly specific to this mod. The material changes depend on ALL the non-adamantine metals having same shear yields which is not exactly the case in the vanilla game. You would have to copy over the whole weapon-metals portion, which would in turn not play well with the vanilla weapons/armor.

I do want to make make this mod play nicely with your DF Revised mod as its got some pretty cool changes in there.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.43.05) - Revision 6a
Post by: Taffer on March 15, 2017, 05:06:52 pm

I'm not certain if installation using only "1 - Arms and Armor" is supported, but doing so results in a "NATIVE_ALUMINUM: Smelt Ore Not Found, Token - ALUMINUM" error, FYI.

Quote from: Grimlocke on March 15, 2017, 04:47:26 pm

@Taffer: Your free to any thunder that strikes your fancy ;)

However, most of the changes will be fairly specific to this mod. The material changes depend on ALL the non-adamantine metals having same shear yields which is not exactly the case in the vanilla game. You would have to copy over the whole weapon-metals portion, which would in turn not play well with the vanilla weapons/armor.

I do want to make make this mod play nicely with your DF Revised mod as its got some pretty cool changes in there.

What do you make of your new material_template_default.txt and body_default.txt changes for Revised? At a glance the changes to things like hair would probably translate well, but perhaps I'll need to try to test things. I'm also intrigued by the idea of removing "armor pants" and preventing armor worn over armor, but I'm not sure that I understand all the components sufficiently to do that right now.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.43.05) - Revision 6a
Post by: Urist Tilaturist on March 15, 2017, 05:38:50 pm

Quote from: Grimlocke on March 15, 2017, 04:47:26 pm

@Urist: Mail armor will be hurt by arrows, though mostly by blunt damage. Right now making mail easier to pierce will make it pretty ineffective as armor which isn't really accurate to how it was either.

Bolts and arrows have a chance of doing blunt damage to plate armor as well, as long as your using either the bodkin arrows or non-broadhead bolts.

Handheld firearms, overheating, fatigue and movement impairment of armor and sight/breathing impairment of helmets will depend on DFhack support. None of these are really viable with regular raw modding, so I'm hoping DFhack support for 43.05 will be available... sooner rather than later. Once that is there, these should be doable enough.

Bombards and cannons are not going to happen until toady implements more advanced artillery. Random exploding of poorly made guns sounds fun though, poor James, he was doing so well until he bought a crappy cannon and had to stand near it.


@Taffer: Your free to any thunder that strikes your fancy ;)

However, most of the changes will be fairly specific to this mod. The material changes depend on ALL the non-adamantine metals having same shear yields which is not exactly the case in the vanilla game. You would have to copy over the whole weapon-metals portion, which would in turn not play well with the vanilla weapons/armor.

I do want to make make this mod play nicely with your DF Revised mod as its got some pretty cool changes in there.

Maille still reduced the power of a thrust. While it could be pierced with a sharp point, it was an awful lot harder to do it than just stabbing through clothes (see here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ydjdBTV8ZbY). The best strength of maille, though, was stopping cuts, which have much less piercing power than thrusts. This is why late medieval swords like longswords, used at times when most troops were wearing at least maille, were pointy blades which were mostly used to thrust, while dedicated cutting swords like the falchion existed in the 13th century when many common soldiers were just wearing gambesons or clothes. Does the game differentiate between cuts and thrusts at all, or is all sharp damage the same?

What are the "legacy items" in the mod?

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.43.05) - Revision 6a
Post by: Grimlocke on March 15, 2017, 09:25:57 pm

Thank ye both for the feedback!

@Taffer: Whoops, the Arms and Armor folder is supposed to work separately, but it seems I forgot about undoing the removal of aluminium. Will correct that with a bugfixing kind of release soon.

As for the Revised material templates, the only different I saw off-hand is adding the butchery tags and some crafting tags to chitin. Make armor out of chitin is slightly goofy, but frankly so is making armor out of bone, so these all seem fine.

I have a body_default adaption for modest mod, I haven't yet looked if Revised changes anything that modest doesn't to that file, but I don't think anything in there will conflict too badly with what my mods put in there. I'm not entirely sure what changed about the hair material template though.


@Urist: Edged damage in the game has a contact area, and a penetration area. Stabs have a low contact area and thus generally apply more force per area, and stabs from particularly pointy weapons like awl pikes have more of this effect. Slashing attacks from swords have a lot of area, good for quickly murdering unarmored things but quite worthless for piercing armor as they don't have enough momentum per contact area. Spiky blunt attacks from morningstars and such have a large contact area (as they hit with a ball rather than an edge) and a low penetration area, as the spikes on it are only so long. Entirely blunt weapons still have 10 penetration depth (which is very little at all) to make sure they chew up and eventually break armor that they hit hard enough.

However, there is nothing in the game beside that that can differentiate between damage from a stab or a slash. Meaning that either all attacks first bend plate armor and do blunt damage and only then cut through it (as in most cases, they should), or the other way around. That is a bit odd for when you stab something in plate armor really hard and it just ends up doing blunt damage on a really small area but unavoidable for now. This is also the reason that bows and crossbows can cause blunt damage through armor. The game just doesn't simulate impact area spread from pointy things hitting plate armor.

I might try and see what exactly happens when I just reduce the overall thickness of mail armor, see if that makes it at least possible to pierce it with a really determined, pointy kind of stab.

Also, the legacy file contains items that I booted from the main mod, for various reasons. Most are just due to being from the wrong era entirely (200-ish years too early for instance).

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.43.05) - Revision 6a
Post by: Taffer on March 15, 2017, 09:31:49 pm

Quote from: Grimlocke on March 15, 2017, 09:25:57 pm

@Taffer: Whoops, the Arms and Armor folder is supposed to work separately, but it seems I forgot about undoing the removal of aluminium. Will correct that with a bugfixing kind of release soon.

As for the Revised material templates, the only different I saw off-hand is adding the butchery tags and some crafting tags to chitin. Make armor out of chitin is slightly goofy, but frankly so is making armor out of bone, so these all seem fine.

I have a body_default adaption for modest mod, I haven't yet looked if Revised changes anything that modest doesn't to that file, but I don't think anything in there will conflict too badly with what my mods put in there. I'm not entirely sure what changed about the hair material template though.

Thank you for the feedback: I feel like I never get enough of it. I should have clarified, though: I'm curious about integrating your material_template_default.txt and body_default.txt changes into Revised, given that you said "most of the changes will be fairly specific to this mod". I also don't change body_default in any way aside from textual changes, but I'm intending to change that next release: try to bring in some of your improvements and add in collarbones (and possibly femurs).

Quote from: Grimlocke on March 15, 2017, 04:47:26 pm

@Taffer: Your free to any thunder that strikes your fancy ;)

Ha ha (https://i.ytimg.com/vi/VSjy_Yq-G40/hqdefault.jpg)!

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.43.05) - Revision 6a
Post by: Grimlocke on March 15, 2017, 09:55:52 pm

Aaaah, oh :)

The balancing material-wise is in inorganic_metal, and in material_template for hair, silk and plant thread. The changes there are all the impact and shear values, the rest I left as they were.

The body default changes are the aforementioned collarbones, the JOINTS entry (substantially increased size), and embedded on lots of small bodyparts. You can simple use the body_default with the modest mod changes that already comes with my mod.

Again, I am not sure how the materials will function with vanilla weapons and armor, but it should be easy enough to just copy the materials over and knock some things about in arena mode to see how they react. There is a chance the vanilla weapons become useless, overpowered or a combination of both, in which case you might also have to tinker with the weapons in Revised to at least adjust the velocities to a point where the weapons make some sense.

Femurs are already in the game, they are upper leg bones. Perhaps you meant a pelvis? I considered doing that for consistency if nothing else, and might include it in a next release. Keep in mind though that this affects bodypart steppings of pants and body clothing/armor. This means that a skirt that extends down to the knee, loses one stepping in going from the lower body to the pelvis and ends up only covering the lower body. The same effects happens with collarbones.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.43.05) - Revision 6a
Post by: Urist Tilaturist on March 16, 2017, 08:34:32 am

Chopping at plate armour or helmets with a sword shouldn't really do much except break the sword (is weapon breaking even possible now?). In order to do any significant damage at all you need a weapon with more mass at the striking end.

This video shows the effect of medieval weapons on a replica bascinet:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l47Idc7anG4

Crossbows cannot penetrate replica Anglo Saxon or Norman helmets either:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UqGZl5MVFPg

Longbow arrow barely scratched replica breastplate:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ej3qjUzUzQg

In short, shooting armour with arrows or chopping at it with swords won't do a lot to destroy it.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.43.05) - Revision 6a
Post by: Grimlocke on March 16, 2017, 06:07:25 pm

Weapons ingame generally behave like that. They can eventually break, but it only seems to happen when you hit something hard with a weapon made out of something soft, mostly wood. Tools also seems to break much more easily than weapons.

Though it should also be noted that the goal is never really to destroy someone's equipment, but to make the guy using unable to fight. Missile weapons don't have to go through the armor to make life for the guy in it thoroughly uncomfortable either.

Also, for gameplay reasons I did not want to make missile weapons entirely useless against armor. Once I get DFhack going, I want to split off crossbows into more and less powerful ones, ranging from hunting crossbows to the hulking great hand-ballistas that were used during sieges. This is also where gunpowder weapons will come in, in the form of handcannons and simple matchlock arquebusses.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.43.05) - Revision 6a
Post by: Urist Tilaturist on March 17, 2017, 08:30:48 am

Arrows are not entirely useless against armour. They can hit people in the face when they have their visors up, as happened to Henry V, and pierce maille if powerful enough, remembering that most common soldiers didn't wear full plate armour. If cavalry feature much in the game, they can also kill the unarmoured mounts, which is how longbowmen stopped mounted knights at Agincourt. The number of prisoners taken at that battle, including some of the French nobles at the head of the charge, indicates that most of the captured knights were not mortally wounded by arrows, but many horses were killed.

Arrows and bolts cannot and should not be able to pierce or meaningfully damage plate armour, unless you are talking about a ballista. That is where cannon become useful.

In a test battle I staged, an aketon seemed to protect someone's eye from punches. Why does this happen? I don't know if there is any way to implement reduced visibility from having a visor down in the game, but there were reasons people put their visors up in melee.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.43.05) - Revision 6a
Post by: Grimlocke on March 17, 2017, 11:34:50 am

Eyes and other facial features are protected by any body armor that extends up to the lower arm, as kind of an unintended side-effect. The extend of bodyparts body armor protects is defined by 'steps away from the upper body'. It sees 'neck, head, nose' as the same distance as 'collarbone, upper arm, lower arm'. Oddly enough, helmets don't have any way to protect facial features. Not much I can do about any of that.

Liftable visors are not really feasible to mod in right now, maybe not even with DFhack. Getting the both the interface and the AI to work with something like that seems rather improbable, sadly enough.

The ranged weapons we have right now are kind of a placeholder, for until I can actually get an accurate and balanced set into the game (which requires DFhack, which requires me to actually know how DFhack works and DFhack to work with 43.05). This isn't just a mod for pure historical accuracy, but also a combat balance mod and rendering ranged combat nigh-useless wouldn't really live up to that latter standard. Standing around getting shot at was a bad idea in the middle ages regardless of what you were wearing anyhow, so see this as 'historically accurate gameplay consequences' if you must ;)

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.43.05) - Revision 6a
Post by: Urist Tilaturist on March 17, 2017, 06:53:20 pm

Quote from: Grimlocke on March 17, 2017, 11:34:50 am

Eyes and other facial features are protected by any body armor that extends up to the lower arm, as kind of an unintended side-effect. The extend of bodyparts body armor protects is defined by 'steps away from the upper body'. It sees 'neck, head, nose' as the same distance as 'collarbone, upper arm, lower arm'. Oddly enough, helmets don't have any way to protect facial features. Not much I can do about any of that.

Liftable visors are not really feasible to mod in right now, maybe not even with DFhack. Getting the both the interface and the AI to work with something like that seems rather improbable, sadly enough.

The ranged weapons we have right now are kind of a placeholder, for until I can actually get an accurate and balanced set into the game (which requires DFhack, which requires me to actually know how DFhack works and DFhack to work with 43.05). This isn't just a mod for pure historical accuracy, but also a combat balance mod and rendering ranged combat nigh-useless wouldn't really live up to that latter standard. Standing around getting shot at was a bad idea in the middle ages regardless of what you were wearing anyhow, so see this as 'historically accurate gameplay consequences' if you must ;)

Ranged combat isn't useless if the enemy isn't wearing full plate armour or is riding a horse, which applies to the majority of medieval armies even in the 15th century, and I presume in game armies as well. Even with a plate cuirass and helmet, an arrow or bolt to the unarmoured arm or leg could be incapacitating. I don't think goblin raiders are usually all clad in full plate. Unless literally everyone is fighting on foot in full plate longbows and crossbows will still be useful.

I'm not trying to dismiss longbows and crossbows at all. They are very useful weapons, except in the one specific scenario of fighting infantry clad in full plate armour.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.43.05) - Revision 6a
Post by: spudcosmic on March 18, 2017, 12:52:20 am

I'm noticing most strikes against helmeted heads cause no damage to the head but seem to often result in "the force twisting the neck and destroying the upper spine's nervous tissue". I'd understand a strike against the head could cause spinal injury but this seems a bit extreme. What are your thoughts on it?

Also sorry if this is explained elsewhere, but many weapons seem to have two different attacks that are identical in name? Why is this? Do they do something different? Or are they there just to increase the frequency that dwarfs use them?

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.43.05) - Revision 6a
Post by: Urist Tilaturist on March 18, 2017, 06:07:37 am

Quote from: spudcosmic on March 18, 2017, 12:52:20 am

I'm noticing most strikes against helmeted heads cause no damage to the head but seem to often result in "the force twisting the neck and destroying the upper spine's nervous tissue". I'd understand a strike against the head could cause spinal injury but this seems a bit extreme. What are your thoughts on it?

Also sorry if this is explained elsewhere, but many weapons seem to have two different attacks that are identical in name? Why is this? Do they do something different? Or are they there just to increase the frequency that dwarfs use them?

A strike with a heavy weapon like a mace or a lance smashing into the helmet from a charging horseman could easily snap back the neck and cause at least a knockout, if not something more serious. Sword cuts or spear stabs shouldn't do anywhere near that level of damage, though.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.43.05) - Revision 6a
Post by: Grimlocke on March 18, 2017, 02:43:54 pm

Hmmm, the neck damage was intended, but I'll have a look how easily it happens exactly and adjust the nervous tissue material if needed.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.43.05) - Revision 6a
Post by: spudcosmic on March 18, 2017, 03:10:34 pm

Quote from: Urist Tilaturist on March 18, 2017, 06:07:37 am

A strike with a heavy weapon like a mace or a lance smashing into the helmet from a charging horseman could easily snap back the neck and cause at least a knockout, if not something more serious. Sword cuts or spear stabs shouldn't do anywhere near that level of damage, though.

Bruising of the spine is common with spears and sword slashes, which result in neck down paralysis about 50% of the time.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

(http://puu.sh/uOWQf/e149e41c23.png)

Edit: That was at legendary spear user. It seems to be much less common at lower skill levels.
Hammers and maces seem to almost always tear apart the spine. This is through with greathelm + mailed bascinet + padded coif. Maybe it needs to be toned down a little bit. Neck injury should be expected but not so much though that much armor.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.43.05) - Revision 6a
Post by: spudcosmic on March 18, 2017, 03:49:45 pm

Quote from: spudcosmic on March 18, 2017, 03:10:34 pm

Quote from: Urist Tilaturist on March 18, 2017, 06:07:37 am

A strike with a heavy weapon like a mace or a lance smashing into the helmet from a charging horseman could easily snap back the neck and cause at least a knockout, if not something more serious. Sword cuts or spear stabs shouldn't do anywhere near that level of damage, though.

Bruising of the spine is common with spears and sword slashes, which result in neck down paralysis about 50% of the time.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

(http://puu.sh/uOWQf/e149e41c23.png)

Edit: That was at legendary spear user. It seems to be much less common at lower skill levels.
Hammers and maces seem to almost always tear apart the spine. This is through with greathelm + mailed bascinet + padded coif. Maybe it needs to be toned down a little bit. Neck injury should be expected but not so much though that much armor.

after more testing it might be good right where it's at. Legendary users with maces snap necks left and right but just expert individuals might be lucky to get a bruised spine a quarter of the time.

after more testing it might be good right where it's at. Legendary users with maces snap necks left and right but just expert individuals might be lucky to get a bruised spine a quarter of the time. The heavy attack action makes it incredibly common at all skill levels and with any weapon strike though. I'm pretty sure only the player is capable of using the attack modes, so it doesn't affect fortress mode much.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.43.05) - Revision 6a
Post by: Grimlocke on March 18, 2017, 04:58:32 pm

I did some testing with a AI characters in full plate and weapons too light to damage eachother with regular attacks, and they did actually damage eachother, although they took a while.

One thing I noticed that even a 'nervous tissue bruise' in the upper spine knocks you out, which I didn't think would happen (the bulk of the balance testing was done on a 'dummy' creature). Will correct that to make it so only a proper, heavy blow to the head will damage the spine.

Edit: About the 'duplicate attacks', they are not in any way different. They are for AI priorities only. It is the only way to make the AI one a weapon more for one attack than the other, besides the edged/blunt distinctions which will result in blunt attacks being used 100 times less than sharp ones. Bit much, that. The duplicates are basically there to make the AI use a stabby weapon for more stabbing, and slashy weapons for more slashing.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.43.05) - Revision 6b
Post by: Grimlocke on March 21, 2017, 12:24:10 am

Update bump! Fixed some minor derps: the missing aluminum entry for the non-metallurgy version, and nervous tissue being damaged earlier than I imagined.

Also fixed a rather major derp where I included a crappy old material template file! Updating will be somewhat important for not having borky combat balance.

Everything should still be savegame compatible.

Also added a compatibility patch for Dwarf Fortress Revised! This replaced the Modest Bodies patch that was included before, but the body_default file that was that patch is still the same.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.43.05) - Revision 6b
Post by: KillzEmAllGod on March 21, 2017, 09:34:38 pm

Great work!

So metallurgy should work fine with revised?

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.43.05) - Revision 6b
Post by: Grimlocke on March 22, 2017, 05:16:14 am

Yes, the two mods don't have a huge amount of overlap to begin with.

Though I should probably vet the microreduce mod now that I think about it... Will elaborate once I'm back home.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.43.05) - Revision 6b
Post by: Grimlocke on March 23, 2017, 11:22:46 am

Yesterday ended up being... long. Updated the mod today to not include a steel reaction which kind of breaks the metallurgy component (really should have read the full description of that component).

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.43.05) - Revision 6b
Post by: KillzEmAllGod on March 23, 2017, 05:53:32 pm

If I'm updating a save will this break it?
If that's not the case what file just needs replacing?

Found where it was and deleting it wasn't the best idea.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.43.05) - Revision 6b
Post by: Grimlocke on March 24, 2017, 01:10:24 am

If your updating your save, just bump out the STEEL_MAKING2_(something) reaction from your entity_default file. Or just edit the reaction to have no building, reagents and products. It doesn't create any horrible duplication errors so all that's needed it to break it somehow.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.43.05) - Revision 6b
Post by: KillzEmAllGod on March 25, 2017, 12:50:54 am

You were talking of having to use DFHack later on, what features would require it?

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.43.05) - Revision 6b
Post by: Grimlocke on March 25, 2017, 12:33:16 pm

Lots of them, most importantly armor impairment effects (think slightly reduced agility, reduced sight for visored helmets, etc) and being able to set up a tech tree for armor and weapon manufacturing along with a more interesting smithing process (heat treatment, skill-based material results, skill-based building requirements).

There are also some minor annoyances that I figured could be corrected with DFhack, such as the 'increased willpower during battle' interaction being somewhat unreliable.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.43.05) - Revision 6b
Post by: KillzEmAllGod on March 28, 2017, 02:05:59 am

It would be very helpful if the reactions had explanatory tooltips, getting a bit confused with some of them and not remembering the amount of reagents required as well. Might also help with some of the text not fitting without truetype on.

Wouldn't using buckets instead of bags for charcoal powder be more ideal? 

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.43.05) - Revision 6b
Post by: Grimlocke on March 28, 2017, 02:15:34 pm

Reaction descriptions are on the to-do list, should be done for the next update.

I might modify the make charcoal powder reaction to be able to use more than one type of container (was considering jugs, a container that can be sealed would make sense). It can indeed be a bit of a hassle with having to make new bags due to sand and food also using bags.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.43.05) - Revision 6b
Post by: eddievxx on March 31, 2017, 08:31:12 pm

Hello, I am really enjoying this mod but I am only just getting to grips with it. Great work!
To that end, can anyway give me (or direct me to if I have missed it) even just a basic run-down of the metallurgy work-flows; like how and where do I produce steel, how do you use billets (vs bars) and the like? I am sure I'll figure it out in time, and I am attempting to decipher the raw files but there's still lots I am scratching my head over (which is great by the way, I love this kind of thing).

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.43.05) - Revision 6b
Post by: KillzEmAllGod on April 01, 2017, 12:10:10 am

Should be using the puddle and blast furnace to make pig iron and then that into iron bars.
With the finery reactions Case hard iron bars into steel, need charcoal powder done at a quern or millstone, needs a lot of bags. After that you hammer out the  billets there will be alot of them to hammer. Billets also go under tools in the finished good stockpile slag is under stone.

There's also an iron stone? that I'm not sure what its used for?

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.43.05) - Revision 6b
Post by: Grimlocke on April 01, 2017, 01:36:57 am

There are two ways to make iron and steel. The one KillEmAllGod described, or by using a bloomery.

The last one is a bit easier to set up and won't require any flux stone, but does require a more labor. You can build either a simple pit bloomery (basically a hole in the ground lined with clay), or a larger chimney bloomery, which can process 4 ore at once instead of just 1. Both will produce a bloom (a lump of iron and slag) which will be hammered out into billets and then into bars.

Billets and blooms are automatically processed by a finery (a forge used for refining metal) or a trip hammer (a big, mechanically powered hammer), but can also be set manually from a regular forge.

Not sure where your seeing an iron stone though, unless you mean the sponge iron material, which is used for iron blooms. That is used to prevent weirdness like being able to assign blooms for melting.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.43.05) - Revision 6b
Post by: KillzEmAllGod on April 01, 2017, 03:05:09 pm

It's just "iron" with a weight of 700 or so said it can be used like normal iron bars. just been using the blast furnace.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.43.05) - Revision 6b
Post by: eddievxx on April 01, 2017, 10:33:50 pm

Right that makes sense. And the pattern-welded and crucible steels are better qualities I assume.

I think this is a great addition to the game, I was always disappointed how easy it was (without this mod) to make steel arms and armour, and that there was no further choices. This is far better. Thanks!

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.43.05) - Revision 6b
Post by: Grimlocke on April 02, 2017, 07:03:42 pm

Pattern-welded steel has mostly the same qualities as regular steel, slightly harder but slightly more brittle as well. Its only usable for weapons as making armor out of it wouldn't really work right. Its mostly there in anticipation of tech levels.

Crucible steel is a good bit stronger than regular steel, though rather finicky to produce. I plan to reduce the micro just a bit by allowing the ground glass, charcoal and sand to be processed into jugs as well since bags tend to be used by a lot of other stuff as well.

And glad you like it!

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.43.05) - Revision 6b
Post by: TheHossofMoss on April 13, 2017, 02:19:27 pm

Hello!

I'm really enjoying the mod, Grimlocke. Thanks for making it, I wish I had started using it sooner!

I have a question though: I started a new fortress, and brought along 7 daggers. Unfortunately, I can't seem to get my civvies to equip their daggers. Was I mistaken in thinking that the following quote was talking about your dwarf civilians in Fortress Mode (rather than Adventure Mode)?

Quote

Added a number of civilian weapons - By making them tools with various uses civilians now carry daggers and cudgels.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.43.05) - Revision 6b
Post by: Grimlocke on April 13, 2017, 03:42:23 pm

Ah yeah, the daggers are defined as tools which adventurer mode things like to carry around (carving knives and such in the stock game).

Tools sadly cant be equipped in fortress mode. There goes the minecart equipped militia, but you'll also have to use the regular weapon-type daggers in fort mode.

Glad your enjoying the mod!

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.43.05) - Revision 6b
Post by: negocromn on April 25, 2017, 06:15:20 pm

Just started using this a couple days ago, really interesting concept. I have yet to make the new crafting stations and so on, but I've tested a lot on the arena and the combat at least seems really cool.

Will make some more posts in a few days if I play a little more fortress mode, thanks for the mod man!

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.43.05) - Revision 6b
Post by: Grimlocke on April 28, 2017, 03:46:44 pm

Glad your enjoying it!

I look forward to any comments, criticisms or miscellaneous you might have,

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.43.05) - Revision 6b
Post by: Amostubal on May 19, 2017, 08:30:19 pm

Hey Grim!  I've been overhauling few mods that have fallen behind in masterwork... I was looking around and realized masterwork is running 4c, I'm reviewing the changes here, comparing it to what is in MW already, do you mind if I update the MW weapon and armor list?

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.43.05) - Revision 6b
Post by: Grimlocke on May 20, 2017, 08:56:57 am

Ah right, there is a MW version of this out there. I haven't kept track of that in quite some time now.

So yes please, that would be much appreciated ;)

I don't quite recall whether or not the MW version of this mod was modified in any way to make any kind of balance model, I do remember some duplicated between the base game and Stal's mod were culled. I have changed the balance model (several) times since version 4, so you might want to test things out in arena to make sure none of the weapons and armor do anything too silly.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.43.05) - Revision 6b
Post by: Amostubal on May 20, 2017, 08:59:51 pm

The only thing that I see is odd... I understand you made a change to body plans to add a shoulder blade? or something like that.... I've been updating other mods all day, I don't remember what it was, so that you could add another body section and change the coverage of some items... how much of the gear does that effect?  I'm having a hard time imagining updating all the current armors in MW to correct coverage.  I'd love to have a more in depth conversation on the mod as a whole, with you.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.43.05) - Revision 6b
Post by: Grimlocke on May 21, 2017, 07:30:41 am

The collarbones add an 'internal' limb that lets me have an armor that covers neck but not the upper arms. Armor coverage can only be set as 'steps away from the upper body' so that was the only way to do it.

Not having collarbones would make a cuirass have mysterious upper arm protection, which isn't a huge deal but a little inconsistent. You can reduce the length of the arm harnesses to make there not be a double layer of armor on the upper arms. I wouldn't recommend setting the stepping to 0 as that would result in weirdly easy loss of head.

Of course, ask any question you like, as you might garner from my previous posts here I enjoy blathering about mods and arms and armor ;)

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.43.05) - Revision 6b
Post by: Amostubal on May 21, 2017, 11:36:44 am

You have never been in a chat room with me then... we would drown the rest of the room out... lol.  I'm on Discord as Amostubal in most DF rooms, if your on there.   anyways... It may be 1.27 before I get to this one... I'm having an issue pushing a creature update.  but this is on my list to do.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.43.05) - Revision 6b
Post by: Dunmeris on July 06, 2017, 03:31:21 pm

What's a crescent axe? I mean, I know there was a weapon in Dark Souls called a crescent axe, but is that what it's supposed to be?

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.43.05) - Revision 6b
Post by: DaSwayza on July 16, 2017, 05:44:20 pm

I just discovered I am having a problem with meteoric iron: Every time I try to hammer out a meteoric iron bloom, the object is consumed by the workshop and nothing is returned. Any suggestions?

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.43.05) - Revision 6b
Post by: Grimlocke on July 19, 2017, 05:51:27 pm

@DaSwayza: Whelp, dang. Seems I brokes that at some point.

The problem was missing item product tags in inorganic_zHistoric_Metallurgy. The proper file: https://pastebin.com/mHbwPyXE Copy paste that into your local version, no new save should be needed for that.

Will update the main download once I have a bit more time.

@Dunmeris: A crescent axe is literally just any axe with a crescent-shaped blade. In my mod's case, the crecent axe and short crescent axe are what is also called a horseman's axe (https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/91/75/e5/9175e5cf43006df313af620efc5fab5e.jpg)... in medieval times usually just called 'axe'. The regular crescent axe is basically that without the point. The short one is that, but a bit smaller overall.

The crescent axe from Dark Soul is actually an Ottoman axe (https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/236x/b5/5b/b5/b55bb53a3481135395d13fd4d267b769--zombie-weapons-battle-axe.jpg), which is indeed also crescent shaped and thus properly named. Medieval terminology is kind of a pain at times; very few of these things have a precisely defined definition.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.43.05) - Revision 6b
Post by: captinjoehenry on September 11, 2017, 09:28:13 pm

What's the Abdomen armor?  As it is I am in full plate armor but I just got attacked in the abdomen and it got deflected by my braies

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.43.05) - Revision 6b
Post by: Grimlocke on September 12, 2017, 06:27:01 pm

Heh, you must have some pretty solid underpants there.

Any body armor also serves as abdominal armor though, in reality it would be very impractical to make/sell these separately and ingame it is even impossible without any weird body hackery. The messaging was most likely being flaky there; it doesn't always pick the right layer for deflection messages.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.43.05) - Revision 6b
Post by: Cryoshakespeare on September 22, 2017, 08:38:02 am

Very happy to see how this is going Grimlocke, I had added to the discussion on this a while back and it looks like fantastic work you've done. Starting a new DF spree, so this and the DF revised mod are a necessity.

I'm going to be raw installing them on top of the LNP, is that advisable? (I suppose for now I'll just have to try and see myself :P )

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.43.05) - Revision 6b
Post by: Grimlocke on September 23, 2017, 07:21:42 am

Dropping this and Revised on LNP should work just fine, neither mods really do anything with the graphics or utility side of things.

So yeah, enjoy the dorf spree!

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.43.05) - Revision 6b
Post by: Frank2368 on October 18, 2017, 09:17:47 am

Hey thanks for the mod, I love historical equipment so I'm loving it. I have a minor gripe.

Does the bevor actually protect the neck? Doesn't the body armor already protect the neck gameplaywise? So shouldn't bevors already be a part of the cuirass?

If I'm not mistaken that means sallet/kettle + bevor is simply better than Armet/Barbute/Hounskull since the game thinks that sallets and bevors are two seperate helmets worn over each other when in reality they don't really overlap at all. It's only slightly less effective than bascinet + greathelm due to slightly lower coverage values.

Not a big problem but it seems like an inconsistency that doesn't represent reality.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.43.05) - Revision 6b
Post by: Grimlocke on October 18, 2017, 11:45:16 am

Fair points, and I completely agree! However, this was the best I could come up with giving the game's severe limitations on helmets (such as their inability to cover more than just the head).

Bevors also function as lower face armor, which is all I can make them do in this mod. I could rename plate armor to 'plate armor and bevor', but that would make it unable to cover the head. It would also no longer be a convenient add-on item to existing armor sets. Making an armor piece that only covers the neck is sadly impossible.

Ingame, kettle/sallet + bevor still has a small (2% i believe) chance of rolling no coverage at all, accounting for the gap left between the two. DF's coverage works a bit weird in that wearing two 80% coverage items results in a large chance of two layers of armor being hit, a smaller chance of only one being hit and a small chance of the attack bypassing both items completely. There is no way to make two non-100% coverage items give 100% coverage. Full helmets like the armet right now have the advantage of always giving full coverage and being somewhat less of a hassle.

I'm hoping Toady will expand a bit on the armor system at some point in the future. Once I get back into actually modding again I want to use DFhack to add various debuffs to armor pieces such as increased fatigue by weight, lowered agility for plate armor and reduced observation/weapon handling skill for full helmets that impair sight and breathing. They won't be massive debuffs, but will make medium-weight armor such as mail+brigandine+kettle have at least some edge over the heavier sets, as they historically had. I don't think DFhack will be able to cure the layering issues, but will at least take a poke at that too.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.43.05) - Revision 6b
Post by: DaSwayza on October 25, 2017, 04:26:38 pm

Got a few more questions:

First: Is the only way to obtain steel bars using the metallurgy mod by case-hardening them, or am I missing something?

Second: I would like to put together a skirmishing force specifically for were-creatures. What is the lightest whole-coverage armor I can outfit them with?

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.43.05) - Revision 6b
Post by: Grimlocke on October 26, 2017, 04:06:44 am

Case hardening so far is the only clearly described process for making steel I have been able to find. In some cases they only case hardened a already forged product, but that wouldn't work too well with the vanilla forge. I am not sure whether it was possible to fine pig iron only enough for it to be steel, or that that would leave too many impurities in the metal for that to work. I really ought to pick up an actual book about this subject at some point...

As for lightest armor, I guess that would be gambeson, padded coif and mail mittens/chausses. You can replace the mittens with sleeves and add a brigandine and helmet for some better protection, but cloth armor should suffice for most were-beasts that are not bloody weremammoths. Nothing protects you from the weremammoths.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.43.05) - Revision 6b
Post by: pikachu17 on October 26, 2017, 05:06:41 pm

Can were-cavemen save you from the were-mammoths?

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.43.05) - Revision 6b
Post by: Grimlocke on October 27, 2017, 09:08:40 am

Only with sufficient ☼pointy sticks☼ while penned in behind fortifications to keep them from charging in and getting turned into were-paste.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.43.05) - Revision 6b
Post by: Amostubal on November 12, 2017, 05:56:30 pm

Quote from: Grimlocke on March 28, 2017, 02:15:34 pm

Reaction descriptions are on the to-do list, should be done for the next update.

I might modify the make charcoal powder reaction to be able to use more than one type of container (was considering jugs, a container that can be sealed would make sense). It can indeed be a bit of a hassle with having to make new bags due to sand and food also using bags.

hey bro... I saw this and agreed, here's a bit that I added to my version.

Code: [Select]

[REACTION:GLASS->-GLASS_POWDER_2]
[NAME:grind up raw glass(jug)]
[BUILDING:QUERN:CUSTOM_S]
[BUILDING:MILLSTONE:CUSTOM_S]
[REAGENT:raw glass:1:ROUGH:NONE:NONE:NONE]
[GLASS_MATERIAL]
[REAGENT:jug:1:TOOL:ITEM_TOOL_JUG:NONE:NONE]
[EMPTY]
[PRESERVE_REAGENT]
[DOES_NOT_DETERMINE_PRODUCT_AMOUNT]
[PRODUCT:100:1:POWDER_MISC:NONE:GET_MATERIAL_FROM_REAGENT:raw glass:NONE][PRODUCT_DIMENSION:150]
[PRODUCT_TO_CONTAINER:jug]
[SKILL:MILLING]

[REACTION:CHARCOAL->-CHARCOAL_POWDER_2]
[NAME:grind charcoal into powder(jug)]
[BUILDING:QUERN:CUSTOM_S]
[BUILDING:MILLSTONE:CUSTOM_S]
[REAGENT:charcoal:150:BAR:NONE:COAL:CHARCOAL]
[REAGENT:jug:1:TOOL:ITEM_TOOL_JUG:NONE:NONE]
[EMPTY]
[PRESERVE_REAGENT]
[DOES_NOT_DETERMINE_PRODUCT_AMOUNT]
[PRODUCT:100:1:POWDER_MISC:NONE:COAL:CHARCOAL][PRODUCT_DIMENSION:150]
[PRODUCT_TO_CONTAINER:jug]
[SKILL:MILLING]


Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.43.05) - Revision 6b
Post by: Grimlocke on November 13, 2017, 07:38:48 am

Oh, cool stuff! I kinda completely forgot about that.

I will get back properly into modding... perhaps December, this month is going to be a bit busy for me.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.43.05) - Revision 6b
Post by: Amostubal on November 14, 2017, 09:43:44 am

That's cool, I found the code fix for the meteoric iron also earlier in this post, so my end looks really good and its meshing with everything perfectly... all errors 0, 1 interesting thing I've noticed is that because of the collarbones being designated as a "limb"?!? am I saying that correctly... along with some other body plan changes... so here is a list of things anyone who is installing this needs to know:

Mod Creature Failures:
1.  These kind of lines will fail in creature generation after installing this, since cheeks are now internal:

Code: [Select]

[TISSUE_LAYER_OVER:BY_CATEGORY:CHEEK:XXXXX]some mods have these several ZM5 modes have these also you can't color cheeks anymore so these lines fail too:

Code: [Select]

[SET_TL_GROUP:BY_CATEGORY:CHEEK:SKIN]
[TL_COLOR_MODIFIER:WHITE:1:BLACK:1:RED:1:YELLOW:1:GREEN:1:BLUE:1:TEAL:1:PURPLE:1:PINK:1]
[TLCM_NOUN:cheek markings:PLURAL]
2.  Since the new collarbone is a required to have tissue thickness since its considered a limb, not defining the bone parameters will fail, lines like these:

Code: [Select]

[BODY_DETAIL_PLAN:VERTEBRATE_TISSUE_LAYERS:STONE:NONE:NONE:NONE:NONE]
which some mods use to give a unit stone skin but nothing else useful will need to be modded to:

Code: [Select]

[BODY_DETAIL_PLAN:VERTEBRATE_TISSUE_LAYERS:STONE:NONE:NONE:STONE:NONE]
basically any creature that gives you an error for tissue layer thickness this is why its doing it and its probably an oddity creature like a stone golem or wood sprite that needs a bone layer to be identified for the collarbone to have thickness.

Modded Entity Errors:
The following items were replaced in grimlocke's mod; here's the list and what you should replace it with as a best guess for similarity/utility:

Code: [Select]

[WEAPON:ITEM_WEAPON_DAGGER_LARGE] -> [WEAPON:ITEM_WEAPON_DAGGER_BOLLOCK]
[WEAPON:ITEM_WEAPON_SWORD_SHORT_TRAINING] -> [WEAPON:ITEM_WEAPON_BASTARD_TRAINING]
[PANTS:ITEM_PANTS_GREAVES] -> [SHOES:ITEM_SHOES_SPLINTED]
[PANTS:ITEM_PANTS_LEGGINGS] -> [SHOES:ITEM_SHOES_MAIL:COMMON] & [SHOES:ITEM_SHOES_CHAUSSE:COMMON]

And the only other oddity in the whole code, a typo in the item_weapon.txt from grimlocke, you will find it in several items, and if you read battle reports, you will be WTF?

Code: [Select]

grab your with blade both hands and strikeneeds to be:

Code: [Select]

grab your blade with both hands and strike
Thanks for the code Grimlocke! thats' the only bit of additional information I've gathered from working with your mod and combining it with other people's mods. 

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.43.05) - Revision 6b
Post by: Grimlocke on November 14, 2017, 11:29:57 am

Oh nice, this should be pretty useful for anyone else trying to combine this mod with other ones.

That typo though... Not sure how that eluded me for so long.

I'm kind of wondering why you would do [BODY_DETAIL_PLAN:VERTEBRATE_TISSUE_LAYERS:STONE:NONE:NONE:NONE:NONE] though, that would also leave all bodyparts such as ribs, organs, etc without a material (though I guess you could make a stone golem with meaty organs... bit creepy). If the goal is to make every bodypart stone, you could just do [TISSUE_LAYER:BY_CATEGORY:ALL:STONE]

Edit: added a link to your post in the OP

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.43.05) - Revision 6b
Post by: Amostubal on November 14, 2017, 01:16:00 pm

Quote from: Grimlocke on November 14, 2017, 11:29:57 am

Oh nice, this should be pretty useful for anyone else trying to combine this mod with other ones.

That typo though... Not sure how that eluded me for so long.

I'm kind of wondering why you would do [BODY_DETAIL_PLAN:VERTEBRATE_TISSUE_LAYERS:STONE:NONE:NONE:NONE:NONE] though, that would also leave all bodyparts such as ribs, organs, etc without a material (though I guess you could make a stone golem with meaty organs... bit creepy). If the goal is to make every bodypart stone, you could just do [TISSUE_LAYER:BY_CATEGORY:ALL:STONE]

Edit: added a link to your post in the OP

not my work, I'm guessing if it has body parts even if they are stone bones stone meat etc, they will function as such? not sure they aren't my expertise.  My expertise is tracking down the source of errors in code and creating scripts & reactions for entities.   apparently no other body part matters as they have skin already and don't need a thickness... I think the collarbone issue is that its basically the start of limbs? as they extend from the torso, even though they are internal, so if you don't give them a bone material they wont have any tissues for thickness, since they don't have muscle, skin, or fat.  the rest of the limbs are fine without it as the skin covers all those layers.  personally the few times I've made golems I just put the same material in each instead of none... but I'm working with other people's work.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.43.05) - Revision 6b
Post by: Grimlocke on November 14, 2017, 03:42:54 pm

Quote from: Amostubal on November 14, 2017, 01:16:00 pm

personally the few times I've made golems I just put the same material in each instead of none...

Heh, I'm guessing that would result in combat reports like 'Urist bashes the golem in the arm, shattering the stone, shattering the stone and cracking the stone!' as the game is going to see each of those arguments as different layers.

Any bodyparts with no tissues on them will cause some weirdness somewhere down the line though, if only combat reports of attacks 'passing right through'. What I'm suspecting is that the golem just didn't use any bodyparts that wouldn't have any skin on them (so no organs, ribs, skulls, etc). That should give the exact same result as just telling the game to throw a tissue on every single bodypart, unless of course someone starts messing with the default bodypart sets... :)

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.43.05) - Revision 6b
Post by: ANickel on November 25, 2017, 11:17:38 pm

Has anybody tested if this still works with 44.02?

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.43.05) - Revision 6b
Post by: DaSwayza on November 26, 2017, 09:23:45 am

I just ran a rought test, it looks like we're good to go, it looks like it is compatible. You might not be able to make the modified steel pedestals maybe, but I can think of better uses for meteoric steel lol.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.43.05) - Revision 6b
Post by: DoomOnion on November 28, 2017, 09:41:50 am

http://dffd.bay12games.com/file.php?id=13242

Here's an unofficial update and minor tweaks to Grimlocke's History and Realism Mods + DF Revised.

I've dug through the file changes since the last version, and made changes to the appropriate files. This was originally intended for personal use, but I decided to share. If any of the original authors feel uncomfortable with this being distributed, I will take it down.

Since this was for personal use, I made several changes to the mod(s). Here are the changes:

• I've removed all of the macro reactions from DF Revised, since I don't find myself using it.
• I've added [EDIBLE_COOKED] to all fruit seeds. I know that they are not supposed to be edible, but considering there is no use for them and that it would mean at least 400+ seeds sitting around taking space, I felt there was a game mechanic necessary to get rid of them. Consider this a band-aid solution.
• Steel making has been streamlined. I got rid of the messy requirements of ground glass, charcoal, and sand, and removed slag from the mod entirely. After vigorous play testing I found them to just get in the way, simply tedious for the sake of realism which added very little to the core gameplay. As for balance, reactions which required ground charcoal, glass, and sand now have increased need for charcoal. Since iron containing slag is also removed, lower tier smelting will now yield slightly lower.
• Short arming sword's plural form was just arming swords, which made things hilariously confusing on the military equipment screen. It has been fixed.

This is a one-off thing and likely not going to be maintained.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.43.05) - Revision 6b
Post by: DoomOnion on December 02, 2017, 06:21:28 am

A few things I want to make a note on.

First of all, I'd like to open by mentioning that all the historical treatises and recordings refer to as various types of swords like two-handed swords, longswords, bastard swords, hand-and-a-half swords as... you guessed it, swords. Whereas attempts at classifying swords came in the Victorian era. There were(and still are in museums as surviving examples) numerous swords that had their own specifications. A smith back then didn't use a graphical software to get the blueprint just right and used a pressure cutter and a power hammer to mass produce identical swords; no, they were sized and forged by a person. Naturally, it's almost guaranteed that no two swords were technically the same.

However, Ewart Oakeshott's classification of swords based on their developmental background(origin and time period) was a small step forward in studying of swords. Although it suffered from the Victorian idea common in sciences back then that all things given time naturally progress and become more complicated, and its classification is a bit too linear and rigid in nature, it still offered a clear, identifiable view into the development of swords throughout European medieval ages. That said, there are a few things I wanted to talk about in this mod's use of terms, particularly related to swords.

The greatsword entry was particularly interesting to me, since the mod tries to be a 14th to 15th century mod. I was looking at the raws, and noticed that minimum size to use one handed was a whooping 140,000 cube cm. Which is only 10,000 short of being as big as a gorilla. I thought to myself, 'Alright, that's fair.' But then I looked at the minimal size to use, and realized that it was set to 75,000. This is a problem in largely two factors.

The first is that due to a bug in DF's code right now, a creature's broadness and height modifier is not taken into account to determine who can use what equipment. Within the current version, it is only used for determining if it's used one handed or two handed. Which means even humans who as a species average at 70,000 cube cm cannot use a greatsword in fortress mode regardless of their actual size. Under pervious versions this was not an issue given how they are not playable. Since the update a couple months back, we now get human mercenaries and citizens, so this is definitely an issue.

The second factor is that the definition of a greatsword in this sense. What I got out of the 75,000 size classification was that you designed it after this (http://www.coldsteel-uk.com/store/two-handed-great-sword-88wgs-full-1.jpg). Unfortunately, this is the sort of a greatsword used in the 16th century. (Even the way it was used was quite far being swordlike, it was closer to being used as a thrusting pole weapon with double grip. But this is a different topic for another day.) However, according to Oakeshott's study, the weapons most commonly referred to as Espèes de Guerre, "Grete Swords", or more commonly as greatswords in the early 14th to early 15th century was Type XIII and XIIIa swords. Here (http://www.thearma.org/spotlight/typology/oakeshott2.gif) are examples of the swords. Type XIII had a shorter grip and shorter blade, while type XIIIa had a longer grip. They were only roughly as big as a late medieval longsword.

There rises a question: then, how do you justify separating a greatsword and a longsword? Concordantly, how do you define a bastard sword and a longsword? To answer all these, it'll take at least a few more forum posts that no one will muster the will to read, so I will keep it concise. The answer is you need to understand the historical context and the way the weapons were used. Fortunately for us, we have a specific historical context, and all we have to do now is look up how they were used, and abide by that clear definition and work the mod around it. Here's what I propose you do:

Remove the bastard sword entry entirely: as it stands, it bridges the gap between an arming sword (which is a name given to one handed swords in the 15th century, excellent work there) and a longsword. However, the idea that bastard swords were two handed swords that could be used in one hand if necessary is largely a myth. The problem with that definition is that, as you've seen above, pretty much all sword barring really small ones could be used both one-handed and two-handed. (This is likely why all swords except arming swords were referred to as nondescript 'swords' back then) There is only one certain source iirc that specifically refers to a bastard sword as its own thing, and even then it was said to have earned it uniqueness to having a special type of blade (which wasn't explained in great detail). Needless to say, there is no surviving example of bastard swords. Change longsword's stat so that a portion(upper half?) of human population, not dwarves, can use it one handed.

With that, the greatsword's size and one-hand/two-hand requirements should be brought down to be same as the longsword's new stat. Well, what is the difference between a longsword and a greatsword then? You might ask. In that specific historical setting, the difference would be in how the weapon was used. As you saw the Type XIIIa sword, you would have noticed that the point was rounded. It was not a thrusting sword. Remove the greatsword's thrusting attack, and either leave it's edge attack alone, or bring it down slightly to suit its new size better.

Of course, it's all a mere suggestion, but do have a look and decide yourself if realism is the paramount concern.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.43.05) - Revision 6b
Post by: Grimlocke on December 03, 2017, 10:01:52 am

I return!

From vacation, right in the middle of which there was apparently the .44 release. It doesn't seem like the mod should need too much adjustment for the newest version, thank be to DaSwayza for giving basic functionality a test! From the file changes file it seems I only need to merge in some entity file changes.

@DoomOnion As I mention in the OP, anyone is free to modify, fork and distribute the mod, provided they don't start asking money for any of it. I'm more interested in people actually enjoying this mod and DF by extension than in my own 'glory'  ;)

I do of course reserve the right to merge back any changes that I like, such as that typo correction for short arming swords. Oops.

As for the two-handed swords, I'm honestly not entirely sure what the idea was behind the size requirements for the greatsword (and kriegsmesser). Its supposed to just be a larger longsword, just like the 'bastard sword' is just a name I used for a smaller longsword. I am aware that swords at the time were not made to any standard pattern, the 'bastard sword, longsword and greatsword' mostly just denote varying sizes of longsword. The game would become very confusing very quickly if I just named everything 'sword'. I did consider making the greatsword more slash-focused, but that would have it be functionally identical to the big messer.

Two-handed and one-handed use is... not really implemented in a very satisfying way in DF in my opinion. ANY melee weapon can be used with one or two hands, even something like a poleaxe can still be used to thrust with one hand. Thing is, I can't set a per-weapon or what would be even better, a per-attack two-handed use modifier. I considered actually setting a ridiculously high two-handed size for every weapon and giving smaller weapons a boost in attack power to compensate for the one-handed use malus, but that didn't feel quite right since something like a threshing flail should get considerably more out of two-handed use than a short arming sword.

As for the crucible steel reaction, from the perspective of historical accuracy it would be best to just remove it or not use it if it feels to tedious. Crucible steel was a whole lot more tedious to make than even in this reaction. Its there as an end-game material, if your just equipping your first wave of cannon fodder brave militia, you should probably just use the regular 'steel' which represents the kind of steel actually used in Europe.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.43.05) - Revision 6b
Post by: DoomOnion on December 03, 2017, 10:24:24 pm

A few more bugs I found while I was raw-diving.

Two of the new reactions from finery(I think?) yield BOULDER:IRON. It just pops out a stone boulder made of iron, whereas I have a hunch you meant to have it yield iron-rich slag.
Meteoric iron is missing reaction class tokens so they never get worked in Fortress mode. I noticed that there's a fix posted, but given it's been a few months it's a bit baffling to not see it included in the main version.
All weapon's third perspective combat message refers to the user as 'his', not accounting that the user can be of any sex. Change it to 'their'?

Not sure if this counts as a bug, but another tid bit. None of the ground material get stockpiled properly.

and also:
Due to the minimum size to use being set as 75,000 for greatswords and possibly more weapons, even humans cannot use it regardless of one hand or two hand usage in fortress mode. This needs fixing.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.43.05) - Revision 6b
Post by: Taffer on December 03, 2017, 10:38:09 pm

Quote from: DoomOnion on December 03, 2017, 10:24:24 pm

Change it to 'their'?

Nothing to add, but agreed on singular "their" if the sentences can't be rephrased. His/her is barbaric, and I dislike assuming male.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.43.05) - Revision 6b
Post by: Asin on December 12, 2017, 07:37:40 pm

Grimlock, I think there is a bug. I'm trying to add to my Goblinoids and Orcs mod, which uses your mod (and credits it too), but when I gen a world, dwarves are referred to as humans, elves have gods, and other strange things. This happens after world-gen, in legends.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.43.05) - Revision 6b
Post by: Random_Dragon on December 12, 2017, 07:42:03 pm

Um. Question. How can you actually have eye or neck-covering helms? There is no token allowing a helm to extend coverage beyond the head, and attempting to apply the existing "extend coverage" tokens to them will cause an errorlog report as these tokens don't work for helms: http://www.bay12games.com/dwarves/mantisbt/view.php?id=10234 (http://www.bay12games.com/dwarves/mantisbt/view.php?id=10234)

See also, the fact that FACE VEILS do not in fact cover the face.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.43.05) - Revision 6b
Post by: Grimlocke on December 13, 2017, 12:02:50 am

@Random_Dragon: The face-bits attached to the head are broken in kind of a particular way. The EMBEDDED tag on them are supposed to give them the armor protection of the host bodypart, but this only seems to work for the eyes (probably due to being defined first). There seems to be no way to extend this to the other parts of the face, so I just made those internal instead. It is no longer possible to bite off someone's nose, a great loss indeed, but your adventurers and militia dwarves also won't inevitably end up with no nose, ears, etc. Danger room training also shouldn't act as instant defacing ritual either, though its still frowned upon :)

Edit: Helms don't cover the neck in my mod either, sadly. I moved that function to the body armors.

@Asin: Kinda sounds like a duplicate entity entry. I know my mod doesn't add any races and definitely doesn't produce anything like that on its own, so you may want to check if any of your new races use vanilla raw entry names.

Not much else I can think of that does that sort of stuff. If its not that, maybe describe what's happening a bit more so I can get an idea where its coming from.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.43.05) - Revision 6b
Post by: Random_Dragon on December 13, 2017, 02:41:10 am

> internal ears

Why did that make me wince a bit. An unnervingly clever way to do it, I guess.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.44.02) - Revision 6c
Post by: Grimlocke on December 20, 2017, 09:15:58 pm

Update out! It has the various suggested fixes and balances (yes, including the greatsword one), adds descriptions to metallurgy reactions and updates to 44.02.

Also yes, internal ears! Like birds. Or maybe just ears with a layer of skin over them. Ew. Best not to think about it too much.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.44.02) - Revision 6c
Post by: Amostubal on December 21, 2017, 07:30:28 am

awesome! I see you added the jug reactions.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.44.02) - Revision 6c
Post by: Amostubal on December 21, 2017, 01:47:13 pm

interesting notes:
1:  removal of scaled and barred from ITEM_SHOES_SPLINTED:
  - stops the use of shell and bones to make this item.
2:  item_weapon.txt - attack description errors:
  line 1138 & 1313 - "your with blade" needs to be "your blade with" | "his" needs to be "their"
  line 1313 - "guard" needs to be "crossguard" to match with the others
3:  reaction_adv_carpenter.txt errors:
  line 255 - "[NAME:make wooden training short sword]" needs to be "[NAME:make wooden training bastard sword]"
  line 262 - "ITEM_WEAPON_SWORD_SHORT_TRAINING" needs to be "ITEM_WEAPON_BASTARD_TRAINING"
  missing reaction:
 

Code: [Select]

[REACTION:MAKE WOODEN PEDESTAL]
[NAME:make wooden pedestal]
[ADVENTURE_MODE_ENABLED]
[BUILDING:CARPENTER:NONE]
[REAGENT:log:1:WOOD:NONE:NONE:NONE]
[ANY_PLANT_MATERIAL]
[REAGENT:tool:1:NONE:NONE:NONE:NONE]
[PRESERVE_REAGENT][HAS_EDGE]
[PRODUCT:100:1:TOOL:ITEM_TOOL_PEDESTAL:GET_MATERIAL_FROM_REAGENT:log:NONE]
[PRODUCT_TOKEN:pedestal]
[SKILL:CARPENTRY]
[CATEGORY:ADV_CARPENTRY]4:inorganic_metal.txt:
  lines 84, 86, & 89: not sure why they was replaced as NONEx4...  not sure if that was intentional.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.43.05) - Revision 6b
Post by: pikachu17 on December 21, 2017, 04:05:57 pm

Quote from: Taffer on December 03, 2017, 10:38:09 pm

Quote from: DoomOnion on December 03, 2017, 10:24:24 pm

Change it to 'their'?

Nothing to add, but agreed on singular "their" if the sentences can't be rephrased. His/her is barbaric, and I dislike assuming male.

But isn't that inaccurate, as "their" is plural? How about "its", which is gender-neatral and singular.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.44.02) - Revision 6c
Post by: Grimlocke on December 21, 2017, 05:03:34 pm

Quote from: Amostubal on December 21, 2017, 01:47:13 pm

interesting notes:
1:  removal of scaled and barred from ITEM_SHOES_SPLINTED:
  - stops the use of shell and bones to make this item.
2:  item_weapon.txt - attack description errors:
  line 1138 & 1313 - "your with blade" needs to be "your blade with" | "his" needs to be "their"
  line 1313 - "guard" needs to be "crossguard" to match with the others
3:  reaction_adv_carpenter.txt errors:
  line 255 - "[NAME:make wooden training short sword]" needs to be "[NAME:make wooden training bastard sword]"
  line 262 - "ITEM_WEAPON_SWORD_SHORT_TRAINING" needs to be "ITEM_WEAPON_BASTARD_TRAINING"
  missing reaction:
 

Code: [Select]

[REACTION:MAKE WOODEN PEDESTAL]
[NAME:make wooden pedestal]
[ADVENTURE_MODE_ENABLED]
[BUILDING:CARPENTER:NONE]
[REAGENT:log:1:WOOD:NONE:NONE:NONE]
[ANY_PLANT_MATERIAL]
[REAGENT:tool:1:NONE:NONE:NONE:NONE]
[PRESERVE_REAGENT][HAS_EDGE]
[PRODUCT:100:1:TOOL:ITEM_TOOL_PEDESTAL:GET_MATERIAL_FROM_REAGENT:log:NONE]
[PRODUCT_TOKEN:pedestal]
[SKILL:CARPENTRY]
[CATEGORY:ADV_CARPENTRY]4:inorganic_metal.txt:
  lines 84, 86, & 89: not sure why they was replaced as NONEx4...  not sure if that was intentional.

1: I removed the 'barred' tag because I suspect it was responsible for this item showing up as 'cloth partial plate leg harness'. That was the only item giving me that issue, and also the only non-deprecated item that still used the barred and scaled tags.

2 and 3: Gah. Forgot there were training weapons in the game.

4: That was likely what was causing the weird iron boulders to appear. I also removed slag production from pig iron being hammered.`

Thanks for spotting these, will fix them in due time.


@pikachu17: 'their' is the generally accepted policor ungendered pronoun. I think it sounds kind of impersonal and unfriendly, but DF doesn't give me any way to make gendered attack text so it will have to do.

I don't quite get the remark about barbarism either, but please don't really need those discussions here, there's the general bay12 forum for that.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.44.02) - Revision 6c
Post by: pikachu17 on December 21, 2017, 07:39:06 pm

Sorry, I'm just a Grammar Nazi. It irrationally makes me angry a little bit, because there is already a perfectly good singular non-gendered pronoun, "its", and "their" is better as a plural pronoun.
What is "policor"?

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.44.02) - Revision 6c
Post by: Grimlocke on December 21, 2017, 11:16:33 pm

'Politically correct'. Apparently, people object to being referred to with the pronoun normally reserved for inanimate things and animals.

It IS also grammatically correct, and has been used to refer to a party of whom the gender isn't known, such as 'Somebody left their umbrella at the office'. 'its' would look very out of place in this example.

Dwarf Fortress itself does use 'its', but that was likely never intended to apply to sentient creatures instead of golems and such.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.44.02) - Revision 6c
Post by: Amostubal on December 22, 2017, 09:22:05 am

its has always been referred to as a genderless singular pronoun.  keyword is genderless, its does not refer to a thing that could have any gender in english, its reserved for things that have no gender.  Referring to a thing as an it, is to say it has no gender not that it can have any gender, thus its rude.  They|Their is not just a politically correct pronoun, but additionally it conveys agency of an actor and is appropriate for when referring to a person or group.  Have the children eaten? Yes they have.  Whose umbrella is this? I don't know, but they left their umbrella on the table.  Its an agency term that does not define its gender but does not additionally state that the bearer for the pronoun has no gender.  you would not say "It left its umbrella on the table," as then the question becomes what kind of thing is this that can leave items laying around?  Was it a robot?  saying "they left their" gives them the sort of agency of an actor, it wasn't some weird machine that can do things.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.44.02) - Revision 6c
Post by: DemAvalon on February 04, 2018, 10:57:07 am

Hi, I noticed a problem with the mod, it makes me unable to produce pig iron or steel (the bars, the weapons/armors/tool/object orders are there) it simply does not list making those as an option (not red like when you don't have the ingredients, the option to make steel and pig iron does not exist), I'm using the latest version of the mod (for version 44.02), and playing with the LazyNewb pack for dwarf fortress 44.05, is this the problem?, I thought since the version difference is not that great that it would work, but maybe there is a conflict of some kind?

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.44.02) - Revision 6c
Post by: Grimlocke on February 16, 2018, 10:55:42 am

Oops, the email notification for this kinda went by me. In case your still around, there are pig iron producing reactions in the finery section of the regular forge, or in the specialized finery forge called 'make pig iron billet by case hardening steel/iron bars', and blast furnaces should output pig iron.

There isn't much of a reason to produce it if your using the bloomery furnace though, since its not really usable until you turn it into iron/steel/patternwelded steel. I'll have a see to make sure they actually show up in fortress mode.

The LNP pack and version 44.05 indeed shouldn't make any difference.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.44.02) - Revision 6c
Post by: DemAvalon on February 16, 2018, 01:17:04 pm

Oh?, did you change the name of the action? because searching for "make steel bars" in the manager screen gives me nothing, nor pig iron, also does this require the metallurgy section of the mod?, because I did not instal that, just the equipments, another thing I think somewhere in the mod its mentioned that you changed the properties of the "combat" metals so there would be a greater importance on wearing armor, and I have to ask if this is something that happened due to your mod:
I got my first goblin invasion and I noticed that they have steel crossbows, I thought only dwarves had access to steel?, then as my soldiers are fighting them, I notice in the combat log that a goblin crossbowman bashed my mace lord in the arm and the part exploded into gore, he then bashed the mace lord in the hand (or leg don't remember) and same result, exploded into gore, he then bashed the mace lord in the abdomen and it also exploded into gore, now my military was wearing long sleeved mail shirts, long chausers, visored saletes, bevors and brigandine (all made of iron due to my inability to make steel) all of good or exceptional quality... so how come a random goblin did all that with the butt of a crossbow through all their armor?

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.44.02) - Revision 6c
Post by: Grimlocke on February 17, 2018, 02:49:15 am

Oh. The non-metallurgy version doesn't touch the smelter reactions at all, so whatever disappeared your pig iron, it wasn't me.

The goblins with steel might have been an intended copy from the metallurgy mod, or some past change to make goblins a bit less flimsy. Either way, I might revert that back to iron since there is no higher-tier metal (other than the evil cyan stuff) in the stock metals version. Thanks for pointing that out.

Mail armor will, like in the vanilla game, not be very useful against blunt damage. I don't get how the crossbow goblin got through the brigandine though, can't quite replicate that in the arena either. It could be your mace dwarf got floored at that point, which multiplies any hit damage by quite a bit, possibly enough for the steel crossbow (which the game thinks is made entirely from steel) to get through? That or that was one hardcore crossbow goblin.

I do recommend using the padded armors, (aketon, padded coif) especially under mail armor since that can absorb at least some of the blunt damage.

Edit: Tested the floored scenario, with some mace skill and a steel crossbow you can indeed kill a brigandine+mail guy by first flooring them by breaking a leg. It takes a while though.

I considered nerfing the crossbow melee attack when I made this mod, but left it as a somewhat crappy mace since there is no way to make soldiers carry and switch to a sidearm. The marksdwarf suicide charge is annoying enough as it is.

Edityetgain: Adding some padding in the form of an akaton makes the crossbow useless against even a prone enemy. Cloth armor works! Hooray!

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.44.02) - Revision 6c
Post by: DemAvalon on February 17, 2018, 06:45:41 am

Quote from: Grimlocke on February 17, 2018, 02:49:15 am

Oh. The non-metallurgy version doesn't touch the smelter reactions at all, so whatever disappeared your pig iron, it wasn't me.

I don't know what to say, I did a fresh install of the game, created a world started the fortress quickly made a manager and office, then check the others, make pig iron and steel were there, then I put the mod in, created another world, did the manager thing and boom!, make pig iron and make steel don't show (I only put the contents of "1 - Arms and Armor" in the raw's objects folder, do I need something else there?, is something in the Arms and Armor folder supposed to go somewhere else? also the version I got is "Grim's History and Realism Mods - Rev6c")

About the goblin, that were a very strange case, none of the other dwarfs got hit, so it could be that that goblin was very exceptional and maybe the difference from iron to steel in terms of damage vs protection is just so great that a child using a basic steel hammer could hit an iron full plate foot knight and it would get through (extreme exaggeration)

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.44.02) - Revision 6c
Post by: Grimlocke on February 17, 2018, 05:45:08 pm

Damnit, found what I did wrong. Somehow the non-metallurgy entity file lost its entity reaction permission tokens for steel and pig iron making.

Uploaded a patched version: http://dffd.bay12games.com/file.php?id=13330

It should be fully save-compatible. Thanks for reporting this one.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.44.05) - Revision 6c (+patch)
Post by: DemAvalon on February 18, 2018, 05:20:24 am

Yes!, it worked, thank you!, on another note how much more complicated is the metallurgy mod compared to regular dwarf fortress? (in terms of making metal) and I assume the layered steel is better than regular steel right?

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.44.05) - Revision 6c (+patch)
Post by: Grimlocke on February 18, 2018, 09:19:02 pm

Basic iron production is fairly simple to set up, with a lump and clay and some leather giving you a basic iron smelting building (a pit bloomery). The patternwelded steel, steel and crucible steel require increasing amounts of work. It can be sped up and automated by building dedicated buildings, and employing a couple extra dwarves for the crude work still lets you produce everything up to steel at a reasonable pace. You can now make iron and steel without needing flux by using the somewhat slower and more charcoal hungry bloomery furnaces, a few more ore types like bog iron was also added to make up for the removal of copper, silver and bronze as weapon/armor material.

Crucible steel is a bit of a different matter, as it requires glass, clay, charcoal and a lot of work to produce. Its a finicky, high end material for later in the game when most of your soldiers already have decent-enough equipment.

Patternwelded steel is roughly the same as 'regular' steel, slightly easier to produce, and only usable for weapons and ammunition. Its more intended as an early-game material. It will be a bit more relevant if I ever get around making the planned ore-quality and skill-mastery based tech tree.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.44.05) - Revision 6c (+patch)
Post by: Orkel on February 20, 2018, 01:13:23 pm

What labors does a civilian have to have enabled for them to pick up personal daggers? I've got 3 daggers in my stockpile but nobody is picking them up.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.44.05) - Revision 6c (+patch)
Post by: Grimlocke on February 21, 2018, 11:31:25 am

Sadly, the civilian weapons that spawn in adventurer mode do not apply to fortress mode, for some reason or another. You'll have to assign them like a military weapon, assuming you made the daggers from the 'weapons' menu and not as a tool (these are there only to have the game distribute them as adventurer mode civilian weapons).

Its weird, but it is inevitable.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.44.05) - Revision 6c (+patch)
Post by: Orkel on February 24, 2018, 06:36:14 pm

There seems some kind of issue with the leg armor layering. Although the reference sheet shows it possible to use shoes and then a leg plate harness on top of it, my dwarves will only wear 1 shoe and 2 harnesses. I haven't been able to use 2 shoes and 2 harnesses (1 per foot/leg) though it should be possible.

Using 2 gloves and 2 arm plate harnesses works though. Just the legs that refuse to.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.44.05) - Revision 6c (+patch)
Post by: Grimlocke on February 25, 2018, 09:04:05 am

There is a weird glitch in fortress mode related to dwarves not understanding the concept of wearing of pair of leg-items. You can ear everything just fine in adventure mode, and assigning two pieces of leg armor usually cures the issue. It also tends to lead to some leg armor getting reserved but not used and therefore sitting around indefinitely.

Its a base game issue though, and seems to come up whenever trying to get a militia to wear more than one layer of leg armor. I havn't found a more satisfying way to get around it yet, so if anyone knows, I'd love to know!

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.44.05) - Revision 6c (+patch)
Post by: EuchreJack on July 10, 2018, 08:36:59 pm

I'm updating my mod Of MultiBeasts and Renassance: Playable Beastfolk with Late Medieval Equipment (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=152878.0).  Thanks again for the great late medieval equipment.

EDIT: I also added a Handcannon, if you're interested.  It was a primitive firearm used in this era.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.44.05) - Revision 6c (+patch)
Post by: Srip121 on September 08, 2018, 02:29:05 am

It would be worth many days and nights of prayer if someone could update this, including the metals and buildings :)

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.44.05) - Revision 6c (+patch)
Post by: Grimlocke on September 08, 2018, 11:45:42 am

I've been working on something, the mod is updated to the most recent version and has had various fixes and additions among which ingame item descriptions and raw comments added to modified vanilla files for clarity's sake. I did get into somewhat of a tangent with dfhack scripting at ranged combat.

The handheld weapon part is pretty much done; I've included gunpowder weapons(handgonne and arquebus, coincidentally), a heavy crossbow and war darts and extended the scripts ability to mod ranged weapon accuracy, hitrate, velocity, damage falloff, weapon/ammo quality actually mattering and a bunch more stuff to the existing weapons. Ranged combat is actually kind of interesting now! I'm still looking into how to get thrown weapons to play nice with worldgen-spawned characters (it doesn't seem to want to spawn ranged weapons that use the throwing skill at all, I think I'll assign spear skill them) but aside from that it's pretty much done.

The last thing I'm hung up on is adapting the fixed artillery as seen in zaporozhets' musket mod. I've been trying to streamline the process of loading and firing a bit, make it not rely on a target being present exactly as the gunner completes the 'fire' reaction AND the gunner not being spooked by the enemy being too close. I... mostly succeeded but the way I have it now is a little prone to borking when players do crazy things like ordering a bunch of 'fire' commands and then cancelling them again. Once I have that sorted and everything tidied up, I'll get a release out, possible along with a final non-DFhack release for anyone reluctant to adopt DFhack.

Oh and I'll probably have bombards built with a building item that is just a ranged weapon way, way too large for dwarves to use. But you know, if EuchreJack has any elephant men wandering around they could in theory pick them up and be an utter OP nightmare to everything else :P

After all that, I can get to finally implementing more extensive weapon/armor production and metallurgy (which I presume was what Srip121 was referring to), which will also be requiring DFhack to be remotely feasible. Timeframe on this is 'pretty long' though, since there are no scripts anyone has made that I have found that do all the thing I'd like them to. My current plodding about with the fixed artillery relates to this so if anyone thinks I'm wasting time on that then fret not, it will come of use elsewhere!

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.44.05) - Revision 6c (+patch)
Post by: Srip121 on September 08, 2018, 02:52:24 pm

And just like that an Angel has answered my plea

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.44.05) - Revision 6c (+patch)
Post by: EuchreJack on September 08, 2018, 07:35:58 pm

Well, I do have Elephant men as a civilization in my mod.  ;)
While I don't want anyone to think my mod is less than vital, the recent versions for Dwarf Fortress have Intelligent Sentient Animals in adventure mode, so the player should be able to use Bombards even without my mod.   But yeah, anyone that wants the military in Fortress mode to even pick up the weapons without relying on unpredictable mercenary recruitment will need my mod.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.44.05) - Revision 6c (+patch)
Post by: Bob69Joe on September 19, 2018, 08:30:37 pm

Is "munitions" steel the best to use?

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.44.05) - Revision 6c (+patch)
Post by: Grimlocke on September 21, 2018, 04:33:52 am

Nope, its not a material at all. Historically speaking, munitions grade armor is basically a polite way of saying 'this armor was hammered out as fast as possible at bare minimal quality'.

Ingame, I just used it to put armor on goblins that would normally show up wearing only clothes (they think its clothes, don't tell them!). I added it since highly-skilled goblins no longer seem to show up at all which makes them kind of weak compared to well-equipped and trained militia, and armor being commonplace (if not always of good quality) makes sense for our time setting.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.44.05) - Revision 6c (+patch)
Post by: Bob69Joe on September 21, 2018, 01:03:02 pm

Quote from: Grimlocke on September 21, 2018, 04:33:52 am

Nope, its not a material at all. Historically speaking, munitions grade armor is basically a polite way of saying 'this armor was hammered out as fast as possible at bare minimal quality'.

Ingame, I just used it to put armor on goblins that would normally show up wearing only clothes (they think its clothes, don't tell them!). I added it since highly-skilled goblins no longer seem to show up at all which makes them kind of weak compared to well-equipped and trained militia, and armor being commonplace (if not always of good quality) makes sense for our time setting.

Howdy! Thanks for your work! Well, alright, I was looking through search engines for some explanation of what "munitions" could mean in medieval steel-work, and what I was getting is that it refers ro war-ready materials.

Now, I've been trying out several adventurer games and I've noticed that the starting weapon won't mention a material, like steel and iron, but only mention munitions or pattern, and what specific type of design. Like, pattern-welded crescent-axe, but shouldn't it mention steel or some other material?

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.44.05) - Revision 6c (+patch)
Post by: Sver on September 21, 2018, 03:22:51 pm

Pattern-welded is a type of steel.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.44.05) - Revision 6c (+patch)
Post by: Bob69Joe on September 25, 2018, 05:31:07 pm

Howdy Grimlocke! Thanks for all the cool weapons and armor. Do you think you'll ever add in belts that work like backbacks so I have somewhere to keep all these cool knives and daggers?

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.44.12) - Revision 7a: Guns & Fashion!
Post by: Grimlocke on September 29, 2018, 07:44:20 am

Update out! Loads of new stuff, dfhack scripts, guns, clothes, give it a look over at the OP.

@Bob69Joe Cool idea actually, were it not that I just added belts as a kind of 'pants', which serve to not make dwarves super cranky from their pants being destroyed through their armor... somehow. I'm giving that idea a go though; It shouldn't be too hard to add a belt that works similar to the already existing pouch.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.44.12) - Revision 7a: Guns & Fashion!
Post by: Bob69Joe on September 29, 2018, 09:08:44 pm

Quote from: Grimlocke on September 29, 2018, 07:44:20 am

Update out! Loads of new stuff, dfhack scripts, guns, clothes, give it a look over at the OP.

@Bob69Joe Cool idea actually, were it not that I just added belts as a kind of 'pants', which serve to not make dwarves super cranky from their pants being destroyed through their armor... somehow. I'm giving that idea a go though; It shouldn't be too hard to add a belt that works similar to the already existing pouch.

Super! :)

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.44.12) - Revision 7a: Guns & Fashion!
Post by: 69_BlueSpeedMouse_69 on October 14, 2018, 06:47:14 am

Quote from: Grimlocke on September 29, 2018, 07:44:20 am

Update out! Loads of new stuff, dfhack scripts, guns, clothes, give it a look over at the OP.

@Bob69Joe Cool idea actually, were it not that I just added belts as a kind of 'pants', which serve to not make dwarves super cranky from their pants being destroyed through their armor... somehow. I'm giving that idea a go though; It shouldn't be too hard to add a belt that works similar to the already existing pouch.

I have couple of problems with this mod.
First of all: When I installed your mod and the Metallurgy one I cannot build artillery, It shows me I need Bombard to build a bombard while I already forged Bombard Barrel.
Secondly: When I installed your mod without the Metallurgy one I actually can build artillery but when I order my dwarfs to load and shot it nothing happens. They seem to load it and fire but no projectile is ever fired.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.44.12) - Revision 7a: Guns & Fashion!
Post by: Grimlocke on October 14, 2018, 09:02:59 am

Hmmm, thats puzzling because the metallurgy mod shouldn't have any overlap with the cannons at all.

I'll check up on this later at home.

Edit: Was the failure to fire with an enemy standing in about a 100 degree arc in front of the gun? The gunner should wait with firing until theres something to actually shoot .

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.44.12) - Revision 7a: Guns & Fashion!
Post by: 69_BlueSpeedMouse_69 on October 14, 2018, 09:31:43 am

Quote from: Grimlocke on October 14, 2018, 09:02:59 am

Hmmm, thats puzzling because the metallurgy mod shouldn't have any overlap with the cannons at all.

I'll check up on this later at home.

Edit: Was the failure to fire with an enemy standing in about a 1-- degree arc in front of the gun? The gunner should wait with firing until theres something to actually shoot .

I tried to testfire and also fire in an empty corridor, then I put my test dwarves in front of a cannon to see if they get hit and after that i tried shooting to bunch of crocodilles. In all of those tries no projectile was fired. I see that cannonballs and potash are hauled into cannon but are not fired. Also I noticed that DF hack sometimes returns A LOT of red errors. I'll try to repeat them and post a screenshot.


Edit: Here it is: https://i.imgur.com/w735qqd.jpg and it happened on a completly new fort.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.44.12) - Revision 7a: Guns & Fashion!
Post by: Grimlocke on October 14, 2018, 09:43:06 am

Ah, I may have forgotten to fix the test fire reaction.

I'd like to see the dfhack errors though, also they should have blasted the crocodiles.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.44.12) - Revision 7a: Guns & Fashion!
Post by: 69_BlueSpeedMouse_69 on October 14, 2018, 09:57:06 am

Quote from: Grimlocke on October 14, 2018, 09:43:06 am

Ah, I may have forgotten to fix the test fire reaction.

I'd like to see the dfhack errors though, also they should have blasted the crocodiles.

Recreated the testing and got this: https://i.imgur.com/a4xzvI2.jpg

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.44.12) - Revision 7a: Guns & Fashion!
Post by: Grimlocke on October 14, 2018, 10:40:45 am

Gah... Ok, not entirely positive why that's happening. Could you run "modtools/arty-mod -list" for me? I read over it and it might have somehow lost its properties which would make the projectile speed go all 'uuh, you can't make my speed a not number', which is what that message says there.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.44.12) - Revision 7a: Guns & Fashion!
Post by: 69_BlueSpeedMouse_69 on October 14, 2018, 10:59:59 am

Quote from: Grimlocke on October 14, 2018, 10:40:45 am

Gah... Ok, not entirely positive why that's happening. Could you run "modtools/arty-mod -list" for me? I read over it and it might have somehow lost its properties which would make the projectile speed go all 'uuh, you can't make my speed a not number', which is what that message says there.

Here you go: https://i.imgur.com/HmPkbuW.jpg

But there was another problem...new world, new cannon, new alligators and new error.
https://i.imgur.com/hSZrlm8.jpg

Another one: https://i.imgur.com/C1AgMNI.jpg

I tried to run this in DFHack
modtools/arty-mod -artyType ITEM_TOOL_BARREL_BOMBARD -loadTime 1000 -range 100 -shootForce 72000 -rotateTime 600
But it didnt help

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.44.12) - Revision 7a: Guns & Fashion!
Post by: Grimlocke on October 14, 2018, 11:17:11 am

Ok, neither of these things have any business happening. I'm going to subject this to a couple new round of troubleshooting once I have time, which should be in the next ~24 hours.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.44.12) - Revision 7a: Guns & Fashion!
Post by: Grimlocke on October 17, 2018, 11:22:29 am

Found the problem, apparently items only have weight if something tells to them to calculate weight. Else its just zero, so it ended up dividing by zero which caused the 'not an integer' error. The reason it didn't come up during testing is because I was checking the ammunition was loaded before firing, which forces the game to calculate weight to show it in the UI.

Thankfully dfhack has a handy function to force items to calculate weight.

I also found some issues with the targeting function, namely it trying to shoot through floor, it not trying to shoot through fortifications and it not always picking the closest target.

Those are fixed too, I also made the targeting a little less resource intensive by not having it iterate through every unit on the map, and sorting them by range before checking against other conditions. Also prevented fired ammo from occasionally remaining in the barrel, somehow, by now just deleting the item and spawning a copy. The moveToGround function is... uselessly unreliable.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.44.12) - Revision 7a: Guns & Fashion!
Post by: 69_BlueSpeedMouse_69 on October 17, 2018, 11:25:34 am

Quote from: Grimlocke on October 17, 2018, 11:22:29 am

Found the problem, apparently items only have weight if something tells to them to calculate weight. Else its just zero, so it ended up dividing by zero which caused the 'not an integer' error. The reason it didn't come up during testing is because I was checking the ammunition was loaded before firing, which forces the game to calculate weight to show it in the UI.

Thankfully dfhack has a handy function to force items to calculate weight.

I also found some issues with the targeting function, namely it trying to shoot through floor, it not trying to shoot through fortifications and it not always picking the closest target.

Those are fixed too, I also made the targeting a little less resource intensive by not having it iterate through every unit on the map, and sorting them by range before checking against other conditions. Also prevented fired ammo from occasionally remaining in the barrel, somehow, by now just deleting the item and spawning a copy. The moveToGround function is... uselessly unreliable.

Thank you ;) Great work done!

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.44.12) - Revision 7: Guns & Fashion
Post by: Grimlocke on October 17, 2018, 11:42:20 am

Gah. Forgot to uncomment the hostility check.

Uploaded another fixed version that doens't try and murder your own dwarves.

I should add: I havn't yet fixed the 'test fire' command, it was being kind of useless after I added firer tracking to the projectiles which prevents it from harming your dwarves, pet animals, neutral characters, etc.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.44.12) - Revision 7: Guns & Fashion
Post by: EuchreJack on October 19, 2018, 03:30:46 am

Quote from: Grimlocke on October 17, 2018, 11:42:20 am

Gah. Forgot to uncomment the hostility check.

Uploaded another fixed version that doens't try and murder your own dwarves.

I should add: I havn't yet fixed the 'test fire' command, it was being kind of useless after I added firer tracking to the projectiles which prevents it from harming your dwarves, pet animals, neutral characters, etc.

But, projectiles should harm your dwarves, pet animals, neutral characters, etc, if they're between the firer and the target.  Ammo of this era doesn't have Friend-or-Foe recognition.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.44.12) - Revision 7: Guns & Fashion
Post by: Betrix5068 on October 19, 2018, 08:33:29 pm

I really like this mod but it's really hard to use since other mods I consider essential, like adventurecraft for example, are incredibly conflict heavy. You also make the installation process unnecicarily confusing by having your files set up as they are. Formatting them to the standard PyLNP's mod loader uses would be a godsend.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.44.12) - Revision 7: Guns & Fashion
Post by: Grimlocke on October 20, 2018, 04:46:42 am

@Euchrejack: In theory yes, they should. But right now fortress mode combat is not really controllable, there's no way for the player to prevent his dwarves from charging out in front of the guns and getting shot to pieces. That's bound to get old sooner rather than later. You may have noticed the regular ranged weapons don't have friendly fire either.

Also the hostility check on projectiles is kind of hard to manipulate, it requires the projectile having no firer set, which trips up the ranged-mod script in all sorts of ways. Right now implementing friendly fire seems not quite worth the bother; friendly fire mechanics are only fun if there's a reasonable way to prevent it.

@Betrix5068: I've not used PyLNP myself, I'll give it a look at some point if its easier for folks to use.

Adventurecraft is... probably going to be a bit of a nightmare to make compatible. It does the thing where it gives custom materials to a whole range of creatures, many of them set in the creature file itself. Vanilla file changes are aren't marked or annotated. Not much I can do about this I'm afraid.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.44.12) - Revision 7: Guns & Fashion
Post by: EuchreJack on October 27, 2018, 12:54:20 am

Quote from: Grimlocke on October 20, 2018, 04:46:42 am

@Euchrejack: In theory yes, they should. But right now fortress mode combat is not really controllable, there's no way for the player to prevent his dwarves from charging out in front of the guns and getting shot to pieces. That's bound to get old sooner rather than later. You may have noticed the regular ranged weapons don't have friendly fire either.

Also the hostility check on projectiles is kind of hard to manipulate, it requires the projectile having no firer set, which trips up the ranged-mod script in all sorts of ways. Right now implementing friendly fire seems not quite worth the bother; friendly fire mechanics are only fun if there's a reasonable way to prevent it.

I thought it was probably something like that, but I couldn't resist commenting.  Thanks for the explanation.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.44.12) - Revision 7: Guns & Fashion
Post by: Betrix5068 on November 04, 2018, 06:32:40 pm

Figured I should mention that I ditched adventurecraft not long after your post since, like you said, its internals are an utter mess and the author seems to think making it an even greater mess is worth it so the thing is more idiot proof, which is stupid since DF has an idiotproofing mechanism hardcoded into it's very soul and smartproofing isn't something anyone asked for. I would mention that Sver's combat mod is incompatible though, and since his is A: well made, B: well annotated, C: inline with your own goals of realism and historical authenticity, and D: already borrowing code, a compatch would make plenty of sense.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.44.12) - Revision 7: Guns & Fashion
Post by: Sver on November 04, 2018, 07:13:59 pm

Not sure what you mean. A patch between my mod and Grimlocke's? They are pretty much two different takes on the same parts of the game, with some already being exactly the same, while others are mutually exclusive. What features do you think can be merged here?

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.44.12) - Revision 7: Guns & Fashion
Post by: Grimlocke on November 05, 2018, 01:45:20 pm

Mostly, what Sver said. Our two mods have very few features that don't overlap, aside from some items that would likely still be functionally redundant if added. The only thing I can see is Sver's war horses, which might actually already be compatible with my mod.

One compatch I'm planning to include though is one for Taffer's excellent Revised mod, which I'll be getting around once he has his new release out.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.44.12) - Revision 7: Guns & Fashion
Post by: sorrow on November 15, 2018, 06:55:06 pm

sorry but I keep getting a thing with dfhack that says it can't find grims.init

I added everything to my df raw folder, was it supposed to be the dfhack folder? I can't find anything called grims.init either


df hack keeps tellin me it can't find raw/scripts/grims.init

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.44.12) - Revision 7: Guns & Fashion
Post by: thefriendlyhacker on November 16, 2018, 04:02:21 am

Quote from: sorrow on November 15, 2018, 06:55:06 pm

sorry but I keep getting a thing with dfhack that says it can't find grims.init

I added everything to my df raw folder, was it supposed to be the dfhack folder? I can't find anything called grims.init either


df hack keeps tellin me it can't find raw/scripts/grims.init

Inside "1 - Arms and Armor", there are two folders - "scripts" and "objects".  Everything in "objects" gets added to your raw/objects folder.  Everything in "scripts" should be pasted into your hack/scripts folder (merge modtools with the existing modtools folder when prompted).    That will probably solve your problem.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.44.12) - Revision 7: Guns & Fashion
Post by: sorrow on November 16, 2018, 12:52:51 pm

thats weird there's no folders inside arms and armor, just the files that I assume are supposed to be in the objects folder


I'm using revision 6c if that helps

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.44.12) - Revision 7: Guns & Fashion
Post by: Grimlocke on November 22, 2018, 11:41:45 am

Yes, those are for the objects folder. I feel I need to rework the installation procedure a bit, your not the first to trip up on it.

Note that this most is not strictly compatible with revision at this point. You may be able to still use them both if you add my mods afterwards, but some features from Revision will end up being overwritten.

I have a compatibility patch planned for the next major release of Revision.

EDIT: Said Revision release is apparently out, huzzah!

Also, thanks to thefriendlyhacker for answering sorrow's question in such a timely manner.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.44.12) - Revision 7: Guns & Fashion
Post by: Burneddi on November 28, 2018, 08:08:13 am

Is there a guide or readme of some sort to get started with the metallurgy part?

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.44.12) - Revision 7: Guns & Fashion
Post by: Grimlocke on November 28, 2018, 10:01:36 am

I've added descriptions to the buildings and reactions ingame, which should make most of the processes obvious. I do plan on writing up a proper workflow scheme kind of thing once I have the whole thing reworked and upgraded with dfhack.

For now, the general workflow is as such:

-Smelting:
  At: Bloomery or Blast Furnace
  Smelt the ore with an charcoal, or coke if you have a blast furnace
  Product is a bloom or pig iron bars respectively

-Fining:
  At: Finery, Trip hammer or Vanilla Forge's finery section
  Process bloom and raw metal into usable metal with the 'hammering out bloom/bar'
  The trip hammer is fastest, both the trip hammer and finery run these reactions automatically.
  Product is iron bars

-Steel or patterned steel making:
  At: Finery or Vanilla Forge's finery section
  Make steel from iron bars and charcoal powder
  Will need to be re-hammered, also runs automatically

-Crucible steel:
  At: Crucible furnace
  Use iron, charcoal powder, glass powder and a crucible
  Again needs to be hammered out

-Other stuff:
  Charcoal and glass powder are produced at the quern, into a bag or a jug
  Crucibles are made at the kiln

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.44.12) - Revision 7: Guns & Fashion
Post by: Burneddi on November 28, 2018, 11:51:20 am

Quote from: Grimlocke on November 28, 2018, 10:01:36 am

I've added descriptions to the buildings and reactions ingame, which should make most of the processes obvious. I do plan on writing up a proper workflow scheme kind of thing once I have the whole thing reworked and upgraded with dfhack.

That should get me started. Cheers!

A bit of feedback: I think it's a little weird that iron is the only usable metal for tools and weapons. From a historical (and logical!) standpoint it would make quite a bit of sense to use bronze when steel isn't available, as it's quite comparable and in some ways superior to wrought iron, and saw lots of use historically beyond the bronze age. Right now the situation is pretty much "you can have any metal, as long as it's iron", heh.

EDIT: Oh yeah, while I'm here: I noticed that in material_template_default.txt, the [SOLID_DENSITY] under [MATERIAL_TEMPLATE:THREAD_PLANT_TEMPLATE] has been changed from 1520 to 150, but this change isn't mentioned in the comment on impact and shear value changes right below. If I understand the raws correctly, this makes cloth items less than 10% the mass they normally are. Is this just a slip of the scalpel?

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.44.12) - Revision 7: Guns & Fashion
Post by: thefriendlyhacker on November 28, 2018, 09:06:02 pm

Quote from: Burneddi on November 28, 2018, 11:51:20 am

...
A bit of feedback: I think it's a little weird that iron is the only usable metal for tools and weapons. From a historical (and logical!) standpoint it would make quite a bit of sense to use bronze when steel isn't available, as it's quite comparable and in some ways superior to wrought iron, and saw lots of use historically beyond the bronze age. Right now the situation is pretty much "you can have any metal, as long as it's iron", heh.
...

If I remember my metal history correctly, bronze was more or less a straight upgrade to iron as a weapon material.  Iron was only put into widespread use when the collapse of trade routes made sourcing both tin and copper simultaneously in sufficient quantities dubious at best.  The crappy material properties of iron compared to bronze was what drove metallurgy developments to reduce those shortcomings, and this eventually resulted in the discovery of steel production.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.44.12) - Revision 7: Guns & Fashion
Post by: Grimlocke on November 29, 2018, 11:33:00 am

The notion that bronze was always superior to 'iron' tends to be supposed on the basis of the properties of pure iron. No such thing existed in the middle ages. Iron was in all cases polluted with various slag inclusions and often did have some amount of carbon in it, either as leftovers from the smelting process or added in later through case hardening.

Medieval iron is more accurately called wrought iron, its been said to be roughly comparable to modern mild steel, but quality, carbon content and quite importantly also the degree of homogeneity make this a pretty wide estimate.

Bronze is also a bit of a tricky thing, since freshly cast bronze suited for armor and weapons is still fairly soft, but was always work-hardened with various levels of skill. Composition and consistency varied as well, so statements of bronze or iron being better than the other in general can be safely dismissed.

The reasons I eventually chose not to include it as a weapon/armor grade material are the following: DF doens't give me any way of setting the prevalence of a certain metal. Either you don't get bronze items, or bronze items out the wazoo. The later, I felt, gave the wrong feeling for the medieval era.
There is also the thing that bronze-working is a different craft than iron/steel working. The process is quite different, and bronze armor and weapons had some much more stringent requirements on the quality of the work and materials than say, a bronze or copper kettle.
Lastly, material in large part dictates what shapes of weapon and armor your going to make. Long, thin swords or complex plate armor would simply not work if made from bronze (this goes for things like iron estocs as well to a lesser degree). Steel and even wrought iron have a very useful elasticity (read: the ability to deform and spring back again) that bronze doesn't have. Springiness like that tends to be more important to making durable, lightweight weapons and armor than hardness.

Adding the appropriate tags back on bronze should be fairly trivial, and *might* not even require a new save. What I have not isn't perfect, I do want to make it a bit more reasonable once I get around to working on the metalworking mod again. What have planned should give me more control over what things can be produced with specific metals.

Edit: In response to the cloth density thing, that was added to make gambesons not weight a ton. Seems I missed it on my comment tour, good find and thanks for pointing that one out!

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.44.12) - Revision 7: Guns & Fashion
Post by: Dragonsploof on June 07, 2019, 06:43:15 pm

Anything new happening with this mod?

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.44.12) - Revision 7: Guns & Fashion
Post by: knainoa on August 01, 2019, 02:50:42 pm

How can I get this to work with the meph launcher? It keeps erasing the custom workshops from the meph pack.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.44.12) - Revision 7: Guns & Fashion
Post by: Grimlocke on August 21, 2019, 09:57:01 am

I return, and work continues on the industry mod script. I've gotten it to do basic stuff like modifying job length based on job name, building name or both and it should be fairly easy to extend to more exciting possibilities. Possibilities such as the incremental quality levels I describes a few ages back, morphing workshops into other workshops, having forges spew constant clouds of acrid smoke, etc. The possibilities are endless!

@knainoa: I'm honestly not at all familiar with Meph's launcher or what it does, but while this mod does contain custom workshops it doesn't override the default workshop raws. The scripts don't touch any of the files either, so if something is getting overwritten there then perhaps Meph or someone more familiar with his work can tell you more.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.44.12) - Revision 7: Guns & Fashion
Post by: Meph on August 24, 2019, 07:05:07 pm

The answer is probably this: Both mod contain entity files. It doesn't override workshops, but it overrides the dwarven entity that has the workshops enabled.

The solution: Don't override any files, and merge the entity file manually, keeping what you want to keep from both.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.44.12) - Revision 7: Guns & Fashion
Post by: Meph on September 07, 2019, 08:28:12 am

Am I missing something here?

Your reactions for the gunsmith are for the BUILDING:METALSMITH, while the gunsmith workshop is BUILDING:GUNSMITH.

Edit: The light ballista seems to be lacking a reaction to load it.

I also can't actually use any of the siege engines, I can build, load and fire them, but when it fires, nothing happens, except for dfhack stating:

Quote

...ss/data/save/region5/raw/scripts/modtools/ranged-mod.lua:307: attempt to compare number with nil
stack traceback:
        ...ss/data/save/region5/raw/scripts/modtools/ranged-mod.lua:307: in global 'initProps'
        ...ss/data/save/region5/raw/scripts/modtools/ranged-mod.lua:245: in function <...ss/data/save/region5/raw/scripts/modtools/ranged-mod.lua:229>
...ss/data/save/region5/raw/scripts/modtools/ranged-mod.lua:307: attempt to compare number with nil
stack traceback:
        ...ss/data/save/region5/raw/scripts/modtools/ranged-mod.lua:307: in global 'initProps'
        ...ss/data/save/region5/raw/scripts/modtools/ranged-mod.lua:245: in function <...ss/data/save/region5/raw/scripts/modtools/ranged-mod.lua:229>
[DFHack]#

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.44.12) - Revision 7: Guns & Fashion
Post by: cltail on October 09, 2020, 03:09:57 pm

I've been fiddling with some of the ranged-mod features, and I've found that the code is attempting to run every single projectile on the map though it's checks and causing hundreds of errors. Logs from cutting down a tree, thrown objects, even spit. I think this is happening because the code lacks a check to skip these special special projectiles. I haven't noticed any slowdown or any problems because of this, but it fills the DFhack console with these errors.

Code: [Select]

...12/data/save/region6/raw/scripts/modtools/ranged-mod.lua:237: attempt to index a number value (field 'subtype')
stack traceback:
        ...12/data/save/region6/raw/scripts/modtools/ranged-mod.lua:237: in function <...12/data/save/region6/raw/scripts/modtools/ranged-mod.lua:229>
...12/data/save/region6/raw/scripts/modtools/ranged-mod.lua:237: attempt to index a number value (field 'subtype')
stack traceback:
        ...12/data/save/region6/raw/scripts/modtools/ranged-mod.lua:237: in function <...12/data/save/region6/raw/scripts/modtools/ranged-mod.lua:229>
If you want to test it, go into the arena and grab some sand or a branch, throw 'em around and spit a couple times, the console will be filled with errors.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.44.12) - Revision 7: Guns & Fashion
Post by: Luckyowl on November 21, 2020, 02:04:32 am

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

# run from dfhack.init with: sc-script add SC_WORLD_LOADED raw/scripts/BGW.init

modtools/ranged-mod -ammoType ITEM_AMMO_BULLET -hitrateAdd 8 -velocity 0.8
modtools/ranged-mod -trailFlow ITEM_AMMO_BULLET -minmaxint 1 -flowType 9 -flowMat INORGANIC:MUZZLEFLASH -volume 500
modtools/ranged-mod -weaponType ITEM_WEAPON_RIFLE -deviation 2 -hitrateAdd 8 -baseRof 1
modtools/ranged-mod -materialType INORGANIC:IRON -breakChance 0.70 -deviation \-1

I need help trying to test out the ranged-mod and I'm getting this error.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

...eyond the Great War/hack/scripts/modtools/ranged-mod.lua:307: attempt to compare number with nil
stack traceback:
        ...eyond the Great War/hack/scripts/modtools/ranged-mod.lua:307: in global 'initProps'
        ...eyond the Great War/hack/scripts/modtools/ranged-mod.lua:245: in function <...eyond the Great War/hack/scripts/modtools/ranged-mod.lua:229>

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.44.12) - Revision 7: Guns & Fashion
Post by: Jesterdwarf on November 25, 2020, 03:31:10 am

Does this mod work with current version of DF or no? I mean, I see that it was last updated for 44.12, but on other hand it seemingly doesn't change anything that was also changed in 47.04...
EDIT: Oh yeah, it doesn't. Scripts are broken. Neato.

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.44.12) - Revision 7: Guns & Fashion
Post by: DaSwayza on December 05, 2021, 03:31:06 pm

Hey, has anyone had or fixed the issue with dwarves only wearing chausse on one leg when both are available? My "Command Infantry" are wearing both of their iron chausses, but my "Guard Infantry" are only wearing one of their crucible steel chausses per dwarf. Any ideas on this?

Title: Re: Grimlocke's History & Realism Mods (0.44.12) - Revision 7: Guns & Fashion
Post by: EuchreJack on December 18, 2021, 04:17:17 am

Since Grimlock has been gone since March, I'm going to shamelessly promote my mod here:
The Cult: Evil Kidnapper Fortress - Complete with Secret Weapon (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=178825.0)

Why is this relevant?
My mod has Plated Vests, Plated Mail, and The Gun.  Plated armors are Transitional Armor.