Bay 12 Games Forum

Dwarf Fortress => DF General Discussion => Topic started by: G-Flex on April 02, 2010, 04:34:58 am

Title: My comments from testing arena mode, on combat/damage (plus a few other things)
Post by: G-Flex on April 02, 2010, 04:34:58 am
First: Creatures have an extraordinarily difficult time hurting each other successfully. It seems that multiple successive blows aren't much/any more harmful than just a single blow. A high-skilled dwarf with adamantine equipment can consistently fracture a bronze colossus' skull, over and over again, yet the skull will never break, and bite attacks that simply tear a creature's muscle over and over don't do much either, it seems. I have an iron man stabbing an ettin with a pike right now, and is good enough at it to fracture the ettin's skull multiple times, and the ettin's wound page is almost entirely red/cyan, yet nothing is happening.

Successive attacks should matter more. After all, if you can tear skin, you can keep tearing skin until you get at what's underneath, and if you can fracture a skull, you can fracture it until there's not much left, and also get at what's underneath there (if there is anything). Wounds essentially seem to be limited to what an individual attack can cause, here, which is odd. A bronze colossus should not have to die from a single skull fracture, but it also shouldn't be able to accrue eighty of them and still be as affected as if he had accrued one or two.

Death from blood loss doesn't seem to happen a lot either, at least not from regular wounds. From magma, sure, but not from constant bite wounds and pikes-through-the-groin.

As far as creatures damaging each other is concerned... try putting, say, two hydra against each other. Basically nothing will come of it; they'll fight for ages and never kill each other.


For what it's worth, some bronze colossus body parts also don't drop as the body part, instead being called "bronze colossus's bronze" or something like that, as if it's just a bronze tissue chunk.


Also: Temperature transfer also seems messed up. You can dump lava right on top of an elephant and it can walk away wounded but alive. Creatures survive in magma for far too long. While they should die almost instantly in most cases, I've actually had creatures drown before getting burnt to death. Also, they seem to either die of melting or blood loss, which is strange, since they should mostly burn to death instead. Magma also seems to be unable to set corpses/remains/bodyparts on the ground on fire, except maybe after an extraordinarily long time. This is highly opposed to what should happen, which is severe burn wounds and almost instantaneous death. I put a Blizzard Man in the lava, for instance, and right now he's not even drowning (swimming I guess?), and is in a pool of his own grease (all his fat seems to have melted and drained out of him), full of yellow wounds (burnt and gushing a blank-named material, e.g. "Its fourth finger, right hand is gushing  ."), on fire, spewing smoke, and just sort of... there. Basically, it's the Blizzard Man Eternal Flame, never dying, always greasy.


Fire men seem particularly messed up, for what it's worth. They attempt to attack, but when they do, it "goes straight through" (or whatever the message), presumably because they can't attack with their nonsolid form. They also drop "flames" that don't go away, and weird stuff like that. In fact, I'm honestly not sure how combat against those is supposed to work; how do you kill something made of gas/plasma with a sword? At any rate, there are clearly some issues there.



I have no idea if any of this is due to any fundamental problems with the combat system. I sort of hope it's not, and that it's just due to some simple oversights. The new material/body/combat stuff is extremely neat and interesting, so I hope these issues aren't too difficult to hammer into workable condition. Captain also mentioned something about necks/throats not connecting to the bodies/heads properly, so maybe you'll want to ask him about that, although he's probably told you already.

There are some other more mundane bugs, like animals dropping prepared organ meats, bolts not doing much of anything to creatures, and creatures wrestling the teeth out of other creatures, but people have probably mentioned those a lot.
Title: Re: My comments from testing arena mode, on combat/damage
Post by: NoctisVampire on April 02, 2010, 04:49:25 am
Yes...have to agree...now adamantine bolts just dents unarmored elf skin...new version have rendered ranged weapon useless it seems. Combat system was totally overhauled in this version,and weapon balance will need to be redone soon...
As all of us knows...this version is highly experimental in nature, being too long from last releast and having too much feature and changes added in all at once...actually I'm expecting something lile this :P
Title: Re: My comments from testing arena mode, on combat/damage
Post by: G-Flex on April 02, 2010, 04:53:21 am
Small addendum:

For obvious reasons, gold shouldn't be the best of materials out of which to build a weapon: It's way too soft to hold an edge, and is too heavy to be used effectively.

However, I just did a couple arena tests: A bunch of dwarves with gold short swords vs. a bunch of dwarves with iron short swords.

The gold swords won, hands-down. In all tests, a significant number of the gold dwarves survived after the iron ones were dead. I'm not entirely sure why, but I thought it might be worth mentioning. These tests were done with unskilled dwarves who had no items except the weapons.


One problem seems to be that gold and iron have the same MAX_EDGE. I know you can sharpen gold probably fairly sharp, but it's so soft it won't hold it anyway. However, currently the game doesn't handle this occurring, so the only way to fix this would be to lower MAX_EDGE to give it softer edges in the first place.

The other problem seems to be that, realistically, dwarves should have much more trouble swinging something so heavy. Evidently, they don't.


The same problems probably occur with lead, for what it's worth (I don't see why not, it's another soft, heavy metal). I can't imagine what historical warfare would have been like if lead weapons were that good!


I'll be editing this post after I'm done testing with gold vs. iron hammers as well.


[EDIT]

Jesus Hell. I set up ~16 dwarves with gold warhammers against the same number of dwarves with iron warhammers.

Only two or three of the dudes with gold hammers died, at the point when all the iron hammerdudes were dead.

This doesn't bode well!

I imagine that this test had a more extreme outcome simply because the weight matters more when blunt weapons are used.

I believe I remember asking about this before, actually. I was kind of worried that this sort of thing would happen: That more weight would almost automatically equal a better blunt weapon.

Now, I could understand copper or something, but gold or lead is way, way too heavy to be used effectively in a situation like this.



[EDIT #2]

Wait, theoretically, shouldn't hardness of a material also affect how likely it is to cut something? I'm not sure how (or if) this is currently handled, but it's another reason gold would be a bad idea.



[EDIT #3]

After running more tests, I'm not sure how conclusive my original results were, because now a group of iron shortsword wielders killed the gold shortsword wielders in a landslide. I'm not sure why the results are so skewed. I'll have to do more tests.
Title: Re: My comments from testing arena mode, on combat/damage
Post by: NoctisVampire on April 02, 2010, 05:03:30 am
I believe I remember asking about this before, actually. I was kind of worried that this sort of thing would happen: That more weight would almost automatically equal a better blunt weapon.
I've got it...Just repeated the bolt experiment with steel bolts...and they works not much less effectively than previous version...when adamantine bolts doesn't do any damage beside "dent"ing skin:they almost weigh nothing!
Truly...some serious adjustment is needed...fast.
EDIT: bolts are not blunt weapons...but some rule applies it seems...*sigh*
Title: Re: My comments from testing arena mode, on combat/damage
Post by: Urist McCyrilin on April 02, 2010, 05:06:14 am
I simply editted Adamantium to be the heaviest metal. It packs a horrible punch now.
Title: Re: My comments from testing arena mode, on combat/damage
Post by: G-Flex on April 02, 2010, 05:38:47 am
It seems like "gold sword vs. iron sword" seems like a toss-up against unarmored dwarves, with maybe a little bit of advantage towards the gold. It's probably so damn easy to cut them up (no armor!) that any differences in material doesn't make a huge difference. Weight should still be detrimental to the gold swords, of course, but it's not. Well, it's PROBABLY not. When it comes to warhammers, gold is still the clear victor in every test.

For my next test, then, I'm putting everybody in copper armor: Chain leggings, breastplate, helm, gauntlets, and high boots. I'm also giving them competent armor user and novice swordsdwarf skills. The only difference, again, is that one group is equipped with golden shortswords and the other with iron.

Test results: There MIGHT be a slight advantage towards iron here, which would make sense - iron is harder than copper, and gold softer than copper. However, most of the damage in the fight came from dwarves hitting unarmored parts (the shots to armor mostly glanced away), which, as established, isn't very difficult to hurt someone by doing regardless of material.

Actually, on examination of combat logs, it does seem that iron has a tiny advantage: It tends to bruise through the chain leggings more than gold does. I want to say that this is presumably because it penetrates copper better, but if it's just bruising, it's not really penetrating, so I don't know what's going on here. What I do know is that the gold swords get deflected by the copper leggings, whereas the iron swords bruise the muscle underneath. Both are deflected always by plate elements of the suit, and by the helm, even if I give the dwarves better swordsdwarf skill. I'm not sure what difference this really makes, though - in the tests, not much.


Re: Adamantine bolts:
To be honest, adamantine bolts probably shouldn't be powerful at all. A missile needs weight behind it in order to penetrate. Obviously you don't want it to be as heavy as possible, but, well, there's a reason bullets have lead in them. An adamantine bolt wouldn't fly very straight, suffering too much air resistance, and wouldn't be able to carry enough momentum to penetrate. This problem is less true for adamantine swords, because with a sword, you provide follow-through, constantly putting force behind it, so it matters a bit less that the item itself is light.



Oh, another thing: It seems like gem/ores are a lot more common now?

I definitely understand why, although personally I'd rather see fewer but more major ore deposits rather than all kinds of normal-sized ones running all over the place. I'm not a geologist, though, and I haven't done enough extensive digging to see how weird it is.
Title: Re: My comments from testing arena mode, on combat/damage (plus a few other thin
Post by: Doomshifter on April 02, 2010, 06:35:10 am
I ran some tests with an Iron Man, lugging about a Lead Maul ( I entered a contest in the community games thing, I wanted to see how well I might do ;3 ) against a variety of creatures.

It killed the other iron man instantly, took a few swings to take down a human, utterly crushed a gnome but got his limbs ripped off by an ogre.

Did I mention the Iron Man won that last fight? He kept 'pushing' the ogre till he was a bloody, bruised mess while the ogre was overexerted from trying to tear his body in two.

Iron, 1, Ogre strength, 0.
Title: Re: My comments from testing arena mode, on combat/damage (plus a few other things)
Post by: Max White on April 02, 2010, 06:37:07 am
Demon bait is only good for armor now, SHADE is the new boom stick.
Title: Re: My comments from testing arena mode, on combat/damage (plus a few other thin
Post by: Doomshifter on April 02, 2010, 06:39:49 am
Demon bait is only good for armor now, SHADE is the new boom stick.
Shade?
Title: Re: My comments from testing arena mode, on combat/damage (plus a few other things)
Post by: G-Flex on April 02, 2010, 06:41:03 am
It's spoiler material. It's also almost ten times as heavy as platinum, so I can't imagine it actually being good for anything.
Title: Re: My comments from testing arena mode, on combat/damage (plus a few other things)
Post by: Max White on April 02, 2010, 06:41:35 am
Demon bait is only good for armor now, SHADE is the new boom stick.
Shade?

Most oftern found under trees.
Title: Re: My comments from testing arena mode, on combat/damage (plus a few other things)
Post by: G-Flex on April 02, 2010, 06:44:48 am
Oops. It's actually "slade".
Title: Re: My comments from testing arena mode, on combat/damage (plus a few other things)
Post by: Max White on April 02, 2010, 06:48:11 am
We couldn't hide that as a spoiler or some witty innuendo now, could we.
Title: Re: My comments from testing arena mode, on combat/damage (plus a few other things)
Post by: Lordinquisitor on April 02, 2010, 06:50:09 am
Yeah, it`s incredible hard to kill things now. Once, in adventure mode, my sword managed to get stuck in the throat of my enemy- After twisting it 3 times around in his throat i managed to free my sword.

We fought for another ~80 turns.

Title: Re: My comments from testing arena mode, on combat/damage (plus a few other things)
Post by: JohnLukeG on April 02, 2010, 06:56:58 am
Like I said in another thread, my wrestler in fortress mode achieved legendary status from beating an unconscious gazelle, and eventually died of thirst before it could be killed. 
Title: Re: My comments from testing arena mode, on combat/damage (plus a few other things)
Post by: Huggz on April 02, 2010, 06:57:44 am
Combat IS kinda stupid. I pitted a fully armed, fully skilled bronze colossus (Full adamantine with Iron warhammer) against a naked, unskilled one and 10 minutes later the unskilled one had EVERY limb red and a couple had been removed but he was still alive...

Also I gave a bunch of goblins adamantine bows and arrows intending to kill some elves for the lulz, spawned 20 elves but I forgot to remove the skills (they were naked though) and the elves got ALL THE WAY TO THE GOBLINS who by that time had fired around 400 arrowsat the elves, AND KILLED THEM ALL!

I am going to mod in 'Dense Adamantine', which can be made from 3 adamantine wafers, so that weapons can be made from adamantine...
Title: Re: My comments from testing arena mode, on combat/damage (plus a few other things)
Post by: Max White on April 02, 2010, 06:59:12 am
My horse managed to rip a few pieces off a demon before it had any injures worse then bruises. I'm thinking maybe spears will be useful for the quick kills once the elves targets have been knocked out.
Title: Re: My comments from testing arena mode, on combat/damage (plus a few other things)
Post by: G-Flex on April 02, 2010, 06:59:29 am
Like I said in another thread, my wrestler in fortress mode achieved legendary status from beating an unconscious gazelle, and eventually died of thirst before it could be killed. 
What were you fighting?

I also noticed that armor seems way too damn good.

I just had an iron man with maxed skills fight those copper-clad dwarves. He was using a steel maul. The dwarves had copper armor and gold swords. The dwarves won. Turns out their copper armor was actually preventing any serious damage from being done.

Combat IS kinda stupid. I pitted a fully armed, fully skilled bronze colossus (Full adamantine with Iron warhammer) against a naked, unskilled one and 10 minutes later the unskilled one had EVERY limb red and a couple had been removed but he was still alive...

Yep. Same stuff I described. It's pretty bad sometimes.

Quote
Also I gave a bunch of goblins adamantine bows and arrows intending to kill some elves for the lulz, spawned 20 elves but I forgot to remove the skills (they were naked though) and the elves got ALL THE WAY TO THE GOBLINS who by that time had fired around 400 arrowsat the elves, AND KILLED THEM ALL!

I am going to mod in 'Dense Adamantine', which can be made from 3 adamantine wafers, so that weapons can be made from adamantine...

This is perfectly normal, though. Just don't use adamantine for arrows.

Adamantine still should make excellent bladed/piercing weapons and armor, just not blunt weapons or projectiles.


My horse managed to rip a few pieces off a demon before it had any injures worse then bruises. I'm thinking maybe spears will be useful for the quick kills once the elves targets have been knocked out.

One of my examples I posted above involved an ettin getting constantly stabbed very successfully with a pike, including massive skull fractures. It didn't do any good no matter how many hits landed or how deep they seemed to go.
Title: Re: My comments from testing arena mode, on combat/damage (plus a few other things)
Post by: Max White on April 02, 2010, 07:00:49 am
I am going to mod in 'Dense Adamantine', which can be made from 3 adamantine wafers, so that weapons can be made from adamantine...

Don't be silly, you don't need to mod anything, you just need some shade!
Title: Re: My comments from testing arena mode, on combat/damage (plus a few other things)
Post by: Huggz on April 02, 2010, 07:26:06 am
I thought it was actually shale? And isnt shale just a rock? Or is that the point?
Title: Re: My comments from testing arena mode, on combat/damage (plus a few other things)
Post by: G-Flex on April 02, 2010, 07:29:28 am
It's not "shade" and it's not shale either. It's slade. And it's some kind of ridiculously heavy spoiler-related material.
Title: Re: My comments from testing arena mode, on combat/damage (plus a few other things)
Post by: nenjin on April 02, 2010, 07:52:22 am
Guys...

The Bronze Colossus is MEANT to be nigh on indestructible now.

I had five or so dwarves with slade axes and hammers wail on one for 30 turns or so. The best they managed was to cut its feet and hands off.

They can ONLY be killed by melting, as far as anyone can tell.

Using monsters with no skin, muscles, fat, organs and no ability to sense pain is NOT a valid test to make statements about entire combat system.


Title: Re: My comments from testing arena mode, on combat/damage (plus a few other things)
Post by: G-Flex on April 02, 2010, 07:55:08 am
You were missing the point.

The point is that the guy fighting the bronze colossus could easily severely fracture, say, the head, but could not destroy it.

This is the exact same problem that I had pointed out in other examples, and that other people had too: That cumulative damage simply doesn't work as it should.

I don't expect fracturing a colossus's skull to kill it, but if you can give it a severe skull fracture seven thousand times on end, how can you not destroy the skull? It doesn't make any sense to say that you can split something open repeatedly but not destroy it eventually.

So yes, it is a valid test, depending on what you want to test. Obviously it's not good for testing other things. But I did other tests for those things, and so did other people.
Title: Re: My comments from testing arena mode, on combat/damage (plus a few other things)
Post by: PsyberianHusky on April 02, 2010, 08:06:12 am
It was kinnda silly before, the system just needs some tweaks, I think most of it can be done with the Raws
Title: Re: My comments from testing arena mode, on combat/damage (plus a few other things)
Post by: G-Flex on April 02, 2010, 08:10:20 am
I don't believe it can. I have no idea what's up with blizzard men, and lava acting funny with regards to creatures is probably not something you can fix through raw editing. The other combat problems seem more to do with the way the system works than the creature/material definitions.
Title: Re: My comments from testing arena mode, on combat/damage (plus a few other things)
Post by: Jehdin on April 02, 2010, 08:12:10 am
Yeah, it`s incredible hard to kill things now. Once, in adventure mode, my sword managed to get stuck in the throat of my enemy- After twisting it 3 times around in his throat i managed to free my sword.

We fought for another ~80 turns.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Previously, on Dwarf Fortress Z...
Title: Re: My comments from testing arena mode, on combat/damage (plus a few other things)
Post by: tigrex on April 02, 2010, 08:50:52 am
I have to agree with the OP.  In adventure mode combat I regularly "shatter" bones, only for them to remain functional.  ie An ettin with a shattered lower leg bone has no problem standing and fighting.  Strangely enough, destroying tendons has more effect in dropping enemies than bones do!

Even the term "shattered" is misleading.  I would imagine that a shattered bone would be totally pulverised, in several pieces, incapable of any action.  The way the game interprets it, it sounds more like a hairline fracture to me.  And oddly enough, a shattered bone can be hit and shattered again, with no indication that it worse off than before.  This is mostly evident when using a hammer on a creature: since the hammer can really only kill by smashing in the head in this version, it can be comical to shatter the skull three or four times before it randomly sends a piece of skull through the brain, killing off the enemy.

As it is, creatures routinely shrug off attacks that should kill them.  I have, for example, torn a naked mole dog's heart with the aid of a spear.  It just keeps attacking, instead of hosing me down with every drop of blood in its chest and keeling over.  Lungs will have some effect, eventually, but not in any timely fashion.  Hacking muscle, fat, skin is a waste of time.  Blood loss doesn't seem to affect the enemy much.  A thrust to the neck that tears out the throat only resulted in oozing blood.  Creatures are almost constantly in extreme pain, but it seems irrelevant since they never pass out from it.   Hitting the guts will make an enemy vomit butdoes  not seem to hasten their demise overly.   If a fight goes on long enough, a creature may pass out due to exhaustion.  Damaging the brain is remarkably effective: even a bruise to the brain is sufficient to kill a dragon.

Overall, I find swords the best weapon to use thus far.  While I've yet to set up a good decapitation, they are surprisingly effective at chopping off limbs (which isn't as devastating as you'd assume) and the entire lower body (which is instant death.).

The damage done to adventurers is sketchy, too.  So far, after fighting werewolves, dragons, ettins, wolves, naked mole dogs and others, the only creature that could inflict any damage at all was a bronze colossus, which, may I say, was very effective at doing so.  Every other creature could not inflict even a scratch to my adventurers. 

I hope that my observations can be of help to those intending to evaluate or adjust the system.
Title: Re: My comments from testing arena mode, on combat/damage (plus a few other things)
Post by: G-Flex on April 02, 2010, 08:54:14 am
The reason swords are so great is probably because of severs. When cumulative strikes don't do much, you need severely debilitating individuals blows. After all, when you can't bludgeon someone to death, you gotta do something.
Title: Re: My comments from testing arena mode, on combat/damage (plus a few other things)
Post by: nenjin on April 02, 2010, 09:04:50 am
Quote
The point is that the guy fighting the bronze colossus could easily severely fracture, say, the head, but could not destroy it.

That's probably just Toady's way of saying "Sorry, you can't." Most other creatures feel pain, so even if you shatter them to hell and back and it doesn't outright kill them, a dozen other things will, eventually.

The BC is a special exception now because it's effectively immune to most standard ways of dying. Including multiple shatterings/fractures. If it had nerves, there would be something beyond bone shattering. Since there isn't, and you can't decap anything beyond limbs on a BC.....all you get is shatters.
Title: Re: My comments from testing arena mode, on combat/damage (plus a few other thin
Post by: Folly on April 02, 2010, 09:20:46 am
Have you taken dwarf descriptions into account? I've noticed some have descriptions like "highly agile" "extremely muscular" and "gets tired quickly". Perhaps these randomized descriptors could account for why Team Iron wins one round, and Team Gold wins another with the same equipment?

Also, make sure you bring the right weapon for the job. I watched a dwarf with a battle axe hack away at a giant for an hour, never doing more than bruising the fat. Then I sent in a spear-dwarf, who quickly pierced his guts and let him bleed out.
I similarly watched two sword-dwarves in heavy armor slap eachother around harmlessly for a while; then I threw a mace-dwarf into the mix and fairly soon he had crushed the lungs of one, causing him to suffocate, and bashed in the skull of the other.
Title: Re: My comments from testing arena mode, on combat/damage (plus a few other things)
Post by: MaDeR Levap on April 02, 2010, 12:04:40 pm
Seems like every enemy in game turns into some weak kind of zombie. Except BC, these monsters seem to be almost immortal.

Quote
The point is that the guy fighting the bronze colossus could easily severely fracture, say, the head, but could not destroy it.
That's probably just Toady's way of saying "Sorry, you can't."
Och, really? How much you would bet on "Toady will NOT fix it"?
Title: Re: My comments from testing arena mode, on combat/damage (plus a few other things)
Post by: Fieari on April 02, 2010, 12:31:02 pm
There's a tag on the bronze colossus that you guys may find interesting...

[NO_THOUGHT_CENTER_FOR_MOVEMENT]

This does, in fact mean that it cannot be killed except by destroying each and every piece entirely, the easiest method of which is to melt it.
Title: Re: My comments from testing arena mode, on combat/damage (plus a few other things)
Post by: Greiger on April 02, 2010, 02:09:27 pm
Swords actually do seem to be quite powerful in this version, in arena mode I'm seeing things with hammers, crossbows and spears struggle do do any mortal damage to anything.

But in adventure mode with my adventurer using his trademark two handed sword multigrasp, things die in droves.  Anything unarmored loses parts almost every swing, including heads and entire lower bodies. Making anything organic cake.

I wondered around in the underground for quite some time last adventurer and nothing could so much as bruise my adventurer through his iron armor.  Yet with his iron two handed sword stuff was barely lasting 2 turns against him.  The only (unbugged) thing that lasted a reasonable amount of time was a GCS.  And that's just because I took out a few limbs before I finally lopped off the thing's abdomen.

I imagine it's because the slash attack for the two handed sword has such a big contact area that instead of just slashing through flesh like every other weapon it just lops the part off because the damage area is bigger than the part is.  I imagine a large axe would be just as effective.

EDIT: I fought ettins using it as well, and didn't have much trouble killing them with stabs.  The two handed sword randomly does a weaker stab attack, and while a stab that basically destroyed a head was ineffective.  Another stab with the same effect to the other head after, kills it off quite nicely.
Title: Re: My comments from testing arena mode, on combat/damage (plus a few other thin
Post by: Untelligent on April 02, 2010, 02:16:52 pm
There's a tag on the bronze colossus that you guys may find interesting...

[NO_THOUGHT_CENTER_FOR_MOVEMENT]

This does, in fact mean that it cannot be killed except by destroying each and every piece entirely, the easiest method of which is to melt it.


It means that without the tag and without a brain it will fall over.
Title: Re: My comments from testing arena mode, on combat/damage (plus a few other thin
Post by: G-Flex on April 02, 2010, 03:08:34 pm
Have you taken dwarf descriptions into account? I've noticed some have descriptions like "highly agile" "extremely muscular" and "gets tired quickly". Perhaps these randomized descriptors could account for why Team Iron wins one round, and Team Gold wins another with the same equipment?

The attributes themselves don't seem to very in the arena creatures, although things like broadness and fatness do. I used enough dwarves to account for this, though.

Quote
Also, make sure you bring the right weapon for the job. I watched a dwarf with a battle axe hack away at a giant for an hour, never doing more than bruising the fat. Then I sent in a spear-dwarf, who quickly pierced his guts and let him bleed out.

Yeah, I always made sure that damage was actually being done, trust me.


That's probably just Toady's way of saying "Sorry, you can't." Most other creatures feel pain, so even if you shatter them to hell and back and it doesn't outright kill them, a dozen other things will, eventually.

The BC is a special exception now because it's effectively immune to most standard ways of dying. Including multiple shatterings/fractures. If it had nerves, there would be something beyond bone shattering. Since there isn't, and you can't decap anything beyond limbs on a BC.....all you get is shatters.

You're missing the point. The general principle applies to other creatures as well in ways I've pointed out already.

And yes, I'm aware that it's intentional that the only way you can destroy a bronze colossus is by completely destroying the upper/lower body or head. That's fine. However, being able to heavily fracture parts means you should be able to destroy those parts, period. I had at least a dozen dwarves, all capable of doing this, fighting the colossus at once to no avail.

So yeah, even with that exception in mind, things are still messed up. An ettin who's had pretty much every part of him skewered and fractured by a pike, with every organ compromised, still lives. The facts remain that cumulative damage doesn't do what it should, that bleeding/organ-failure effects aren't as profound as they should be in at least some cases, and that there are some general balance issues that need addressing, not considering the weird magma/gold-weapon issues.


Regarding some stuff other people have been saying: It seems that armor is pretty ridiculously tough in this version, whereas a lot of creatures' attacks are ridiculously weak. From what I've been hearing, a set of bronze armor can even prevent a dragon from doing much to you.
Title: Re: My comments from testing arena mode, on combat/damage (plus a few other things)
Post by: JohnLukeG on April 02, 2010, 03:16:51 pm
Like I said in another thread, my wrestler in fortress mode achieved legendary status from beating an unconscious gazelle, and eventually died of thirst before it could be killed. 
What were you fighting?

It was a gazelle.

(http://static.howstuffworks.com/gif/willow/gazelle-info0.gif)

I find it silly that a dwarf could attack one for so long that he reaches legendary status then dies of thirst before killing it.
Title: Re: My comments from testing arena mode, on combat/damage (plus a few other things)
Post by: G-Flex on April 02, 2010, 03:20:35 pm
I think that's another issue with cumulative damage, at least partially.

Obviously, punches that just bruise fat/muscle shouldn't do much, but eight hundred of them in a row probably should.

Of course, by the time you're Legendary, you're probably breaking bones... but again, breaking a bone doesn't do as much as it should right now, and even if it did, each one probably wouldn't be a death sentence, and by the trends I'm seeing, that means that none of them would even combined.


[UPDATE]

I know this is a different issue that's probably been around for a while, but wrestlers don't seem to choose what moves they perform very well. They usually just keep punching, which does just about nothing at the moment, and sometimes they'll get a hold on an opponent's body parts but then immediately release it. They hardly do anything else. Also, I have about four entire pages of a combat log of a dwarf gouging out a carp's eyes in arena mode. He just. Won't. Stop. Gouging. Not that the carp is dying, of course... if it does, it'll be a while until it happens. Wait, no. Bled to death, after several dozen successful eye-gougings.

Oh, and swimming dwarves are surprisingly good at treading water even while unconscious.
Title: Re: My comments from testing arena mode, on combat/damage (plus a few other things)
Post by: Nihilist on April 02, 2010, 06:04:00 pm
I was able to get a BC to kill another BC with a Slade Two-handed Sword... Lopped its head right off.
Also from taking control of various creatures I've noticed that they do vary in stats. Easiest way to confirmed is spawn a few dwarves and control each one... and then read their stat screen.
Title: Re: My comments from testing arena mode, on combat/damage (plus a few other things)
Post by: Areyar on April 02, 2010, 06:07:32 pm
@ your issue with iron vs gold hammermen: might be because of weight being the major quality of the material that is considered in blunt weapons, as opposed to edge-holding/hardness for swords.

also @ wrestlers messing about: That is how I fight unarmed: like a dabbler. :)
Title: Re: My comments from testing arena mode, on combat/damage (plus a few other things)
Post by: G-Flex on April 02, 2010, 07:13:30 pm
I was able to get a BC to kill another BC with a Slade Two-handed Sword... Lopped its head right off.
Also from taking control of various creatures I've noticed that they do vary in stats. Easiest way to confirmed is spawn a few dwarves and control each one... and then read their stat screen.

The description changes when you assume control? Interesting, because if so, that means it doesn't display the stats for creatures that aren't yours, or similar.


@ your issue with iron vs gold hammermen: might be because of weight being the major quality of the material that is considered in blunt weapons, as opposed to edge-holding/hardness for swords.

Yeah, and I'm not convinced that iron swords are sharper anyway, for instance, since metals in general seem to have the same MAX_EDGE value, if that means what I think it does.

Quote
also @ wrestlers messing about: That is how I fight unarmed: like a dabbler. :)

Problem is, they do that regardless of skill. A wrestler with high wrestling skill and no striking skill will still spend way too much time punching. I want to say this isn't an issue with this particular release, though.
Title: Re: My comments from testing arena mode, on combat/damage (plus a few other things)
Post by: John Hopoate on April 02, 2010, 07:36:48 pm
I was able to get a BC to kill another BC with a Slade Two-handed Sword... Lopped its head right off.

I'd like to confirm the same thing happened to me

It's still ridiculously tough to kill
Title: Re: My comments from testing arena mode, on combat/damage (plus a few other things)
Post by: uran77 on April 02, 2010, 08:26:12 pm
It takes like 15 turns to strangle animals now
Title: Re: My comments from testing arena mode, on combat/damage (plus a few other things)
Post by: nenjin on April 02, 2010, 08:26:30 pm
I was able to get a BC to kill another BC with a Slade Two-handed Sword... Lopped its head right off.

I'd like to confirm the same thing happened to me

It's still ridiculously tough to kill

There must be some strength quotient going on then. Because I had multiple guys capable of severing, using the best weapons they had, and the best they could manage were fractures and shatters.

It would stand to reason, since a handless "push" by a BC is enough to shatter bone through heavy armor. Maybe we just don't get dwarves in arena mode with high enough stats to actually decap and kill BCs. (Which would make sense. You can't select legendary-anything in arena traits...so the pre-gen traits are probably capped too.)
Title: Re: My comments from testing arena mode, on combat/damage (plus a few other things)
Post by: G-Flex on April 02, 2010, 09:43:11 pm
If you can shatter an object, you can destroy an object. This should go for a BC's head or torso as much as any object in the real world.
Title: Re: My comments from testing arena mode, on combat/damage (plus a few other things)
Post by: alphawolf29 on April 02, 2010, 10:26:38 pm
I want the old combat system back, but with all the new weapons with just damage %s and the new underground features.

Overall this combat system is just severely disappointing and misses out on some key (simple) facts.

e.g

Yes, lead is much heavier than steel, but you cant swing it NEARLY as quickly.
Title: Re: My comments from testing arena mode, on combat/damage (plus a few other things)
Post by: G-Flex on April 02, 2010, 10:32:01 pm
I feel like it's probably just the fault of minor implementation problems, though. There's no reason the system itself needs to be thrown out, just... some things need to be handled better.

Keep in mind this release is just plain buggy, and we were told it would be. No reason to throw the baby out with the bathwater.
Title: Re: My comments from testing arena mode, on combat/damage (plus a few other things)
Post by: alphawolf29 on April 02, 2010, 10:45:23 pm
Yea, im just sad it's basically unplayable with the amount of bugs.

theres buggy, and then theres unplayable. The combat system in my mind makes it totally unplayable.
Title: Re: My comments from testing arena mode, on combat/damage (plus a few other things)
Post by: Ampoliros on April 02, 2010, 10:50:57 pm
Err, so, crazy question - how exactly does DF determine when you've killed a creature of living bronze (or other thought-less and blood-less creature...zombies, skeletons, etc). You hack its torso or similar into enough pieces and it's presumed dead?
Title: Re: My comments from testing arena mode, on combat/damage (plus a few other things)
Post by: Patarak on April 02, 2010, 10:53:59 pm
So is this going to go down in history as the whackiest release ever?
Title: Re: My comments from testing arena mode, on combat/damage (plus a few other things)
Post by: G-Flex on April 02, 2010, 11:00:41 pm
Err, so, crazy question - how exactly does DF determine when you've killed a creature of living bronze (or other thought-less and blood-less creature...zombies, skeletons, etc). You hack its torso or similar into enough pieces and it's presumed dead?

I think you have to lop off one of the following: The upper body, lower body, or head.

That's at least my current guess.

The problem is, as I've stated a few times, you have to basically be able to do it in one blow, because repeatedly shattering/fracturing a bodypart it doesn't do anything to actually destroy it.


Yea, im just sad it's basically unplayable with the amount of bugs.

theres buggy, and then theres unplayable. The combat system in my mind makes it totally unplayable.

Haha, trust me, I hear you. I'm just saying, I'm sure it can be fixed.
Title: Re: My comments from testing arena mode, on combat/damage (plus a few other things)
Post by: jseah on April 02, 2010, 11:52:44 pm
^I think lopping off the head, upper body or lower body being required to one-hit-kill is about correct. 
Obviously, the thing that is happening is that most things aren't strong enough/big enough to be able to do that to a bronze colossus.  That thing is huge, it's one thing to chop off the arm of a giant bronze statue and completely different ballgame to cleave it in half. 

That said, fractures should help.  Perhaps shattered/fractured layers could be made easier to penetrate, requiring less skill/stats to do it.  Eventually, with enough fractures, even the groundhog (remember the super teeth?  XD) should be able to bite a bronze colossus in half (if it can reach up there, say due to the BC not having legs, it should be allowed to), although by that point you'ld be looking at something about to fall apart at any touch anyway. 

EDIT: another thing I don't get is why the BC should be allowed to do damage, or even move, when it doesn't have limbs.  WTF?
Title: Re: My comments from testing arena mode, on combat/damage (plus a few other things)
Post by: Chagen46 on April 03, 2010, 12:40:36 am
While I agree with pretty much everything said in this thread, i do have to say that the whole "melting in magma" thing is morbidly hilarious.

Seriously, reading the descriptions of creatures where appreantly every single part of their body is melting brings some hilarious and twisted images to my mind
Title: Re: My comments from testing arena mode, on combat/damage (plus a few other things)
Post by: woose1 on April 03, 2010, 12:57:50 am
Why are you guys so pissed that the only conceivable way to kill BC's is with magma?

I thought that was what we all did?  :o
Title: Re: My comments from testing arena mode, on combat/damage (plus a few other things)
Post by: SmileyMan on April 03, 2010, 01:00:23 am
Yes, lead is much heavier than steel, but you cant swing it NEARLY as quickly.
From a very simplistic point of view, a more massive object, travelling over the same distance, with the same force constantly applied, will take a longer time (proportional to the square root of the mass) to reach the target, but will have higher momentum (also proportional to the root mass) when it gets there, and require a greater impulse to stop.

So a good combat system would include some sort of factor for mitigating the blow (because of the reaction time), but if the blow connects, the heavier object should hurt more.

As a reduction ad absurdum example, if you're beating an unconscious opponent, you want a lead club over a foam rubber one.

[NB: for constant force and distance, momentum = sqrt(mass x force x distance); time = 2 x sqrt(mass x distance) / force ]
Title: Re: My comments from testing arena mode, on combat/damage (plus a few other things)
Post by: G-Flex on April 03, 2010, 01:15:05 am
EDIT: another thing I don't get is why the BC should be allowed to do damage, or even move, when it doesn't have limbs.  WTF?

It just does the "push" move over and over. I imagine it shifting its weight around and just whamming itself into you, or ramming you with its head or something. This manages to do a surprising amount of damage: He did it to one of my dwarves and managed to shove the dwarf's upper arm bone through his shoulder (breaking the shoulder).


From a very simplistic point of view, a more massive object, travelling over the same distance, with the same force constantly applied, will take a longer time (proportional to the square root of the mass) to reach the target, but will have higher momentum (also proportional to the root mass) when it gets there, and require a greater impulse to stop.

So a good combat system would include some sort of factor for mitigating the blow (because of the reaction time), but if the blow connects, the heavier object should hurt more.

As a reduction ad absurdum example, if you're beating an unconscious opponent, you want a lead club over a foam rubber one.

This is assuming you'll be able to apply the same force over that distance, and you almost certainly won't be able to because you'll be spending most of your effort simply trying to hold the thing up. If it were on one of those frictionless air-carts things from the local school science lab and you're just pushing it, sure, but you're working against gravity (and the hammer's inertia in some cases) very much, and your arm muscles are going to be exhausted just from wielding it.

Really, you want something dense enough to cause significant damage (and hard enough if it needs to penetrate anything directly), but light enough that you can still handle it with grace and effectiveness. That's why most historical warhammers were made out of, say, steel, but with a relatively small head.

Hell, historically, swords are actually quite lighter than people tend to think. Even one of those gigantic two-handers generally never weighed more than... what was it, 7-8 pounds? And that's for a very large one.
Title: Re: My comments from testing arena mode, on combat/damage (plus a few other things)
Post by: nenjin on April 03, 2010, 01:29:09 am
Quote
Why are you guys so pissed that the only conceivable way to kill BC's is with magma?

Agreed. But it's unclear now how the BC is actually supposed to behave, since it can be decapitated and killed by another BC.

Either way, part of the objection is a semantic one. If I'm whacking on a dude, and he's not taking any damage from it, don't print "hits lower torso, shattering it." It should say "hits lower torso, but the attack was ineffective."

That at least is telling us something useful during combat. I'm all FOR creatures with non-standard ways of dying...as long as the game does it's part by letting me know I'm wasting my time.
Title: Re: My comments from testing arena mode, on combat/damage (plus a few other things)
Post by: BloodBeard on April 03, 2010, 01:30:43 am
I don't want to break down all the hard work Toady put into changing the combat mechanics, but yeah it needs alot of tweaking. Untill then, make friends with creative (aka dwarfy) means of destroying your enemies!
Title: Re: My comments from testing arena mode, on combat/damage (plus a few other things)
Post by: Halconnen on April 03, 2010, 01:32:46 am
The way one properly swings a heavy hammer is basically to lift it overhead, use the shoulders as a point of rotiation, and let gravity aid you when you swing it down. And I can easily believe that a lead hammer is much more devastating due to the sheer impulse even if the material is relatively soft and the impact thus gets slightly cushioned.

This is that this should require a lot of strength and exert you very quickly, and currently, while I can't seem to properly nail down wether faster exertion happens, there doesn't seem to be a problem with wielding heavy stuff with low strength, which is probably one of the main issues, here. A weak dwarf shouldn't be able to do it, a legendary maybe should be able to do this effectively?
Title: Re: My comments from testing arena mode, on combat/damage (plus a few other things)
Post by: G-Flex on April 03, 2010, 01:37:28 am
The way one properly swings a heavy hammer is basically to lift it overhead, use the shoulders as a point of rotiation, and let gravity aid you when you swing it down. And I can easily believe that a lead hammer is much more devastating due to the sheer impulse even if the material is relatively soft and the impact thus gets slightly cushioned.

Then they would have made them out of lead in the medieval period. Lead was a whole lot cheaper than steel.

Most warhammers simply weren't like that at all, anyway. They were much more lithe, with smallish heads, and a pointed tip on one side.

And seriously, taking time to lift this giant, superheavy hammer directly over your head would probably be one of the worst tactical moves you can make in a battle. You'd leave yourself open to attack and could probably be knocked down very easily.

Quote
This is that this should require a lot of strength and exert you very quickly, and currently, while I can't seem to properly nail down wether faster exertion happens, there doesn't seem to be a problem with wielding heavy stuff with low strength, which is probably one of the main issues, here. A weak dwarf shouldn't be able to do it, a legendary maybe should be able to do this effectively?

Yeah, some function of creature strength vs. item weight should affect how fast he can swing it (for impact formulas) as well as how long it takes him to do it.

However, I'm not sure I see gold or lead ever being a good replacement for something like steel, for an actual warhammer. A warhammer cares about the shape that it's in, and softer metals are bad for that. It would matter less for a maul/sledgehammer, but I don't know how often those were actually used in war. Granted, DF DOES have them.

Really, I think it would be preferable to just make a larger weapon, perhaps with a bigger head, rather than change the material so drastically.
Title: Re: My comments from testing arena mode, on combat/damage (plus a few other things)
Post by: Ampersand on April 03, 2010, 03:18:21 am
I think you guys are all really missing the point here. You're messing with the combat system in the Arena mode a lot, but only messing with freaking megabeasts.

Megabeasts are different. A LOT different than they were before. Look at the raw files, get an understanding of the absolute differences in size between a BC and a Dwarf. Yeah, they shouldn't be so invulnerable, but;

In dwarf mode, combat between a moderately skilled dwarf with a steel battle axe and no armor against a several troglodytes and an ogre resulted in swift execution of all the monsters by the dwarf in ways that would be utterly expected. Limbs go flying, blood sprays everywhere.

Individual creatures are no longer clones of each other. Their abilities to resist damage, recover from damage, move, react, and stand their ground are all highly variable. Combat depends on much on recruiting a dwarf fit for the job as it is in getting their skill at handling a particular weapon up.

Run a few fights against more reasonable opponents before you call everything into question. Why Bronze Colossi are definitely broken, this is because... Bronze Colossi are broken, than the whole system being broken.
Title: Re: My comments from testing arena mode, on combat/damage (plus a few other things)
Post by: alphawolf29 on April 03, 2010, 04:07:48 am
I think you guys are all really missing the point here. You're messing with the combat system in the Arena mode a lot, but only messing with freaking megabeasts.

Megabeasts are different. A LOT different than they were before. Look at the raw files, get an understanding of the absolute differences in size between a BC and a Dwarf. Yeah, they shouldn't be so invulnerable, but;

In dwarf mode, combat between a moderately skilled dwarf with a steel battle axe and no armor against a several troglodytes and an ogre resulted in swift execution of all the monsters by the dwarf in ways that would be utterly expected. Limbs go flying, blood sprays everywhere.

Individual creatures are no longer clones of each other. Their abilities to resist damage, recover from damage, move, react, and stand their ground are all highly variable. Combat depends on much on recruiting a dwarf fit for the job as it is in getting their skill at handling a particular weapon up.

Run a few fights against more reasonable opponents before you call everything into question. Why Bronze Colossi are definitely broken, this is because... Bronze Colossi are broken, than the whole system being broken.

lol, we arent really talking about brone collossi. we were talking about the un realistic-ness of materials, and casually how undead are utterly invincible. I had a novice with a leader warhammer *human* take on 4 swordsmen with exactly the same skills and won hands down 3/4 times.
Title: Re: My comments from testing arena mode, on combat/damage (plus a few other things)
Post by: dreiche2 on April 03, 2010, 05:25:08 am
Were they heavily armoured? If so, repeat experiment without armour.
Title: Re: My comments from testing arena mode, on combat/damage (plus a few other things)
Post by: G-Flex on April 03, 2010, 05:29:31 am
I think you guys are all really missing the point here. You're messing with the combat system in the Arena mode a lot, but only messing with freaking megabeasts.

I did tests with some other creatures and objects too, but you didn't read that part, I guess.

Also, much of what I found out about megabeasts applies to combat in general.


Quote
Run a few fights against more reasonable opponents before you call everything into question. Why Bronze Colossi are definitely broken, this is because... Bronze Colossi are broken, than the whole system being broken.

No. Again, there are very clear similarities between that situation and combat in general. Throughout all my tests, cumulative breaking/bruising of things simply doesn't seem to do a whole lot.

The fact is, yet again, that repeatedly fracturing a body part should eventually break it entirely. It doesn't matter if it's a bronze colossus, or a hydra, or a dwarf, or anything else.


So, yeah, I did run fights with "more reasonable opponents". Things still didn't work as expected, and in a variety of situations. And if bronze colossi are broken, they're broken for a reason, and I think I've figured out one of the most serious ones.
Title: Re: My comments from testing arena mode, on combat/damage (plus a few other things)
Post by: dreiche2 on April 03, 2010, 05:37:30 am
However, I'm not sure I see gold or lead ever being a good replacement for something like steel, for an actual warhammer. A warhammer cares about the shape that it's in, and softer metals are bad for that.

Yes, but damage to weapons simply isn't in the current system. In system as it is, I don't see a problem with gold hammers having better damage, especially if they come (?) with weaker armour penetration. 

Yes, at some point heaviness of weapons should become a problem, but not necessarily at that point (esp. if warhammers are rather small anyway).

The fact is, yet again, that repeatedly fracturing a body part should eventually break it entirely. It doesn't matter if it's a bronze colossus, or a hydra, or a dwarf, or anything else.

Well, yes if that's true for any creature then it might be bug / incompleteness of the system. Why not file a bug report and wait for an official comment? No need to further argue about it.

I'd rather be interested in finding out more details of the system, i.e. what works against armoured opponents and what doesn't, etc.
Title: Re: My comments from testing arena mode, on combat/damage (plus a few other things)
Post by: Pandarsenic on April 03, 2010, 06:03:08 am
Well, gee, if you don't know that I recommend reading this thread: http://www.bay12games.com/forum/index.php?topic=52120

It contains extensive notation on what works against what things, what elements of the system are problematic, etc.
Title: Re: My comments from testing arena mode, on combat/damage (plus a few other things)
Post by: dreiche2 on April 03, 2010, 06:31:57 am
Good thing I posted in that thread then to find out more details of the system, i.e. what works against armoured opponents and what doesn't, etc..

....instead of in this thread, where people still complain about light-as-a-feather adamantine bolts not doing any damage, or argue about something that's probably just a bug and needs official confirmation.

Edit: Not saying there wasn't some discussion about the former. I'd just like to see more of it.

Anyway...
Title: Re: My comments from testing arena mode, on combat/damage (plus a few other things)
Post by: Grimic on April 03, 2010, 06:45:02 am
Run a few fights against more reasonable opponents before you call everything into question. Why Bronze Colossi are definitely broken, this is because... Bronze Colossi are broken, than the whole system being broken.
I'm hoping that by chance you just didn't read the thread carefully enough and still haven't started a DF2010 fort of your own yet to see how broken the combat actually is. It has nothing to do with Bronze Colossi in specific, they're just one example of how you can break a creature's parts to bits and have them still operating just fine.

When I started my first DF2010 fort, I sent 5 or 6 wrestlers to gang up on a wild muskox to get a feel for the new squad controls. Even after they beat every single one of its visible body parts down to a bloody pulp, it was still conscious and trying to limp away, hardly even affected by what used to mean death several times over. All of the wrestlers were long past legendary status (except for the two that died of thirst) by the time I gave up and canceled the kill order. It didn't take more than that to convince me that combat is broken one way or another.
Title: Re: My comments from testing arena mode, on combat/damage (plus a few other thin
Post by: Funk on April 03, 2010, 06:56:06 am
armor even just copper mail makes slashing worthless ,blunt and stabbing is only a little better.

hell i've ended up just striping my foes in a fight as it quicker
Title: Re: My comments from testing arena mode, on combat/damage (plus a few other things)
Post by: gumball135 on April 03, 2010, 08:09:27 am
My first experience of the arena:
I created a unicorn, a giant mole, a dwarf (with full adamantine gear and grandmaster in most skills), an ogre, a giant tiger and a cyclops and let them duke it out. The giant mole died from blood loss after getting stabbed through the leg by the unicorn. However, it had managed to fatally wound the unicorn before this, so both critters died. This was after they'd been fighting for AGES, so both were covered in wounds.

The dwarf somehow had his weapon hand ripped off within seconds of engaging the other beasts, then his throat ripped out. He died from blood loss while the ogre was strangling him.

The ogre was being bashed on by both the giant tiger and cyclops while trying to knock off the dwarf, and after he had gotten about 20 different wounds (I'm not sure how damaging, don't understand the new wound system yet), finally dropped unconcious. The cyclops was in a similar state wound wise, as was the tiger.

However, the tiger was the only critter that remained concious in the end, despite having over 1 page of wounds. I quit while he was still knawing on the two other guys' unconcious bodies.

This took place over about 3 minutes. So, long story short, combat takes ages, but it's still fun :P I had expected the dwarf (wielding full adamantine gear with an axe, all important skills maxed out) to massacre the others, but he was one of the first ones to die. Also, you have to press [ESC] to exit out of menus now, which is annoying. Now, onto fortress/adventure mode!

Edit: After reading through some of the other posts, my experience of combat seems to match up with everyone else's.
Title: Re: My comments from testing arena mode, on combat/damage (plus a few other things)
Post by: Misterstone on April 03, 2010, 12:18:29 pm
So I've been skimming, but from this thread and what I have seen myself int he arena, all of the issues are based on a few basic problems:

1) Wounds (tissue damage, bleeding, shattered bones) and related pain are just not effective enough, they don't knock an opponent out the way they should

2)  Attack damage is too heavily weighted towards high inertia attacks, which always gives a huge advantage to heavier weapons or attack limbs (thus, gold swords nastier than steel, etc.) rather than mechanical properties of the weapon, or the speed of the swing (which may not even be modeled), raw strength or skill of the fighter, and so on.

3)  Creatures that have NOPAIN, that don't bleed, and so on are almost indestructable, because it is too hard to deliver the structural damage necessary to destroy them.  Also creatures without real flesh may just be buggy (ie skeletal donkeys encased in magma will not die!)

Is this pretty much the problems in a nutshell?  I hope that's basically it, because it seems like it could be tweaked pretty easily by Toady when he gets around to it.  In fact, just tweaking the inertia/weapon properties issue would fix a lot of it.

I figure if the issue with weapon properties gets addressed, we'll find that the colossi aren't 100% invulnerable.  But they'll be extremely tough, enough that it's FUN(tm) to fight them.

Another problem I have found is that it seems too hard to latch on to things with pinching attacks (such as a crocodile's bite).  I'll play with that some more though.
Title: Re: My comments from testing arena mode, on combat/damage (plus a few other things)
Post by: BishopX on April 03, 2010, 01:17:08 pm
I started a hammer dwarf adventurer, and I've killed ~20 wolves so far with her, just wandering around the wilderness with a steel war hammer. In general every one of my strikes shatters some bone. But 4 out of 5 attacks hits the legs of a wolf (even when they are on the ground unconscious). In each of my twenty kills so far there have been 2 causes of death. Either I managed to hit the wolf square in the head and drive it's skull through its brain or I hit the wolf in the chest hard enough to drive a rib through a lung causing it to suffocate.

Title: Re: My comments from testing arena mode, on combat/damage (plus a few other things)
Post by: RedKing on April 03, 2010, 02:12:24 pm
I have a human adventurer clad in bronze with a bronze two-handed sword and bronze shield (mrf?) who has so far slain two dragons, 20 goblin-aligned humans (included 10 with titles), 10 wolves, 5 troglodytes, 3 gremlins, a troll, a giant rat and a giant bat. WITHOUT TAKING DAMAGE. Not even a bruise.

She blocks crossbow bolts out of the air with regularity. Even when she misses the block, they bounce off her bronze chain mail harmlessly. She blocked dragonfire (I'm still trying to figure that out...)

Of all the fights, the giant bat was the toughest. I lopped off a wing, then proceeded to try and strangle it to death. After 100+ rounds of strangling (and the bat waking up and passing out again twice), I said f**k it and stabbity-stabbity'd it to death.


Basically after spelunking the depths to find and track down the second dragon, I waltzed into a dark fortress (inhabited entirely by humans), slew any gobbo-allied humans I found and led a pack of prisoner children out again. Kind of like the Pied Piper of Hamelin, but with a lot more blood.

Yeah, combat is a bit frungy right now.


P.S. Oh yeah, my combat skill xp is rocketing up the chart. I went from dabbling to Adept Wrestler because of the bat.
Title: Re: My comments from testing arena mode, on combat/damage (plus a few other things)
Post by: Patarak on April 03, 2010, 06:58:24 pm
It's looking like the new combat system has changed how limb parts can be used. I've got two bronze collosi going at it and one of them has both its upper arms pretty much toast, but it's still able to attack the other one with an axe. Unless its grabbing the axe with its mouth or something.
Title: Re: My comments from testing arena mode, on combat/damage (plus a few other things)
Post by: G-Flex on April 04, 2010, 01:16:15 am
So I've been skimming, but from this thread and what I have seen myself int he arena, all of the issues are based on a few basic problems:

1) Wounds (tissue damage, bleeding, shattered bones) and related pain are just not effective enough, they don't knock an opponent out the way they should

2)  Attack damage is too heavily weighted towards high inertia attacks, which always gives a huge advantage to heavier weapons or attack limbs (thus, gold swords nastier than steel, etc.) rather than mechanical properties of the weapon, or the speed of the swing (which may not even be modeled), raw strength or skill of the fighter, and so on.

3)  Creatures that have NOPAIN, that don't bleed, and so on are almost indestructable, because it is too hard to deliver the structural damage necessary to destroy them.  Also creatures without real flesh may just be buggy (ie skeletal donkeys encased in magma will not die!)

Is this pretty much the problems in a nutshell?  I hope that's basically it, because it seems like it could be tweaked pretty easily by Toady when he gets around to it.  In fact, just tweaking the inertia/weapon properties issue would fix a lot of it.

That's most of it, it seems. I'd add a couple, though:


Unfortunately, this is all speculation on our part, but I think we've figured out some important enough stuff. The thing we're really the most clueless about, in my opinion, is how hard the problems will be to address.
Title: Re: My comments from testing arena mode, on combat/damage (plus a few other things)
Post by: Huggz on April 04, 2010, 06:29:56 am
I think this just about sums it up:

(http://img245.imageshack.us/img245/8524/invinciblecow.png)

Not even BLEEDING...
Title: Re: My comments from testing arena mode, on combat/damage (plus a few other things)
Post by: Lordinquisitor on April 04, 2010, 06:53:29 am
Axes seem to be balanced; As do fights against unarmoured enemies. My axedwarf was able to quickly strike down, bears, wolves, alligators etc.
Title: Re: My comments from testing arena mode, on combat/damage (plus a few other things)
Post by: Hurion on April 04, 2010, 07:31:46 am
I've been playing a lot of adventure mode and on average axes have been able to kill everything much more quickly than any other weapon.

As said before, in this version decapitation/bisection and blood loss seems to be the fastest way to kill something, and puncture wounds stop bleeding much too quickly (even when I've stabbed something through the heart with a spear/sword, more often than not it stops bleeding before the mob dies).

Has anyone tested to see if hammers/maces shatter bones through armour more often than swords/spears/axes do?

Also, something else I miss... No more hitting people so hard they fly away and blow apart against something.
Title: Re: My comments from testing arena mode, on combat/damage (plus a few other things)
Post by: Raz on April 04, 2010, 08:54:02 am
I've found hammers shatter bones very quickly, even through armour, yes.
Title: Re: My comments from testing arena mode, on combat/damage (plus a few other things)
Post by: G-Flex on April 04, 2010, 09:21:10 am
Not even BLEEDING...

You dumped magma on him?

Magma is pretty broken. Here's a bit from IRC:

<G-Flex> ToadyOne: btw, I think the issue with blizzard men not dying in magma might be that they have no blood? Seems like burn wounds aren't enough. This is just speculation
<G-Flex> (where "burn wounds" = "being on fire for a year and all your fat dripping out of you like a rotisserie chicken")
<ToadyOne> burn wounds are very broken, yeah
<ToadyOne> and they rely on bleeding for death
<ToadyOne> like, your guy can sluff all his fat off and still be alive
<ToadyOne> it is very weird
<G-Flex> yeah that would be why magma death isn't instant now
<ToadyOne> but the game doesn't recognize that much is wrong when fat is gone
Title: Re: My comments from testing arena mode, on combat/damage (plus a few other things)
Post by: Psieye on April 04, 2010, 09:37:21 am
After extensive torturing in the arena, I've noticed that strangling isn't the only way to suffocate someone in unarmed combat. Not sure exactly how it works, but whenever someone died from suffocation without strangling, their lungs and heart were bruised or worse. This makes sense, traditionally we rely either on heart or brain damage to get killing blows and DF chooses to make heart damage not-immediate mortal damage as it takes a while for the body to run out of blood oxygen that is no longer coming in.

Also, it's possible to make creatures die of blood loss with bludgeoning attacks. It needs to crit and get a bone to stab through an organ, bonus for the extra rare "and it also tears apart an artery while at it" proc.

Burn damage is as Toady described as quoted above. All my fodder bleed to death before getting killed by the heat when hit by Dragon Fire. Actually no, really huge fodder (Whales, Polar Bears) do have a chance to die to the heat or even MELT (with their life fluids turning into a small explosion of boiled blood). But humanoids? They bleed to death from having their flesh melted away before the heat melts their vital organs.


Incidentally, humanoids (elves and dwarves at least) don't seem to ever kick or bite. They either rely on punching or wrestling. Now if only they get the sense to start strangling once they've broken all the organs they can with their bare fists... then unarmed combat would speed up I think as currently it's waiting on either the random decision to start strangling, or the random proc of a crit hitting the respiratory system or some artery (and neither of these are guaranteed kills either).
Title: Re: My comments from testing arena mode, on combat/damage (plus a few other things)
Post by: Hurion on April 04, 2010, 08:14:07 pm
Incidentally, humanoids (elves and dwarves at least) don't seem to ever kick or bite.

Just chop off both their arms, and they bite just fine. I've had an elf latched to my throat like a wolf for 3 or 4 turns.
Title: Re: My comments from testing arena mode, on combat/damage (plus a few other things)
Post by: G-Flex on April 04, 2010, 11:21:23 pm
Kicking, scratching, and biting have [ATTACK_PRIORITY:SECOND]. It would be nice to see those things at least sometimes in regular combat, but I think they only do it when necessary right now.


Regarding blood loss, it does seem like things don't bleed enough, or for as long, in certain situations. There's something weird when you get a fractured skull with a pike lodged in it, as well as massive injuries to the rest of your body and its internal organs, and you never bleed out.
Title: Re: My comments from testing arena mode, on combat/damage (plus a few other things)
Post by: Hurion on April 04, 2010, 11:41:16 pm
Yeah, it's like blood regenerates at an incredible rate. You have to have multiple arms/legs off to bleed out quickly like in the old versions.

OTOH, I've had odd minor wounds that would stay bleeding forever. A random finger cut that was dribbling blood would not stop bleeding, and eventually killed me, but having an artery opened or a body part stabbed through would heal rather quickly.
Title: Re: My comments from testing arena mode, on combat/damage (plus a few other things)
Post by: penguinofhonor on April 05, 2010, 03:42:17 am
I've had squads of ten wrestlers beat rats and other creatures unconscious, then continue beating them without killing them for a really long time. The wrestlers are all really hungry and thirsty afterwards. I know bare fists shouldn't be the most useful thing in the world, but ten wrestlers kicking an unconscious large rat should take it down relatively easily.
Title: Re: My comments from testing arena mode, on combat/damage (plus a few other things)
Post by: G-Flex on April 05, 2010, 03:44:31 am
Yeah, that's the other thing that seems to confirm my suspicions about cumulative attacks. In this case, a single punch isn't doing anything fatal, so a thousand won't either.
Title: Re: My comments from testing arena mode, on combat/damage (plus a few other things)
Post by: Footkerchief on April 05, 2010, 03:59:39 am
Just wanted to say you are 100% spot on about the lack of cumulative effects.
Title: Re: My comments from testing arena mode, on combat/damage (plus a few other things)
Post by: Solmyr on April 05, 2010, 05:26:08 am
Also, something else I miss... No more hitting people so hard they fly away and blow apart against something.

I've had that happen to my adventurer when a giantess took hold of his nose (!) and flung him into a wall. Seems it's just moved to wrestling now.
Title: Re: My comments from testing arena mode, on combat/damage (plus a few other things)
Post by: G-Flex on April 05, 2010, 06:47:45 am
Just wanted to say you are 100% spot on about the lack of cumulative effects.

Yeah, I just threw a small army of humans armed with slade mauls at one. Tons of dodecaquintuple brass-shatters, no severs.



Also, I noticed that whips are a bit strange!

They're defined as a blunt instrument with moderate contact area (higher than spears/pikes, lower than swords and whatnot) and very very low penetration size, with low size but a very fast velocity multiplier.

This makes sense until you realize that this basically makes them really fast, tiny hammers.

So iron whips weren't giving me that sort of skin-flaying, pain/bleeding-inducing quality that they have in prior versions. They tend to beat the hell out of creatures, though, and they're blunt, meaning that penetration size is totally ignored, and they transfer a lot of momentum to lower layers. Basically, the result is a lot of shattered bones and stuff.


I changed them to EDGE instead of BLUNT (turns out, scourges actually have EDGE themselves), and the results made a bit more sense. Pretty much every hit tore skin but didn't tear anything else, and even leather armor seemed to stop it from tearing skin most of the time, since the penetration size is so low.

The only problems with this fix seem to be that whips then rely on a material's MAX_EDGE property (presumably), which is a tad silly since leather whips should work fine. I can definitely see why Toady made them BLUNT, but in practice, EDGE seems to work better except for this one fact.

Of course, even with EDGE, they still transfer a lot of force, bruising muscle/fat and even shattering bones sometimes, although mostly just in smaller body parts. Granted, I've seen at least one spine shatter from the sheer impact, despite lack of penetration... probably with armor.

I'm not sure how this could be made better, though, unless Toady makes mass count far more than velocity when it comes to transferring momentum between flesh/armor layers.

Oh, and you can have metal whips, and whips made out of wood, but not leather. Granted, even wooden whips seemed to work okay against unarmored targets, despite the wood template having 1/10 the MAX_EDGE of metals.
Title: Re: My comments from testing arena mode, on combat/damage (plus a few other things)
Post by: G-Flex on April 05, 2010, 08:32:46 pm
Okay, moving on from whips, let's check out spears and some more MAX_EDGE stuff.

Spears and pikes seem like a good example of how armor is too strong: Iron pikes/spears simply cannot penetrate iron mail shirts, much less breastplates. This renders the purpose of a spear pretty moot. I'd think that the low contact area of a spear plus its sharpness would help it penetrate armor, but this might not be working as well as it should, perhaps?

However, spears and pikes seem great against unarmored and lightly armored opponents. Against no armor, or even leather armor, they're great at stabbing straight through a body and tearing into organs, not just bruising them. Against tin chain, they also seem to do okay at this, even if a tin breastplate is placed over.

I think the main problem is just that they can't seem to penetrate armor at all once it reaches a certain level. Adamantine can pierce straight through iron chain+breastplate, despite its lack of weight, and that's good.

Steel spears vs. iron mail+plate seems to result in a lot of piercing below to the fat and sometimes muscle, along with a few (but significant number of) hits to organs. Organ tears happen much, much more often when it's just an iron mail shirt and no breastplate, or a breastplate with no mail. The second I change the armor to being steel as well, though (even just chain), the steel spears start to completely suck at penetrating at all. Lots of deflection and force-transfer bruising results (this is true for pikes as well as spears, it seems).

Conclusion: Spears and pikes kick all kinds of ass, tearing up organs and shattering skulls and brains, but only when the armor is worse than the spear in terms of material. Once the armor reaches the same material quality as the weapon, though, serious wounding through penetration becomes all but impossible. Highly-skilled dwarves will still break bones every now and then, but not through penetration, only inter-layer force transference.


To some degree, I think these results might be realistic. I don't know how good spears are in real life for piercing through similar-quality armor, but I want to say that penetration should happen at least every once in a while, as opposed to never.


Keep in mind that, as with all these tests, I'm using the arena mode, so item quality isn't coming into play at all. I have no idea how much it would matter if the spears and armor pieces were all exceptional-quality, or anything like that. Presumably, the weapon's edge would be sharper, but I don't know about the armor.



Also, I did some tests mucking about with weapon density and MAX_EDGE. Changing gold to have a density of 1 understandably resulted in them basically having LARP boffer weapons, never doing any damage to anything. If I do this and also give the metal a MAX_EDGE twice that of adamantine, they still only dent skin. Just food for thought, trying to figure out how this works.

However, changing gold's MAX_EDGE to extremely low values seems to do very little, testing out golden shortswords and spears. This goes for other materials as well: I changed steel's MAX_EDGE from 10,000 to 50 (!), and it's still tearing organs straight through iron mail shirts. I'm not sure what's going on here, unless MAX_EDGE just isn't actually affecting much.


[EDIT]
Seems that bronze spears can pierce iron chain/plate surprisingly well. So, bronze edged weapons seem to beat iron weapons in terms of penetrating armor. This is probably realistic, actually, but it seems that maybe humans and goblins should use bronze more often in light of this.

Really, it seems that spears/pikes are mostly okay except for the pandemic problem in the new version of armor getting way, way too good at resisting penetration past a certain threshold.
Title: Re: My comments from testing arena mode, on combat/damage (plus a few other things)
Post by: Drakale on April 05, 2010, 08:47:03 pm
I think max edge mainly deal with the maximum size of the part that could in theory be severed, i.e. arrows can sever finger but nothing bigger, a short sword can cut off a goblin head and a 2h axe could cut a giants head. Your 50 max edge sword is , in fact, like a tiny dagger. I bet you aren't cuting much body parts with it.
Title: Re: My comments from testing arena mode, on combat/damage (plus a few other things)
Post by: Footkerchief on April 05, 2010, 08:58:11 pm
Drakale: what you're describing is actually one of the functions of the "contact area" attack parameter.  MAX_EDGE has this note in the raws: "A unitless measure for how sharp the edge is for combat purposes."
Title: Re: My comments from testing arena mode, on combat/damage (plus a few other things)
Post by: Shinziril on April 05, 2010, 09:19:27 pm
Seems that bronze spears can pierce iron chain/plate surprisingly well. So, bronze edged weapons seem to beat iron weapons in terms of penetrating armor. This is probably realistic, actually, but it seems that maybe humans and goblins should use bronze more often in light of this.

Humans actually use bronze now.  At least, human adventurers do, and their shops sell only bronze weaponry and armor.  Was a little startling at first, but they seem to be working just fine for my adventurer, so I'm not complaining.
Title: Re: My comments from testing arena mode, on combat/damage (plus a few other things)
Post by: G-Flex on April 05, 2010, 10:41:21 pm
More tests with spears confirm something nice: For the most part, whether or not a material can penetrate armor of a different material actually makes sense.

Basically: Tin and gold armor are trash, steel is better than bronze which is better than iron, platinum is sort of on par with iron but can't penetrate it and is absurdly heavy and expensive to use, etc.

Also, I could swear that tin manages to block gold but absorb barely any of the shock, which is interesting. The test dwarves are breaking bones with their gold spears through tin chain, while being totally unable to penetrate. So it seems like different materials absorb shock quite differently in the event of non-penetrating hits.

Adamantine spears penetrate like crazy, tearing up the insides of people's chests straight through steel breastplates, and going right through chain leggings to shatter bones and rip tendons.

Adamantine armor stops even adamantine from penetrating, but golden spears can still manage to break bones through sheer force, through adamantine chain leggings, despite being totally worthless when it comes to penetration. This only seems to happen extremely rarely, though, so it's not a big deal. It's that old "who cares if Frodo's shirt is mithril, that spear should have caved in his chest!" principle at work, I guess, but most of the time the adamantine just plain deflects gold and even platinum.

So the "what can penetrate what?" table, in itself, doesn't seem bad, except that it seems too much like you either can or can't penetrate a given material with a given other material, without much wiggle room where you do rarely, or only sometimes.


[EDIT, AGAIN, I'M BAD AT THIS]
~FURTHER CONCLUSIONS~

It seems that density affects how much force gets transferred through layers. Regular tin chain stops gold spears from penetrating, but the gold still transfers enough force to break bones sometimes. With tin modified to have ten times the density (yowza!), the gold can't do much more than bruise fat through it. Also, this SEEMS to make it slightly more difficult for weapons to penetrate effectively as well, but by how much, I'm not sure.

These conclusions are realistic enough, so I'm pretty happy.

Tin in general seems to still deflect iron sometimes, but that's fine. It doesn't most of the time.

One problem I've noticed, if it's indeed a problem, is that aluminum weapons seem almost entirely useless. A sharpened aluminum spear should be able to significantly injure someone, but it can't.  Same goes for tin, really. Maybe density counts for too much, here? Also, aluminum armor seems less useful than gold armor, which... SEEMS unrealistic, but it's hard for me to tell.


[I DON'T FEEL LIKE DOUBLE-POSTING]
Okay, it seems like dwarven skin might be too weak in general? Aluminum and tine aside (which are strange enough), cheetah claws only dent the skin (no bleeding or bruising at all), and GCS fangs literally glance off every single time.

Conversely, chitin seems too weak. A dwarven fist can easily tear through the fat underneath it. A punching dwarf in arena mode is very easily tearing straight through GCS and antman body parts, despite being unable to do anything but bruise other creatures.



FWIW, on the subject of cumulative damage, bruises getting worse with successive hits should result in some sort of serious internal bleeding and function loss, particularly when it's muscle, not to mention compound organ/brain impairment with each successive strike. I have no idea how much of this exists in the current system, but it would be a way for repeated blunt trauma (e.g. fistfights) to actually matter.
Title: Re: My comments from testing arena mode, on combat/damage (plus a few other things)
Post by: GD on April 06, 2010, 07:54:32 am
Chitin weaker than skin? Hmm i think it should stop weak attacks from damaging internal organs better, but be more brittle itself. And after some value of attack power there no difference between them.

Skin:
[IMPACT_YIELD:10000] As i understand this affect power needed to damage skin seriously and go to next tissue.
[IMPACT_FRACTURE:10000] As i understand this affect power needed to damage skin.
[IMPACT_ELASTICITY:50000] High value means that most of the damage go through skin and apply to internal tissue.

Chitin:
[IMPACT_YIELD:10000]
[IMPACT_FRACTURE:10000]
[IMPACT_ELASTICITY:100]Low value means that most damage applyed to chitin, and if it damaged enough go to internal tissue.

And i think that latch attack only attack with cumulative effect. I should try latching to BC.
Title: Re: My comments from testing arena mode, on combat/damage (plus a few other things)
Post by: G-Flex on April 06, 2010, 08:47:06 am
The thing about chitin is that it's not always the same thing.

Pure chitin is more like... well, caterpillar skin. Bug shells are a slightly different form of it, interlaced with proteins and whatever else (minerals?), and something like a crab carapace goes even more in the direction of being rock-hard.

The shear yield/fracture points for it are pretty nuts though, based on bone, and that's used in combat, right? I'm honestly not sure.

Maybe it's just not thick enough, but it does seem odd that an untrained dwarf can trivially punch straight through a giant cave spider/giant desert scorpion/antman, whereas those things can barely dent unarmored human skin with bites and pincers.
Title: Re: My comments from testing arena mode, on combat/damage (plus a few other things)
Post by: Orkel on April 06, 2010, 09:27:05 am
For some reason copper armor always deflects iron weapons, it seems just wrong. Copper is supposed to be a weak metal.

Maybe copper needs a nerf, or iron needs a buff.
Title: Re: My comments from testing arena mode, on combat/damage (plus a few other things)
Post by: dreiche2 on April 06, 2010, 09:44:13 am
Thanks for the interesting info, G-Flex!

Keep in mind that, as with all these tests, I'm using the arena mode, so item quality isn't coming into play at all. I have no idea how much it would matter if the spears and armor pieces were all exceptional-quality, or anything like that. Presumably, the weapon's edge would be sharper, but I don't know about the armor.

Hm, that's an important point actually. I seem to vaguely remember that Toady said higher quality does indeed make weapons sharper, but maybe I'm wrong. But if so, maybe MAX_EDGE refers to the maximal sharpness bonus conveyed by quality?
Title: Re: My comments from testing arena mode, on combat/damage (plus a few other things)
Post by: G-Flex on April 06, 2010, 03:01:42 pm
For some reason copper armor always deflects iron weapons, it seems just wrong. Copper is supposed to be a weak metal.

Maybe copper needs a nerf, or iron needs a buff.

Huh, nice catch.

For what it's worth: Iron won't penetrate copper, but copper won't penetrate iron either.

Brass, however, will penetrate both, and can't be penetrated by copper or iron. In fact, bronze won't penetrate brass either! Brass will penetrate bronze, however.

In other words, it seems like brass is actually better than almost every other metal for military matters, which is rather weird.


Hm, that's an important point actually. I seem to vaguely remember that Toady said higher quality does indeed make weapons sharper, but maybe I'm wrong. But if so, maybe MAX_EDGE refers to the maximal sharpness bonus conveyed by quality?

Toady did say that both artifact and masterpiece weapons have the maximum allowed edge, yeah. Presumably, this means lower-quality weapons have a lesser edge.

However, the armor is also no-quality, so it's getting less of a bonus to its deflection rolls as well, I believe.



Further tests with MAX_EDGE show that it does affect how well a weapon penetrates, but only up to a certain (very low) point past which it appears to become irrelevant. Adamantine with MAX_EDGE:1 doesn't penetrate anything at all, with MAX_EDGE:10 it penetrates stuff but not very well at all, and at MAX_EDGE:100 it's almost acting like normal. I could be misremembering the exact numbers, but even if you multiply all those by ten it's still a little strange. Adamantine seems to get its high penetrative power from the fact that it yields to absolutely nothing, rather than from its high MAX_EDGE, at least the way things work now.
Title: Re: My comments from testing arena mode, on combat/damage (plus a few other things)
Post by: dreiche2 on April 06, 2010, 03:13:28 pm
Maybe that low point is the edge 'bonus' coming from standard quality? I.e. standard quality has sharpness x, masterwork has sharpness y, and you are lowering MAX_EDGE beyond x?

Well I'm just speculating obviously...
Title: Re: My comments from testing arena mode, on combat/damage (plus a few other things)
Post by: G-Flex on April 06, 2010, 04:33:27 pm
That would be an extremely weird way for the system to work, though, and would screw up basically any weapon with a significantly high MAX_EDGE. It almost definitely goes by some kind of percentage of MAX_EDGE, or at least I hope to God it does.

In other words, a weapon's effective edge is probably X% the MAX_EDGE, where X increases along with quality. I know it gets to 100% MAX_EDGE at Masterpiece and Artifact levels.
Title: Re: My comments from testing arena mode, on combat/damage (plus a few other things)
Post by: Wyrm on April 06, 2010, 09:48:14 pm
Maybe that low point is the edge 'bonus' coming from standard quality? I.e. standard quality has sharpness x, masterwork has sharpness y, and you are lowering MAX_EDGE beyond x?

Well I'm just speculating obviously...
That actually makes a lot of sense. A thin edge is structurally weak for obvious reasons, so if you make a thin edge out of a weak metal, then that edge will go away as soon as it hits. Hell, even a steel blade will lose its edge after a while, which is why you occasionally need to sharpen them — the edge gets physically damaged with each cut. Hence, MAX_EDGE.
Title: Re: My comments from testing arena mode, on combat/damage (plus a few other things)
Post by: G-Flex on April 06, 2010, 09:55:09 pm
MAX_EDGE is modulated in some form by quality. Damage to weapons, in itself, doesn't exist yet, at least not in that form.

However, MAX_EDGE should always affect the edge of an object, by which I mean items of a given quality level but materials with different MAX_EDGE should always have different resulting edge values.

Of course, this is also speculation, but it makes the most amount of sense to me.
Title: Re: My comments from testing arena mode, on combat/damage (plus a few other things)
Post by: Boingboingsplat on April 06, 2010, 09:58:47 pm
Well it sounds like armor and weapons are working fine. (Other than the disconcerting fact that weapons made from denser materials might have too much of an advantage.)

At least that doesn't have to be fixed along with the wound system. That's a relief. Let's hope that we won't be able to fracture a leg 5000 times without it becoming unusable!
Title: Re: My comments from testing arena mode, on combat/damage (plus a few other things)
Post by: G-Flex on April 06, 2010, 10:14:49 pm
Well it sounds like armor and weapons are working fine. (Other than the disconcerting fact that weapons made from denser materials might have too much of an advantage.)

MAX_EDGE also doesn't seem to do a hell of a lot, there are some issues with balance (Why is copper better than iron, or brass better than damn near everything?), and piercing seems almost too predictable; in the real world, dudes wearing steel plate fighting with steel weapons still cut each other.

But yes, the vast majority of the issues seem to be with wounds rather than the weapons and armor themselves.
Title: Re: My comments from testing arena mode, on combat/damage (plus a few other things)
Post by: Boingboingsplat on April 06, 2010, 10:47:09 pm
Well it sounds like armor and weapons are working fine. (Other than the disconcerting fact that weapons made from denser materials might have too much of an advantage.)

MAX_EDGE also doesn't seem to do a hell of a lot, there are some issues with balance (Why is copper better than iron, or brass better than damn near everything?), and piercing seems almost too predictable; in the real world, dudes wearing steel plate fighting with steel weapons still cut each other.

But yes, the vast majority of the issues seem to be with wounds rather than the weapons and armor themselves.
Well that doesn't sound too bad. Maybe make the RNG rolls vary more a bit or something as far as material vs itself. I'm sure it'd make more sense in the actual game modes, I think that arena mode is good for testing how things work in general but to sterile to show how things will actually work in either Dwarf or Adventure mode.
Title: Re: My comments from testing arena mode, on combat/damage (plus a few other things)
Post by: tehstefan on April 06, 2010, 11:27:10 pm
Very informative thread, I have to say, lots of gewd stuff in here.

In any case, so, it seems like more of a problem with how wounds work as opposed to the weapons dealing the damage, bar some odd quirks in the system. Lets hope that he can fix wounds, then, and combat should become more fun!
Title: Re: My comments from testing arena mode, on combat/damage (plus a few other things)
Post by: G-Flex on April 06, 2010, 11:52:17 pm
Well that doesn't sound too bad. Maybe make the RNG rolls vary more a bit or something as far as material vs itself.

Well, I'd say to vary them more for a material versus any other material, not just itself, but yeah. "Material vs. itself" is just the most obvious case.

Granted, there's some sort of COVERAGE token for armor that (I think) denotes how much of the body part the piece of armor/clothing actually covers, which leads to armor-bypassing... but for any sort of reasonable armor at all, it's set to 100, and that means full coverage, so it's irrelevant. Besides, a lucky shot with a pointy weapon should have a chance of penetrating even where there is coverage. Causing weapon contact area to affect penetration makes a lot of sense here, as piercing armor that's tougher than (or at least as tough as) your weapon makes a lot more sense when you're using something like a spear, or stabbing with a sword as opposed to slashing.
Title: Re: My comments from testing arena mode, on combat/damage (plus a few other things)
Post by: Pandarsenic on April 07, 2010, 03:47:44 am
It seems if wounds added up damage instead of... doing what they do now... then most of the non-materials problems would be cleared up.
Title: Re: My comments from testing arena mode, on combat/damage (plus a few other things)
Post by: G-Flex on April 07, 2010, 05:53:04 am
Okay, I've done my first tests with ranged weaponry, plus there's some stuff about ribs, skulls and eyelids. And a blurb about warhammers.


First: Blowguns.

These seem pretty much fine, at least for the most part. They barely penetrate much of anything aside from the skin, but that's cool since they aren't really intended to (they're more to cause bleeding and deliver poisons). Even a wooden dart will screw up the tiniest and least defensible parts (You'll shoot your eye out, kid!), but in general, all a dart will do is penetrate the skin and maybe some underlying tissue if you're lucky, and bruise stuff underneath. These bruises also can include organ bruises in the case of harder bolts, including vital organs (heart/lungs), which is off, but only due to ribcage problems I'll get into later. For what it's worth, they can't seem to really do anything to bone, which is fine.

Armor penetration for darts: Wooden darts can't really penetrate anything. Seriously. They cannot penetrate rope reed shirts or coats. Unarmored, they'll pierce skin and bruise stuff underneath, and sometimes tear fat/muscle, but a shirt will stop them. I want to say that maybe this is just the result of them having an extremely low penetration depth. Bronze darts won't penetrate it either, but they'll bruise underlying stuff, making me think that they'll get caught up in almost literally anything between them and the target. It seems like they should be able to penetrate at least a little deeper, then.


Second: Crossbows. (I'm going to assume most of this, or all of it, applies to bows as well, since the ammunition is precisely identical, and literally the only differences between the weapons themselves are the skills used and a bit of size difference)

Penetration: Wooden bolts penetrate leather armor, but not much of anything else, as expected. However, penetration does not seem deep enough for bolts. It seems like it's not enough penetration depth for them to actually pierce through to the organs successfully, even if they otherwise would. Changing the penetration depth to 4000 (from 2000) did the trick. This is the same depth that a slash with a short sword can penetrate, but significantly less than any polearm/spear/pike style weapon, which makes enough sense to me.

Adamantine darts don't do much that bronze darts don't, because of probably a combination of MAX_VEL (Ranged weapons have a maximum speed they can launch something at, since something like a string can only snap back so fast even by itself. This means that adamantine darts don't go as fast as you think. However, the value is high enough for blowguns that it might not be relevant) and the fact that darts don't stick in deep enough for anything like that to even matter (who cares if it penetrates steel armor if it can't get through it?). Adamantine bolts are actually worse, because MAX_VEL matters more with a (cross)bow. Turns out you can't effectively fire something from a bow when it weighs essentially nothing; there should be no surprise there. All of this stuff is mostly realistic, with the possible exception of "darts can't keep going through a target no matter how sharp", which is essentially the same problem as "darts can't just pass through the clothing instead of the clothing counting as penetrative depth".



Now let's talk about ribs.

Ribs are important. They protect your lungs and heart from injury, which is great, because trauma to those is bad news. They're pretty effective at it, too; it's possible to stab someone in the vitals by bypassing their ribcage, but it's not the usual occurrence.

The problem in DF is that ribs don't protect often enough. Remember what I said about organ-bruising via blowgun? This is why. In effect, there's normally no bone at all in between the surface of a creature's upper body and its heart/lungs/liver. The ribs are supposed to get in the way a certain amount of the time, but that amount is low enough that creatures are constantly getting bruised hearts and lungs, even from blowguns, simply from non-penetrative force transferred through tissues.

Here's the relevant part:
Code: [Select]
[BODY_DETAIL_PLAN:HUMANOID_RIBCAGE_POSITIONS]
[BP_RELATION:BY_CATEGORY:RIB_TRUE:AROUND:BY_CATEGORY:HEART:5]
[BP_RELATION:BY_CATEGORY:RIB_TRUE:AROUND:BY_CATEGORY:LUNG:5]
[BP_RELATION:BY_CATEGORY:RIB_FALSE:AROUND:BY_CATEGORY:HEART:5]
[BP_RELATION:BY_CATEGORY:RIB_FALSE:AROUND:BY_CATEGORY:LUNG:5]
[BP_RELATION:BY_CATEGORY:RIB_FALSE:AROUND:BY_CATEGORY:LIVER:5]
[BP_RELATION:BY_CATEGORY:RIB_FLOATING:AROUND:BY_CATEGORY:LIVER:5]

The "5" there is how effective that type of part is at actually surrounding the body part in question, with a maximum of 100. Presumably, this is a percentage, but I can't be certain of that.

I tried jacking these numbers up into the 90s or so, to make sure the damn things actually get in the way.

This worked! Blowdarts were no longer bruising the heart, lungs, or liver. They weren't even bruising the ribs, presumably because the bone is too strong or something.

But when an attack of some kind COULD get through the ribs, this happened (testing using a slade bolt):

Quote
the flying slade bolt strikes dwarf 22 in the upper body, tearing the muscle, shattering the right false rib, shattering the left floating rib, shattering the right floating rib and bruising the liver!

Okay, apparently this marksdwarf is a pinball wizard. Or he's playing Breakout. Pick the game analogy of your choice, I guess.

This brought me to the following conclusion about how the game chooses whether to "block" a body part (in this case, the liver) with a "surrounding" part (in this case, the various types of ribs):

In other words, each rib has a totally independent chance of "protecting" the organ in question. This results, in times like the one I posted, in a bunch of different ribs getting in the way at once.

The only way I would propose changing this to make it make more sense is as follows:

In other words, using this proposition, if we've got [BP_RELATION:BY_CATEGORY:RIB_TRUE:AROUND:BY_CATEGORY:HEART:5] and the heart is about to get hit, there's a 5% chance that one of the true ribs will protect it, as opposed to a 5% chance for every true rib, and if that chance succeeds, then one of them is picked to do it. This results in different body parts within the same category not blocking the attack at once, which is sort of weird. Unfortunately, it would still result in, say, both a true rib and a false rib getting hit, but the syntax and processing could probably be changed to accommodate somehow.

Anyway, that's just an arbitrary suggestion to illustrate how weird it currently is.

What I've actually done is simply placing the values well in excess of their defaults, but nowhere near 100. Something like this:
Code: [Select]
[BP_RELATION:BY_CATEGORY:RIB_TRUE:AROUND:BY_CATEGORY:HEART:50]
[BP_RELATION:BY_CATEGORY:RIB_TRUE:AROUND:BY_CATEGORY:LUNG:50]
[BP_RELATION:BY_CATEGORY:RIB_FALSE:AROUND:BY_CATEGORY:HEART:40]
[BP_RELATION:BY_CATEGORY:RIB_FALSE:AROUND:BY_CATEGORY:LUNG:40]
[BP_RELATION:BY_CATEGORY:RIB_FALSE:AROUND:BY_CATEGORY:LIVER:50]
[BP_RELATION:BY_CATEGORY:RIB_FLOATING:AROUND:BY_CATEGORY:LIVER:50]

You still get magic bullet syndrome sometimes, of course, but it's a good compromise.

The other oddity about this? Look at that quoted magic-bullet scenario that happened. Why is it that the bolt somehow managed to shatter all three separate ribs? It's incredibly strange to me that it managed, after getting through the skin and fat, to shatter three different bones. I want to say that maybe with "surrounding" parts (and maybe other layers things penetrate, to some degree?) it doesn't actually decrease the momentum of the attack more than once. In other words, if eight ribs get in the way, and the attack still has enough power to shatter one, then maybe it can wind up shattering all eight before the game updates how much momentum the attack still has. I'm not entirely sure (do I say this a lot?), and it matters less if you make Popcorn Kernel Bolts less common by not jacking up the protective value of the surrounding parts too high, but hey, it's a guess.



One last bit about warhammers: It seems like warhammers have a surprising amount of trouble getting past chain. Personally, I feel that chain shouldn't have so much of an impact on blunt damage, because it doesn't deflect it very well, or redistribute the force very well either. However, this problem seems to go away fairly readily as hammer skill gets high, implying that skill in hammers matters a bit more than skill in something penetrative, like spears. Perhaps getting a squarer hit is more important with hammers? Again, not necessarily unrealistic, but I guess nobody should expect their hammerdwarves (and possibly macedwarves by extension, although I haven't tested this) to break bones through mail at low skill whatsoever. Plate, on the other hand, is damn near impervious to warhammers completely. Even grandmaster hammerdwarves armed with bronze warhammers can't do any damage past bruising a bit of muscle through breastplate. This is true even if the breastplate is made out of tin. Mauls, on the other hand, work fine. A bit of rebalancing is in order, perhaps, but I'm not sure what warhammers need: A bit more size, a bit more velocity multiplier? Not sure yet.

For what it's worth, "bruising the muscle and bruising the (organ)" is a lot better than it sounds. "Bruising" an organ doesn't sound like much, but in terms of combat descriptions, it's second only to flat-out tearing them apart. A bruise to the guts/lungs/heart can do wonders, which is why I advocate making ribs more protective: By default, a bronze dart can easily bruise your lungs and cause you to suffocate. Of course, I think this also indicates a balance problem with organ damage, especially since a single lung being the victim of blunt trauma shouldn't entirely prevent you from breathing (unless it's so bad everything's just plain filling with blood for a long time).


Oh, I said I would say something about eyelids? They're another example of a "surrounding" body part, but I hardly ever see them get in the way (their "chance"/coverage value is 50), but maybe there's a reason for that. At any rate, there's some raw typo that results in both eyelids cleaning the left eye, while both of them protect the right eye, instead of doing both to each. I'm not even going to try figuring out the logistics of that, because it's kind of scary.
Title: Re: My comments from testing arena mode, on combat/damage (plus a few other things)
Post by: dreiche2 on April 07, 2010, 06:18:53 am
Couple of things:

Are you saying an iron sword should penetrate an iron plate mail (when stabbing)? Because I'm not sure about that.
 
Also, I'm not sure if I'd follow your conclusion about something being wrong with ribs after you increased that value to 100. Maybe that made them overlap or at least touch each other? In that case the bolt hitting several at once would make sense...
Title: Re: My comments from testing arena mode, on combat/damage (plus a few other things)
Post by: G-Flex on April 07, 2010, 06:26:58 am
The thing that's wrong with the ribs is that there's absolutely no (useful) sense of relative position. There's essentially no chance that you can shoot, say, an arrow at a person and have that arrow hit four ribs at once, on different sides of the body, and the liver as well.

It's got nothing to do with them overlapping or anything like that. The problem is that they're all handled completely independently, so there's effectively no way to say "I want ribs to cover the chest 90% of the time, but without them overlapping". It's just impossible. The best you can do is find a sort of probabilistic "happy place" where the chance of at least one rib getting in the way is reasonably high, but the chance of 3-4 ribs at once getting hurt is reasonably low.


Are you saying an iron sword should penetrate an iron plate mail (when stabbing)? Because I'm not sure about that.

Hrm? Not necessarily. But it should have a better chance to penetrate materials in general when stabbing than what it's slashing. After all, that's one of the reasons you stab. The point is that the same force applied to a smaller area should have a better chance of penetration (e.g. a spear versus a sword).
Title: Re: My comments from testing arena mode, on combat/damage (plus a few other things)
Post by: Raz on April 07, 2010, 06:41:25 am
Maille isn't designed to deflect. It is mostly designed to absorb the blows and by having the links breaking underneath the force, furthermore it's historically made out of iron because of the fact that iron is a relatively soft metal. That's why medieval swords were usually primarily made out of steel with an iron core. An iron plate armour should in fact be steel, because plate armour was designed to deflect blows.

Should hammers immediately shatter anything beneath a layer of iron or steel armour? Likely, yes. That's why DF should have padded jacks (thick tunic made out of multiple layers of cloth), to absorb blunt force.

Also, the fact that forearms are protected by maille shirts annoys me. That's why we should have more armour types like maille hauberks and maille coifs.


Title: Re: My comments from testing arena mode, on combat/damage (plus a few other things)
Post by: Orkel on April 07, 2010, 07:34:14 am
How do I use underground creatures like crundles and such in arena mode?
Title: Re: My comments from testing arena mode, on combat/damage (plus a few other things)
Post by: G-Flex on April 07, 2010, 07:35:39 am
Many/most of the new creatures (mostly in the creature_next_underground.txt raw file in /raw/objects) have this tag:

Code: [Select]
[ARENA_RESTRICTED]
Remove that and you should be able to use them in the arena.
Title: Re: My comments from testing arena mode, on combat/damage (plus a few other things)
Post by: LoSboccacc on April 07, 2010, 09:15:29 am
the idea of grouping them in functional units is very good indeed, and will allow to do some even more complex stuff like piercing going trough one surrounding item at random with full force, bashing to effect all of them with divided force, and slashing affecting one at a time with progressively decreasing force (or something like that)
Title: Re: My comments from testing arena mode, on combat/damage (plus a few other thin
Post by: Andeerz on April 08, 2010, 12:08:39 am
Maille isn't designed to deflect. It is mostly designed to absorb the blows and by having the links breaking underneath the force, furthermore it's historically made out of iron because of the fact that iron is a relatively soft metal. That's why medieval swords were usually primarily made out of steel with an iron core. An iron plate armour should in fact be steel, because plate armour was designed to deflect blows.

Should hammers immediately shatter anything beneath a layer of iron or steel armour? Likely, yes. That's why DF should have padded jacks (thick tunic made out of multiple layers of cloth), to absorb blunt force.

Also, the fact that forearms are protected by maille shirts annoys me. That's why we should have more armour types like maille hauberks and maille coifs.




Also, there is no plate armor for the upper arms or shoulders... this is sort of annoying, too, though you can sort of co-opt the breast plate to do this by changing the raws.

As for the maille, I see where you are coming from.  I am under the impression that maille was primarily designed to in essence to defend against cuts, basically converting cutting damage (and even some piercing damage) to bludgeoning damage in addition to offering some shock absorption in combination with a padded jack/aketon/gambeson/whatever underneath.  Check this test out to see what I mean: http://www.myarmoury.com/talk/viewtopic.php?t=11131 

Your statement about iron is intersting, especially with regard to chain maille.  If the steel is of lower carbon content and is not hardened, it might as well be iron as it behaves similarly.  So non-hardened steel maille and iron maille in reality are pretty much exactly the same in performance.  However, there are examples of hardened steel maille hauberks in the late medieval times as steel production became more consistent.  Whether or not this actually performs better is an unanswered question AFAIK.

As for plate, wrought iron used for plate back when iron plate was first emerging (late 1200's, early 1300's) in post-Roman Europe wasn't necessarily hardened (carbon content wasn't right) but was still useful in reinforcing maille defenses and deflecting shots that would otherwise be caught in the maille.  Case hardened iron that was available later (late 1300's) could have higher carbon content and then be case-hardened into a steely-iron (Read Techniques of Medieval Armor Reproduction, or The Knight and the Blast Furnace for more info).  This is what I think of as the steel used by dorfs in this game and the non-hardened wrought iron is what I think of as the iron used.  That's how I justify the properties of iron vs. steel in this game and am able to sleep at night.  :D 
Title: Re: My comments from testing arena mode, on combat/damage (plus a few other things)
Post by: G-Flex on April 08, 2010, 03:02:24 am
I accidentally locked the topic for a while. Don't ask me how.

For a while I thought someone, somewhere, was mad at me. But it was me all along!
Title: Re: My comments from testing arena mode, on combat/damage (plus a few other things)
Post by: Rafal99 on April 13, 2010, 10:55:13 pm
Combat is really strange now.

I just had wolf bite glance of skin of my woodcutter...
Also war hammers are underpowered, it takes ridiculously long time for my dwarf to kill a wolf with his exceptional steel war hammer.
Title: Re: My comments from testing arena mode, on combat/damage (plus a few other things)
Post by: G-Flex on April 14, 2010, 03:35:48 am
Are you breaking the bones? Breaking bones and internal injuries in general don't seem to do a lot (they should be more incapacitating and painful, and should probably cause internal bleeding if they don't yet). One reason that edged weapons, especially axes, are so overpowered right now is because it's hard to get anything immediately-disabling to happen to a creature aside from flat-out severing parts or piercing straight through important organs. There are other ways, but those are the prominent ones.



Okay, I did some more tests. Yeesh.


Fire, heat damage to organs/tissues, and tissue properties

(note: Some of the following medically-oriented information I got from Djohaal, aka Kefka, on IRC, because he seems to know what he's talking about)

Okay, fire is one of those things in DF that's Traditionally Messed Up, by this point. I'm not going to mention any of the obvious stuff like dwarves not caring about it enough.

One thing that's obvious is that temperature transfer simply doesn't happen quickly enough. This manifests itself in a few situations, but I've heard that Toady is already planning to up that rate. Don't quote me on this, because I can't confirm it myself. This is a fairly mundane "tweak" sort of problem, at any rate.

Another thing is that bodily tissues act really weird when it comes to fire. Have you ever noticed that fat seems to melt off creatures really easily? It's one of the first effects of magma submersion, and probably happens easily when the "acid rain" bug comes into play. Ever wonder why, though? It's because the fatty tissue inside creatures uses the "fat" material template. The "fat" material template uses the same thermal/phase characteristics as the "tallow" material template (with some odd exceptions). It melts at 110°F (about 43.3°C). Basically, in DF terms, walking on hot enough sand should cause the fatty tissue in your feet to melt, slough through your skin and off your body onto the ground, and cause severe bleeding (since the fatty tissue has vascular stuff in it, in DF terms). Obviously, this isn't the case.

So, where's the disconnect? Consider: Tallow is rendered, relatively pure fat. The fatty tissue inside you is more complex. In fact, some of that fatty tissue inside you has a melting point well below room temperature, but because there's other stuff in the tissue surrounding it, it doesn't just slosh around or leak out. Another way to explain it: Your muscles are something like 70-75% water, yet you wouldn't call those a liquid. Realistically, fatty tissue should "melt" at a much higher temperature (for our purposes, let's say 140°F/60.0°C), and should have a HEATDAM_POINT lower (again, for the sake of discussion, let's say around 111°F/44°C, see next paragraph), to represent tissue damage from the heat (your internal body temperature just isn't supposed to be that high).

Actually, for human adipose (fatty) tissue, I found this (http://www.faqs.org/patents/app/20080234609) (search the page for "is 44 degrees") stating that "it is well known that the tissue damage temperature is 44 degrees Celsius".

It should be possible to discover melting (and possibly even tissue damage) points for various tissues, given the fact that there are methods devised to target and liquefy/destroy arbitrary tissues inside the human body surgically/with lasers, but I haven't been able to find a table or anything. I've been able to find patents, but they don't list that stuff in detail. Hopefully something can be found without resorting to corporate espionage.

For what it's worth, fat has a COLDDAM_POINT of -68°F/-56°C. If it's representing fatty tissue, this should probably be a bit closer to, I don't know, the freezing point of water or something like that. Certainly, fatty tissue can get frostbitten and I doubt it takes a temperature that low to do it. This is of secondary concern, however.

Also for what it's worth, tallow doesn't have a liquid density defined. Seriously. It's 5/9 the density of fat when solid, which doesn't seem realistic anyway: Solid fat is defined as 0.9g/cm3, and tallow is defined as 0.5g/cm3 (god bless you Toady for using SI units), yet from my quick googling, tallow is actually about the 0.9 figure. Seriously though, in addition to that, tallow has [liQUID_DENSITY:NONE] despite melting easily. I have no idea how the game handles this when/if it comes up. Again, not the biggest issue, just a small oversight.

Bone's values don't seem too out-of-whack in a practical sense, although I'd personally take the HEATDAM_POINT down a notch (it's 282°F/139°C), since bone is a tad more complex than it looks. To be fair, I don't know what's realistic here. It doesn't have a melting point defined, but that easily could be realistic enough, and by that point it should be long burned away.

Blood boiling is a bit weird, since in reality it should just congeal before it boils. Another minor quirk with boiling is that it all happens at once; there's no sense of a pool of something boiling off over time, it all just goes off at once like an explosion (this is something we can easily live with). Personally, I'd move the HEATDAM_POINT down below the boiling point a bit, to at least sort of acknowledge the fact that heat messes it up before it gets to that point.

The HEATDAM_POINT for muscle is the same as that for bone, so maybe that should be lower too, since tissue damage does occur long before then.

Of course, this all depends on what HEATDAM_POINT means. In the human body, I'm sure tissues start being "damaged" in the sense of losing function before the material starts to physically get ruined. It's hard to tell what to use here, since there's no real sense of having the stuff get damaged in different ways or to different degrees at different temperatures.

I think one issue here is that, while bodily tissues are an example of something where material properties are extremely important, they're also an example of something where simple engineering-type values like these don't work very realistically. For instance, fat has more of a gradual, plastic shift from solid to liquid (and sort of goopy in between) rather than a typical "melting" process, tissues are fairly complicated in general, and also note what I said about boiling blood. Fudging it with the current system seems pretty much fine, though, so I don't think it's a serious "issue" or one that really breaks anything. It's just an interesting thing to note.


While I'm on the subject of body tissues, it seems like something is weird about chitin, or at least the body parts/creatures that use it. Untrained dwarven punches sometime shatter through chitin, other times glancing away a lot, and other times breaking straight through to the brain. I don't understand the inconsistency. Maybe they just can't break through consistently, but when they do it's traumatic because there's not much to protect underneath. I was thinking that maybe it's due to its low elasticity, but even modifying that didn't help. I'm honestly not sure, but it might be something to do with the body parts and not the material itself, perhaps.


There are some other miscellaneous issues with the raws, like brain matter also having slightly less than half its actual density, and so forth, but I won't bother going through and trying to list everything that seems off.



Okay, back to fire and tissue damage. There are a few issues here.


Non-solid creatures

Now, as for creatures made of fire... stuff is definitely weird. (I used fire men for these tests)

For one thing, their attacks "pass right through". While it makes sense for a fire man's arm not to really physically exert force on something, one of two things should be the case:

On the defensive end, things are even stranger. Creatures can easily punch/kick parts of the fire man off, because it's made out of a superlight, ethereal material which is somehow able to be sort of... fanned off. The game treats these like normal severs, too, dropping "fire man flames" on the ground, which makes no sense to me since the tissue is in the gaseous state: Why does it land on the ground ostensibly in solid form? For what it's worth, there's a similar issue with the magma that magma men drop on the ground from combat, in that it doesn't seem to interact with water at all.

The problem here is that there's simply no way I can think of to properly deal with creatures made out of gas like this. It doesn't make a whole lot of sense for a sword to "cut through" and sever parts of it, and if you feel like handwaving it to say that it does, then there's still the issue that it's way, way too easy. However, if you truly treat them like a gas, they wind up being nigh-invincible, short of extremely complicated water traps, or some sort of hypothetical "throw water on this thing" bucket brigade maneuver.

Except! They don't even interact with water. They don't boil the water, and the water doesn't cool them off. Personally, I see something wrong with this picture. Oddly enough, magma men do boil off water (although they don't get hurt by it, sadly). Is this a problem with the state of matter? I have no idea.


There are similar, yet  less weird, problems with creatures made out of liquid or powder. Powder creatures, such as those made of snow, are fragile enough that I've personally witnessed combat logs of a cow calf severing the lower body of a snow-composed forgotten beast with a kick. The issue here is that the creature is essentially loose powder (as opposed to being packed solid) kept in shape by forces unknown, meaning it's really easy to break through, similarly to the gas. Also similarly, I'm not entirely convinced that kicking through it, or swinging a sword through it, should actually sever off the part; I mean, the connectivity is entirely magical anyway, so it's not like anything's really getting broken or cut. Again, though, I have no idea how this could be handled better, especially in the current system. It sort of makes sense to whack away bits of the material time after time, but severs don't make a lot of sense to me.


In other words, it seems like non-solid creatures are probably going to be pretty messed up for a while, but there are still some things that look, to me, like they could at least be made a bit more workable. I don't know if I'd suggest simply culling all non-solid titans or what, though, at this point. It would be kind of sad to not have any titans/forgotten beasts/demons made out of snow or fire or whatever, but on the other hand, there's not really any point if they can't be fixed up (or at least weirdly cludged) to the point that they provide a challenge.




oh my god this post is too long what have I done
Title: Re: My comments from testing arena mode, on combat/damage (plus a few other things)
Post by: Pandarsenic on April 14, 2010, 03:42:47 am
Epic thesis is epic.
Title: Re: My comments from testing arena mode, on combat/damage (plus a few other things)
Post by: G-Flex on April 14, 2010, 04:12:10 am
To be fair, if you cut out the bits where I'm just going through tissues and poking at them to see if they make sense, it's... almost reasonable!
Title: Re: My comments from testing arena mode, on combat/damage (plus a few other things)
Post by: Pandarsenic on April 14, 2010, 04:17:31 am
I think the whole thing is a very good, very helpful analysis of some of DF2010's somewhat problematic mechanics.
Title: Re: My comments from testing arena mode, on combat/damage (plus a few other things)
Post by: Arrkhal on April 14, 2010, 08:04:04 am
The main things I noticed on my trips through the raws:

Every single metal in vanilla has an "impact strength" that was noted as being an average for stainless steel.  Gold, copper, iron, you name it.  And impact strength is compared between materials when a blunt weapon encounters some armor, so gold was considered to be just as strong as steel, leading to craziness.

Units were inconsistent, with some kind of 10fold error, or unit conversion error, or something, making impact strength even crazier.

Hardness isn't modeled, and maxedge doesn't seem to do much.  Real life wood has a lower shear strength than real life epidermis, but modeling that in game means that wooden weapons stop piercing skin unless you either buff wood or nerf skin.

Composite weapons and items still aren't in, so wooden arrows and bolts weigh less than 1/15 as much as iron ones, making them basically do nothing.

Impact elasticity has a fixed upper limit of 49,999 for stuff to behave plastically.  Right at 50,000 and up, it becomes impossible to ever tear something due to blunt trauma.  I'm still seeing if I can make muscles and organs tear and rupture when hit by a powerful blow, but it's not looking good.
Title: Re: My comments from testing arena mode, on combat/damage (plus a few other things)
Post by: Wyrm on April 14, 2010, 04:59:52 pm
I noticed that too. Impact strength should be lower than the compressive strength for all materials, not the same and certainly not higher. Impact is not the same as compression, and any realistic modeling of impact vs. compression has to take into account the timescale of the interaction, and I don't see this anywhere. The compressive strength of a material is partially due to the ability of the material to transmit stresses down the line to the end as well as across, but an impact is defined as a shock whose timescale is too short for that to happen.

Quote
Hardness isn't modeled, and maxedge doesn't seem to do much.  Real life wood has a lower shear strength than real life epidermis, but modeling that in game means that wooden weapons stop piercing skin unless you either buff wood or nerf skin.
Except with an arrow, you're pitting the compressive strength of the arrow against the shear strength of skin, so comparing shear to shear is not fair to the arrow. Most wood is stronger in compressive stress than skin is in shear, if only just barely. This explains why wooden arrows (no tip) can be used to hunt game, but are not very good at actually penetrating to do deep damage.

I must point out that materials science (including fracture, impact, and all around destruction) is a very complex one, and I wouldn't want to tackle it with anything less than a good set of materials tables, a supercomputer, and a masters in materials science. Fudging is probably going to be inevitable.
Title: Re: My comments from testing arena mode, on combat/damage (plus a few other things)
Post by: Narmio on April 19, 2010, 09:46:01 pm
Yeah, currently all materials have blunt combat attributes (impact yield and impact fracture) equal to some placeholder value 1080000 which appears to be chosen from stainless steel, according to a raws note by Toady.  I think the shear values (presumably for edged combat) might have similar placeholders.  We really can't make any comment about the formulas and processes Toady is using to do the wound calculations until we can better understand what's being caused by the placeholders.

Massively reducing impact fracture but not impact yield for armour, for example, creates a system where almost every hit from a weapon causes serious deep bruising, but never penetrates enough to break bones.  So there's modelling of some more complicated stuff than what we're seeing in fights right now (better material weapon goes through all the time, equal or lower material weapon bounces off all the time) going on.  I just think it's obscured.

We need to see if we can scare up a materials scientist from among the community, or an engineering student willing to do some library-diving to make some sense of these numbers and what they *should* be.
Title: Re: My comments from testing arena mode, on combat/damage (plus a few other things)
Post by: G-Flex on April 19, 2010, 10:07:28 pm
I'm still trying to find out why blunt weapons can "tear" through fat but not muscle. I cannot figure this out for the life of me.
Title: Re: My comments from testing arena mode, on combat/damage (plus a few other things)
Post by: Footkerchief on April 19, 2010, 10:52:24 pm
Just thickness, maybe?
Title: Re: My comments from testing arena mode, on combat/damage (plus a few other things)
Post by: PencilinHand on April 22, 2010, 01:45:59 am
Yeah, currently all materials have blunt combat attributes (impact yield and impact fracture) equal to some placeholder value 1080000 which appears to be chosen from stainless steel, according to a raws note by Toady.  I think the shear values (presumably for edged combat) might have similar placeholders.  We really can't make any comment about the formulas and processes Toady is using to do the wound calculations until we can better understand what's being caused by the placeholders.

Massively reducing impact fracture but not impact yield for armour, for example, creates a system where almost every hit from a weapon causes serious deep bruising, but never penetrates enough to break bones.  So there's modelling of some more complicated stuff than what we're seeing in fights right now (better material weapon goes through all the time, equal or lower material weapon bounces off all the time) going on.  I just think it's obscured.

We need to see if we can scare up a materials scientist from among the community, or an engineering student willing to do some library-diving to make some sense of these numbers and what they *should* be.

My ears are burning....

I have an ~900 page fundamentals of material science and engineering book, a bachelors in mechanical engineering, and am unemployed(difficult job market is difficult, but it is getting better)....

What do you want to know?  The uses of yield vs fracture?  Frankly, until weapon and armor damage are in the game the concepts of material yield and fracture are largely moot.  How the concept of fatigue is implemented(if at all) will be a critical part of the weapon/armor damage.  Besides we would really need to look either at the code or at least get an oral explanation of the under-pinnings and inner-workings from Toady.  How I might expect penetration to work and how Toady may have coded it could be vastly different.
 

If you want useful numbers for different materials, I can tell you that the bulk modules to COMPRESSIVE_ELASTICITY conversion isn't linear(seems to be something close to y = constant/x but I haven't bothered too do anything other than a quick plot of the data).  I can also confirm that some of the numbers(chiefly the compressive yield and fracture numbers) are bogus at best, and in fact hasn't changed sense Toady originally put the raws together ~16 months ago (http://www.bay12games.com/dwarves/spoilers/raws-12-18-08/inorganic_metal.txt).

I'm still trying to find out why blunt weapons can "tear" through fat but not muscle. I cannot figure this out for the life of me.
Just thickness, maybe?
Probably, fat has the same relative thickness as skin apparently and skin is pretty regularly smashed open by warhammers(like on fingers and toes).  Although, how [THICKENS_ON_ENERGY_STORAGE] and [THICKENS_ON_STRENGTH] interact with the combat system, if at all, remains to be seen.  I think I did hear/read Toady answer a question kind of to that effect, though....

---
Frankly, when I first went looking in the armor raws originally I was expecting explicit thickness statements and was surprised to see the old [LAYER_SIZE:#] and [LAYER_PERMIT:#] tags instead.  I am still expecting the layer size to have some relevance to deflection and protection but have held off testing.  As I don't have access to a working copy of MATLAB anymore I have been writing a program to parse the gamelog for me and turn it into a more excel friendly format but have been having difficulty making my mind up on just how to go about doing that(I have maybe 40% of it done).  I am looking for a job you know.  :P
Title: Re: My comments from testing arena mode, on combat/damage (plus a few other things)
Post by: G-Flex on April 22, 2010, 05:32:46 am
I believe Toady has explicitly stated that extra fat provides a bit of damage absorption in combat, so yeah, that stuff does come into play, although who knows to what degree.

Also, I invariably read your name as "Penicillinhand".
Title: Re: My comments from testing arena mode, on combat/damage (plus a few other things)
Post by: G-Flex on June 09, 2010, 04:26:45 pm
Since 0.31.06 changed some relevant creature raw values, I decided to take another look at creature-on-creature bitin'-and-fightin' combat.


Results: Better than before, but still not exceptional.

Cat vs. Cat
The cats scratched at each other a hell of a lot, sometimes not (but usually) penetrating the skin, and never penetrating more. Not too terrible. However, their bites didn't seem to do much of anything at all, except for when one decided to shake the other around. Bites always seemed to only dent the skin or glance away, even against small parts.

Cat vs. Dwarf

It crashed when I tried to spawn the dwarf.

Cat vs. Dwarf (Take Two)

The cat got in mostly-unsuccessful scratching and biting attacks (biting attacks did not penetrate, scratches rarely broke skin), while the dwarf punched the cat a lot (as well as pointless grab-limb-and-release wrestling), bruising muscle and fat and organs, but never causing much damage due to the issues with cumulative injury I've pointed out before. After quite a long time, the dwarf won, because he went Blend-Tec on the cat's eyes, gouging them out a few dozen times. The cat bled out eventually (the bruised heart might not have helped).

Alligator vs. Alligator

Bites penetrate now, but still only rarely penetrate past the scale. The "shake around" move is still devastating and deadly, of course, although it's unclear what the effects are, exactly. There's not much more to say here.

Alligator vs. Cat

Cat scratches somehow manage to tear alligator scale. Also, despite alligator bites penetrating alligator scale, they cannot seem to penetrate cat skin at all. Latching on and shaking around dispatched the cat quite quickly, though.

Alligator vs. Dwarf

Alligator bites tear the skin, and dwarf punches glance away. The alligator then shook around and tore off the dwarf's lower body. Pretty typical of a real alligator, I guess, aside from the bites not penetrating more.

Alligator vs. Dwarf in Pigtail Clothing (trousers, shirt, cap, gloves, boots, coat)

The alligator knocks the dwarf around like crazy with his biting maneuvers, but never manages to tear skin except for once on the head (presumably because the cap doesn't provide full coverage). All other attacks are deflected by the clothing, probably because alligator teeth don't punch through deeply enough. Eventually the alligator wins, by getting in a lucky shot to the head again and tearing it off by shaking it around.

Elephant vs. Donkey

Elephant kicks knock the donkey around decently, but still don't do very much damage. You'd think they would break bone or something, but they're just bruising fat and occasionally muscle. Incidentally, the donkey's kicks are doing roughly the same thing to the elephant. One donkey kick managed to tear apart the cartilage in the elephant's trunk, which is pretty weird. They bruised each other's guts a bit as well. Also, the elephant grabbed the donkey's lower body with his left rear leg and threw the donkey about five squares. So far, the elephant is the only animal I've seen doing throwing moves, and it did them several times here. The donkey managed to heal completely during the course of the battle, due to minor bruising being the only injuries he had, and seems to have the upper hand in general.

I went downstairs to do some laundry, thinking it was a stalemate. When I got back, I noticed that the elephant had placed a stranglehold on the donkey's throat using its leg, and eventually suffocated the thing. Well, I guess the elephant won.

I also noticed that approximately twenty-nine cats (see below) assaulted the elephant from elsewhere. The elephant was too over-exerted at this point, only getting in a single attack (kicking a cat's head in, shattering the skull but not killing it) before passing out. It seems like nobody's winning, though, since even when the cats shake the elephant around it doesn't do any mortal damage (or significant enough bleeding, it seems). His eyes are torn open, ears and trunk broken and torn apart, and in general he isn't having too much fun. Semper fidelis, mighty elephant.

Dwarf vs. Twenty-Nine Cats

What you'd expect from above tests. The dwarf eventually passes out from exhaustion while cats claw at him, often tearing the skin. Apparently, when given adequate opportunity, cats can shake dwarves around. This eventually caused the dwarf to bleed to death.

Anything vs. Magma

Still just as absurd. Interestingly, while live alligators will catch fire, dead ones will not. Their corpses instead rot faster (although this might have just been a coincidence) and take damage, the blood also boiling off, but only after quite a while. This dead alligator is now an "XXAlligator CorpseXX" but not on fire yet. A few turns later, it disappeared entirely, presumably due to the massive damage.



Me vs. This Data

It seems that natural attacks still don't penetrate enough. This would make sense if you consider it as a simple matter of "How long are these teeth?" vs. "How thick is this tissue?" but it's not that simple in reality. In reality, pushing down like that on tissue causes it to spread apart, compress, dent, and so forth. Even without considering that (although it should be considered!), things should penetrate deeper. This goes hand-in-hand (sorta?) with the penetration issues with things like blowguns and (to a lesser degree) bolts/arrows. After all, the fact that clothing and tissues can never really be torn through is causing issues here, providing near-perfect protection against bite wounds, even without any armor whatsoever.

For that matter, why does scale (at least on alligators) less effective than cat/dwarf skin? You'd think the opposite would be true. I'm not sure what's going on there.

Issues with damage not being terribly cumulative are still paramount here in damn near all the tests, but I've talked about that enough before (I tend to repeat myself enough already).

Elephant kicks not doing much is quite odd. It seems to me that creature size in general isn't doing enough, actually. A more massive creature should put more weight into a striking/wrestling move. They should also successfully absorb more force from strikes, which the elephant didn't seem to be doing very well, if at all.

I don't even have a clue what's up with the elephant wrestling the donkey, as amusing as it was. I thought wrestling for animals was disabled, but maybe I was wrong? However, I saw no other animals doing it at all. Wacky!


Magma/heat damage is still wacky, and I have some pretty serious issues, medically-speaking, with some of the raw values for animal tissue, but that'll have to wait until I talk to Djohaal/Kefka on IRC about them more (he's a med student) so I can compile a nice, well-reasoned list.



[Edit]
I almost forgot this:

Cows vs. Dogs vs. Butchery

For some reason, cows produce less fat than dogs, and slightly less meat as well. I have no freaking clue why. This perplexes me.


[Edit (again)]

From the raws, it seems like the hair template has better shear strength than skin does. Did Toady mess up and use the values for pure keratin? Is a layer of hair causing cats and other furry critters to be protected too much? Is the hair treated as a solid layer of the material instead of a stringy, fuzzy mess? I sure as hell don't know!
Title: Re: My comments from testing arena mode, on combat/damage (plus a few other things)
Post by: Footkerchief on June 09, 2010, 05:44:38 pm
Anything vs. Magma

Still just as absurd. Interestingly, while live alligators will catch fire, dead ones will not. Their corpses instead rot faster (although this might have just been a coincidence) and take damage, the blood also boiling off, but only after quite a while. This dead alligator is now an "XXAlligator CorpseXX" but not on fire yet. A few turns later, it disappeared entirely, presumably due to the massive damage.

IIRC, it's hard to get ANYTHING to ignite in the new version.  Most flammable materials seem to just evaporate from heat damage instead of catching fire.

From the raws, it seems like the hair template has better shear strength than skin does. Did Toady mess up and use the values for pure keratin? Is a layer of hair causing cats and other furry critters to be protected too much? Is the hair treated as a solid layer of the material instead of a stringy, fuzzy mess? I sure as hell don't know!

I believe that the different TISSUE_LAYER_SHAPE is meant to limit the effectiveness of hair/fur, but who knows whether that's working.
Title: Re: My comments from testing arena mode, on combat/damage (plus a few other things)
Post by: G-Flex on June 09, 2010, 07:21:36 pm
Anything vs. Magma

Still just as absurd. Interestingly, while live alligators will catch fire, dead ones will not. Their corpses instead rot faster (although this might have just been a coincidence) and take damage, the blood also boiling off, but only after quite a while. This dead alligator is now an "XXAlligator CorpseXX" but not on fire yet. A few turns later, it disappeared entirely, presumably due to the massive damage.

IIRC, it's hard to get ANYTHING to ignite in the new version.  Most flammable materials seem to just evaporate from heat damage instead of catching fire.

Yeah, the unusual part here is that the creature's tissue was fine about igniting while the thing was still alive, but not on the ground. I guess there's some issue with how temperature transfer to items is done compared to creature tissues, but the fact that the corpse got damaged means temperature was transferring, but perhaps transferring away (to the air? I'm not sure how DF handles this) almost as fast.

Quote
From the raws, it seems like the hair template has better shear strength than skin does. Did Toady mess up and use the values for pure keratin? Is a layer of hair causing cats and other furry critters to be protected too much? Is the hair treated as a solid layer of the material instead of a stringy, fuzzy mess? I sure as hell don't know!

I believe that the different TISSUE_LAYER_SHAPE is meant to limit the effectiveness of hair/fur, but who knows whether that's working.

Feh, I missed that. Thanks. I guess hair's not really an issue, then.

Actually, it might be! Think about this: That only covers the tissue. If an item, hypothetically, gets made out of hair, it would function like solid hair-leather. This doesn't happen right now, but consider, say, wool, or what implications this might have for other things. The basic weirdness here is that the composition of the material is handled totally differently for armor, for tissues, and for other things, since it's all kind of cludged about, primarily so special cases can be handled. Ideally, you should be able to say "This [THING] is made out of [STRANDS] of [HAIR]" no matter the identity of [THING], instead of having completely different ways to say "[STRANDS]" for each type of [THING] (or no way at all, in some cases). I'd say that the material system really should have another tier to its hierarchy, so that it's MATERIAL -> FORM -> ITEM instead of simply MATERIAL -> ITEM with some FORM cludges in place for certain types of FORMs/ITEMs. This way, you could have, say, armor made out of scaled/barred/woven/linked material, or material in any other arbitrary form, simply depending on where the material came from, in a natural manner, without it having to be handled specially.


Interestingly enough, the scales tissue template has TISSUE_LAYER_SHAPE:SCALES and not TISSUE_LAYER_SHAPE:LAYER. I have no idea how this affects things.


For fun, I changed hair to have TISSUE_SHAPE:LAYER and had two cats fight each other, resulting in stuff like this:
Quote
Cat 2 scratches Cat 1 in the upper body, tearing the hair!
Cat 2 bites Cat 1 in the left rear paw, denting the hair!
Amusing.




A note regarding weight encumbrance due to equipment
We know that encumbrance due to hauled items works in DF (I've seen a dwarf haul around a slade stone, and it takes... a while), and I know from previous tests that DF doesn't take weight of a weapon into account (or at least not enough) when determining swing/attack speed (a dwarf with a slade weapon weighing as much as a small vehicle probably shouldn't be able to lift it; dwarves with heavy weapons should attack more slowly, clumsily, and with less velocity, but this doesn't appear to be the case).

What I didn't know is that encumbrance in general appears to be sort of... not there, at least when it comes to worn equipment.

I spawned an elephant wearing a slade mail shirt. The shirt weighed 33,278 kg (that's about 33 metric tons), but the elephant danced around his opponent and ran around just fine. I also spawned two dwarves on opposing teams, one wearing nothing and the other wearing a full suit of slade armor (about 1982 kg or, in other words, a hell of a lot more than the car I drive), and saw them rush each other. They seemed to move at virtually the same pace, even though a dwarf hauling a slade stone does so at a reasonably slow pace.
Title: Re: My comments from testing arena mode, on combat/damage (plus a few other things)
Post by: Greiger on June 09, 2010, 07:57:11 pm
In my own experiments in arena with weight I noticed that it can eventually have an effect.  I can't say I did quite as professional testing as you did, but in arena I weilded a lion corpse, and elephant corpse and a whale corpse and beat up unarmed elves with the weapons.  it was with the same creature weilding the corpses at least. 

the lion corpse wasn't very effective, but it could break a bone now and then, which surpassed my expectations.  Elf died when a chunk of skull lodged in the brain.

The elephant corpse was remarkably effective.  I would say very nearly as effective as an actual iron maul.  It regularly broke bones, almost every swing.  I don't quite recall how that elf died though, think it bled to death or something from a compound fracture messing up an artery.

The whale corpse however was absolutely worthless.  I assume it was too heavy.  The most damaging strike was a dent to the fat.  The elf eventually strangled me to death.
Title: Re: My comments from testing arena mode, on combat/damage (plus a few other things)
Post by: G-Flex on June 09, 2010, 08:42:42 pm
Keep in mind that a whale corpse weighs a lot more than any weapon, though.

I just spawned four whales and let them air-drown, and they weighed between 12,400 and 35,000 (quite a range there) kilograms. I also spawned some elephants, getting weights between 4,400 and 7,500 kilograms.

For comparison, even a slade maul is "only" 260 kilograms.


I'm glad you brought your experience up, because if you're right, it means that weapon weight is taken into consideration in this manner, but only at truly absurd weights.

Of course, it might still be true that you were still able to attack quickly with the whale corpse, or that it didn't slow down your movement, or that things might play out differently for armor.
Title: Re: My comments from testing arena mode, on combat/damage (plus a few other things)
Post by: Footkerchief on June 09, 2010, 10:54:20 pm
I'm glad you brought your experience up, because if you're right, it means that weapon weight is taken into consideration in this manner, but only at truly absurd weights.

I suspect he balanced that part of the calculations before the weight units got changed.  Similar oversights would explain related bugs like armor items weighing ridiculously little (http://www.bay12games.com/dwarves/mantisbt/view.php?id=297) and the problem you mentioned above with heavy armor not burdening its wearers.
Title: Re: My comments from testing arena mode, on combat/damage (plus a few other things)
Post by: Misterstone on June 09, 2010, 11:05:27 pm
I noticed today that a Bronze Colossus dies in magma (it says "Bronze Colossus has melted" or something similar).  An alligator skeleton did not die... the worst that happened was it's limbs turned brown, the rest of the body turned yellow.  The alligator skeleton produced smoke continuously despite having no worn equipment, though.
Title: Re: My comments from testing arena mode, on combat/damage (plus a few other things)
Post by: G-Flex on June 10, 2010, 05:13:47 am
Yep.


I suspect he balanced that part of the calculations before the weight units got changed.  Similar oversights would explain related bugs like armor items weighing ridiculously little (http://www.bay12games.com/dwarves/mantisbt/view.php?id=297) and the problem you mentioned above with heavy armor not burdening its wearers.

Haha, I noticed the thing with armor. Slade gauntlets and boots weigh 2kg each. Go figure.
Title: Re: My comments from testing arena mode, on combat/damage (plus a few other things)
Post by: Jiri Petru on June 10, 2010, 08:09:09 am
Haha, I noticed the thing with armor. Slade gauntlets and boots weigh 2kg each. Go figure.

Meaning the whole set of slade gauntlets and boots weights the same as a cat skull totem  :D
Title: Re: My comments from testing arena mode, on combat/damage (plus a few other things)
Post by: Wyrm on June 12, 2010, 09:37:06 pm
IIRC, it's hard to get ANYTHING to ignite in the new version.  Most flammable materials seem to just evaporate from heat damage instead of catching fire.
That shouldn't happen unless vaporization temperature > ignition temperature. Perhaps if a phase change temperature is higher than an ignition temperature, that phase change should be overridden altogether.
Title: Re: My comments from testing arena mode, on combat/damage (plus a few other things)
Post by: Toybasher on June 30, 2010, 06:41:21 pm
Can you test how disembowlment works and the requirements for a wound to allow gut-popping action?