Print

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

[Pvt. Pirate]

seeing the many listed weapons in some mods and how they change bows and crossbows while shooting my english longbow regularly makes me cringe:
1. crossbows were only superior by the fact, that shooting a crossbow doesnt require even 1% of the training needed to effectively fire a longbow.
so training a crossbow-soldier takes less time, as even a child can fire it once it's loaded: just point at the enemy and fire, while shooting the bow is much more complicated.
2. even though hunting bows of 30lbs are usually enough to kill a deer, warbows began at 120lbs and archeologists even found warbows of 180lbs strength on sunken british ships.
3. there is no known medieval armor that could withstand such a bow on a direct hit - only on a flat angle, it can ricochet.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bodkin_point
most of the tests on armor are done with maximum 30lbs bows and of course against a chainmail either on a wooden wall or hanging free and are not in any way representive as a fleshbody behind that chainmail would definitely result in the arrow going right through.
4. shields dont help either: we shot at a 6cm (2.5'') massive oaken shield with a 60lbs longbow , wooden arrows with 0815 standard sport arrowheads and it went right through.

i hope someone can give these weapons more realism in the game, as i think all of this can be implemented.

[Alfrodo]

Wouldn't that mean just making crossbows more overpowered or adding a "Pull Weight" to bows and crossbows, and making bows take forever to learn?

[Pvt. Pirate]

medieval crossbows were of around 75lbs if i remember correctly.
longbows have a greater maximum distance than crossbows.
the trick is this: a crossbow takes a lot more time to reload if you're not as strong, as you have to use the wind to ready it.
Reports say that english lonbowmen fired up to 120 arrows per minute onto the battlefield.
those shots arent perfectly aimed, but a mere salvo on a battlefield, comparable to MG suppressive fire salvoes.
even aimed shots by a longbow will not take as much time as shots by crossbow.
so, the bow can shoot faster and potentially stronger and further than the crossbow.
using strength as a "damage", "accuracy" and "max reach" multiplyer for bows only would be the way as even a kid can pull a heavy bow, but not even slightly to its full extent and thus will never shoot as far, as accurate and as strong as a trained grown-up archer.
not being trained properly also leads to not pulling the bow correctly and not getting the maximum power to the arrow -> lower reach and lower energy meaning less potential damage.
the muscles needed for shooting a bow are back/neck/shoulder/triceps so the general strength which mostly represents the strngth of the muscles involved in lifting heavy weights is rather useless, but for now it should be okay.
we sometimes have guests who are welltrained weightlifters and yet can't shoot my 40lbs bow, while their tiny girlfriend can.
and i've seen very slender guys shoot 80lbs bows with ease.

the only reason for the success of the crossbow against the longbow was that an archer can now shoot deadly after a very short introduction to the weapon opposed to the necessary training for effeciently shooting a longbow.

TL;DR:
my idea is to have the following
bow damage influenced by strength & training & lbs of the bow ((strength / 10) * (training / 100) * basedamage = damage)
bow accuracy influenced by strength & training
bow max shooting distance influenced by strength & training & lbs of the bow

crossbow damage fixed value smaller than longbow basedamage (maybe half)
crossbow accuracy influenced by training
crossbow max shooting distance fixed value

[Alfrodo]

If so, I think this is more of a suggestion thread than a modding thread.



These are the moddable raws for a ranged weapon.

Code: [Select]

[ITEM_WEAPON:ITEM_WEAPON_BOW]
[NAME:bow:bows]
[SIZE:300] (Melee damage)
[SKILL:SWORD]
[RANGED:BOW:ARROW] (Ammo)
[SHOOT_FORCE:1000] (Max force. Quality comes into play again, I am sure.)
[SHOOT_MAXVEL:200] (Here's where the pull thing would come in handy, but it's MAX, quality comes into play here, I believe.)
[TWO_HANDED:0] (So you can't shoot the bow with one hand.)
[MINIMUM_SIZE:15000]
[MATERIAL_SIZE:3]
[ATTACK:BLUNT:10000:4000:bash:bashes:NO_SUB:1250] (Melee)
[ATTACK_PREPARE_AND_RECOVER:3:3]


[ITEM_WEAPON:ITEM_WEAPON_CROSSBOW]
[NAME:crossbow:crossbows]
[SIZE:400]
[SKILL:HAMMER]
[RANGED:CROSSBOW:BOLT]
[SHOOT_FORCE:1000]
[SHOOT_MAXVEL:200]  This is just to make sure a near-weightless object doesn't go faster than the string could possibly go.
[TWO_HANDED:0]
[MINIMUM_SIZE:15000]
[MATERIAL_SIZE:3]
[ATTACK:BLUNT:10000:4000:bash:bashes:NO_SUB:1250]
[ATTACK_PREPARE_AND_RECOVER:3:3]
Bow and Crossbow accuracy is already entirely determined by skill/stats.  And in the raws, they are functionally identical. (I understand you do not want them this way.)

Shooting distance (In adventure mode, you can see 40m ahead of you, no further.) is fixed and hardcoded, "Draw Weight" is based on quality. and Reload times are already based on skill for both.

I guess you could change the "draw weight" by either increasing the quality or raising that Force Number in the raws.  But there's no way to make it so Crossbows don't vary in power but bows do.

[AceSV]

Didn't medieval crossbows have draw weights in the hundreds of pounds?  like 300-500?  I see a forum post that says European crossbows could exceed 1000lb draw weights, but I'm not sure I buy that.  I know modern hunting crossbows aren't much stronger than bows because deer don't fight back, but medieval crossbows were designed to pierce plate armor and they did. 

Not to say the longbow doesn't have its advantages.  In the War of 1812, Creeks on the side of the British used a combination of bows and firearms to fight the Americans.  They would bring their loaded muskets into battle, fire a volley and then switch to their bows while either hiding or retreating, the high volume of arrows preventing the American gunmen from pursuing them while them escaped to safety to reload the guns for another pass.  If a longbow can go toe-to-toe with muskets, it can go toe-to-toe with crossbows. 



Unfortunately there isn't an easy way to implement the improvements you suggest.  We can't touch the combat equations with mods.

[Alfrodo]

Didn't medieval crossbows have draw weights in the hundreds of pounds?  like 300-500?  I see a forum post that says European crossbows could exceed 1000lb draw weights, but I'm not sure I buy that.  I know modern hunting crossbows aren't much stronger than bows because deer don't fight back, but medieval crossbows were designed to pierce plate armor and they did. 

Not to say the longbow doesn't have its advantages.  In the War of 1812, Creeks on the side of the British used a combination of bows and firearms to fight the Americans.  They would bring their loaded muskets into battle, fire a volley and then switch to their bows while either hiding or retreating, the high volume of arrows preventing the American gunmen from pursuing them while them escaped to safety to reload the guns for another pass.  If a longbow can go toe-to-toe with muskets, it can go toe-to-toe with crossbows. 

I don't believe one could PULL a 1000lb draw weight.  The heaviest benchpress was about 1,008lbs.  So maybe that would be a Balista or something, meant to be armed by multiple British Folk.

Modern crossbow draw weight goes to about 290 pounds. So imagine pulling a lever with the weight of a stereotyped weeaboo to reload a bolt.

Unfortunately there isn't an easy way to implement the improvements you suggest.  We can't touch the combat equations with mods.

That was basically my point, except there isn't a way to implement "Bow forces vary by strength but crossbows only vary by quality."

[AceSV]

I don't believe one could PULL a 1000lb draw weight.  The heaviest benchpress was about 1,008lbs.  So maybe that would be a Balista or something, meant to be armed by multiple British Folk.

Modern crossbow draw weight goes to about 290 pounds. So imagine pulling a lever with the weight of a stereotyped weeaboo to reload a bolt.

Well part of the appeal of a crossbow is that it has a crank, so that you don't have to pull the draw weight.  That's why they take longer to fire, you have to crank several times to build up maximum force. 

Modern material science could probably make crossbows that would rip through concrete, 290lb is just enough for hunting.  Selling a crossbow strong enough to penetrate medieval plate armor would probably be against the law. 

EDIT:  Just thought I'd check wikipedia.  Apparently, because crossbows have a shorter draw length, they need a higher draw weight to get the same amount of shooting force, so directly comparing draw weight of crossbow to longbow is not useful. 

[Zammer990]

An important factor to consider is that bows and crossbows only had real 1-hit killing potential at extremely close range; 30 feet against a fully armoured knight. Firing at longer ranges was far less effective, as a heavy arrow loses power very quickly. Tests firing arrows at breastplates and having penetration does not mean the resulting blow would be fatal, or even hindering; gambesons etc. formed a thick layer of defense to breach.

If crossbows were more powerful outright, why didn't every army the world over simply have crossbows, and why bother with bows?

The current model of armour is far from perfect, but providing survivability from arrows, with the indeterminate ranging of the df world, is far from completely unrealistic.

[Alfrodo]

30 feet against a fully armoured knight

Keep in mind as well
40m(Maximum Vision, and therefore bolt range) = 130 feet

Which, still isn't that much.

[dwarf_sadist]

If crossbows were more powerful outright, why didn't every army the world over simply have crossbows, and why bother with bows?

The Pope banned them because they were so powerful and allowed any peasant to kill a highly trained and armoured knight with practically no effort. The longbow is also easier to maintain and had longer range, while the crossbow string needs to be looked after much more carefully. Also, a longbow is much easier to manufacture in bulk than a crossbow, with practically every Yeoman and Peasant having one for hunting.

[AssassinT90]

3. there is no known medieval armor that could withstand such a bow on a direct hit - only on a flat angle, it can ricochet.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bodkin_point
most of the tests on armor are done with maximum 30lbs bows and of course against a chainmail either on a wooden wall or hanging free and are not in any way representive as a fleshbody behind that chainmail would definitely result in the arrow going right through.
4. shields dont help either: we shot at a 6cm (2.5'') massive oaken shield with a 60lbs longbow , wooden arrows with 0815 standard sport arrowheads and it went right through.

I know what Bernard Cornwell has written. But reality is a little less, say, fantastic.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D3997HZuWjk

[Pvt. Pirate]

as i stated, most tests were done with way too low lbs bows and crossbows.
a gambeson, which was worn below every chainmail, would not hold back the blow of a >120 lbs bow with a 1 inch thick arrow and
those kevlar wests without a ceramic plate can't stop that either.
and even if it wouldnt penetrate, it could still send the enemy to the ground by the heavy blow.
modern bows and crossbows reach this power easily by having multiple pulleys, but medieval bows and crossbows didnt have such mechanisms.
not all crossbows have a crank or comparable loading mechanism.
those 1000lbs crossbow necessarily has to be a huge weapon mounted on a cart or stationary mount.

I've been there when my friend shot through the shield with his 60lbs bow.
that's not a bodkin arrowhead. and they didn't state what lbs the bow has, but as they used standard shafts, that cannot be a 120lbs warbow.

[JesterHell696]

First I'd like to point out that I know nothing about bows or plate armor.

When I saw this topic I thought it looked interesting and reading though it made me wonder just how accurate it was so I google "Longbow vs Plate" and got these.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D3997HZuWjk
A some what questionable "Lab" test not enough penetration to pierce the skin beneath the plate. (the same one AssassinT90 posted)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q2lbB3OMNns
A questionable garage test with a flat plate, penetrates but its hard to tell how much also the close up seems to show rust.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q-Xp56uVyxs
Another test against flat plate with three bows at 95, 100 and 100 lbs shows arrows bouncing off and only penetrating with repeated hits.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KCE40J93m5c
110lb bow at 25 meters got about an inch penetration so enough to hurt but not kill.


And finally this guy (Matt Easton) http://www.fioredeiliberi.org/training/ does a 21 minute video about it here.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q1WZLVZYBwQ
And he has a lot to say about the subject using historical references that I don't know, a point of note is that he says that the Best Quality Armour's worked and that most soldier weren't heavily armored.


So I guess that amour over a certain quality level would reliably stop a long bow and lower quality armor would be easily pierced and given that in dwarf fortress you can outfit your militia with Superior, Exceptional and Masterful steel plate armor...

[Dirst]

So I guess that amour over a certain quality level would reliably stop a long bow and lower quality armor would be easily pierced and given that in dwarf fortress you can outfit your militia with Superior, Exceptional and Masterful steel plate armor...

Real towns could also muster hundreds of men for defense.  FPS concerns demand that dwarves take a more quality-over-quantity approach.

Well, except for people who can't figure out the military screen.  They have to hope that sending every beard into a fight will work somehow.

[Featheredragon]

I started making a mod that makes ranged weaponry as realistic as possible while only altering the Raws. It's on page 4. Or search "Featheredragons ranged weaponry rebalance and addition mod". The Raws and other information is on the post. Still need to finish and release it.


As to the question of bow weighing up to 1000lbs, the existed. Payne -Galloway restored a medieval siege crossbow that had a draw weight of 1200lbs. It had remained spanned cocked for a few hundred years. It's original draw weigh has been estimated to be around 3000lbs.

Longbows being superior to crossbow is just a myth. The draw length of crossbow is shorter that that of a long bow so you have to compensate by using a heavier draw weigh. This means crossbow s are slightly more inefficient. My PVC 100lb crossbow about equals a 40-50 pound bow. However due to the fact you did not have to continue holding a crossbow draw, as well as could use mechanical spanning devices, you could have much more powerful crossbows. Also shorter and stiffer crossbow bolts do not bendy in flight and when hitting target so retain power better.

If you do not understand how such crossbows were spanned, they used devices like the belt and claw, cord and pulley, gafa lever and wippe lever for mid to military grade bows (200-470ish lbs). And Winlass and cranquin for heavy to siege crossbows (500-1200+ lbs).

Tods stuff has good videos on reloading and shooting these crossbows, as well as sells them if you don't want make you're own.

More edits:

My blacksmithing equipment and 175 crossbow prod arrived, so if anybody wants test done just let me know. Th first thing I plan to make with my forge is some mild steel bodkins points, no more hardening than you're average quench though. The Heavyer poundage crossbow will take a bit longer. If anybody can afford one of Tods 1200 lb siege bows I would love to see how that fares against plate.