Bay 12 Games Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  
Pages: 1 2 3 [4]

Author Topic: Why not crossbows?  (Read 20894 times)

yggiz

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Why not crossbows?
« Reply #45 on: October 23, 2008, 04:29:27 am »

lol the arguments.

Crossbow or longbow, I don't want to get shot at by either.

I would love to see reload times get bigger for DF.
Logged

Deadmeat1471

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Why not crossbows?
« Reply #46 on: October 23, 2008, 05:10:20 am »

I suggest calling them crosscannons.
Logged

Kittah_Khan

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Why not crossbows?
« Reply #47 on: October 23, 2008, 05:21:53 am »

As I understand it, the battle of Agincourt had the crossbowmen losing because they missed an essential part of their kit, specially modified shields they used to quickly reload and hide behind, so the mercenaries pretty much went on the field at less than full effectiveness.

Treating longbows as the ultimate medieval ranged weapon is simply foolish, they were reasonably effective, but they didn't dominate the battlefield.
It almost reminds me of japanophiles salivating over katana.
Logged

(name here)

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Why not crossbows?
« Reply #48 on: October 23, 2008, 05:48:38 am »

As I understand it, the battle of Agincourt had the crossbowmen losing because they missed an essential part of their kit, specially modified shields they used to quickly reload and hide behind, so the mercenaries pretty much went on the field at less than full effectiveness.

Treating longbows as the ultimate medieval ranged weapon is simply foolish, they were reasonably effective, but they didn't dominate the battlefield.
It almost reminds me of japanophiles salivating over katana.


They didn't dominate the battlefield for a varity of reasons. for one thing, they require the right kind of wood, which is not common outside of england. or in england, for that matter.
Logged
Only in Dwarf Fortress would you try to catch a mermaid to butcher her and make trophies out of her bones 

Marlowe

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Why not crossbows?
« Reply #49 on: October 29, 2008, 06:56:33 pm »

As I understand it, the battle of Agincourt had the crossbowmen losing because they missed an essential part of their kit, specially modified shields they used to quickly reload and hide behind, so the mercenaries pretty much went on the field at less than full effectiveness.

Treating longbows as the ultimate medieval ranged weapon is simply foolish, they were reasonably effective, but they didn't dominate the battlefield.
It almost reminds me of japanophiles salivating over katana.

Katanas never won a battle, much less a dozen.

The Crossbows were at Crecy, not Agincourt.

EDIT: And Portable Pavises big enough to "hide behind" from arrows coming from ABOVE while you reload a friggin' heavy crossbow standing up are not part of any standard kit. Or this universe for that matter.
« Last Edit: October 29, 2008, 10:14:54 pm by Marlowe »
Logged

Bromor Neckbeard

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Why not crossbows?
« Reply #50 on: October 29, 2008, 09:10:42 pm »

Quote from: MagicGuigz
I was just wondering why one would use anything else than crossbows.

Because having a Legendary Champion Hammerdwarf in full plate charge into a crowd of thirteen goblin ambushers, batting them off thirty squares in every direction, and following the last one through the air, hitting him over and over before he finally lands, scattering his limbs and blood over a square mile, is just freakin' EPIC.

Cowering behind towering walls and impenetrable fortifications while shooting at the enemy from a safe distance is safe and effective, but it's not glorious.
Logged

Kate Wissen

  • Bay Watcher
  • Proficient Engineer
    • View Profile
    • http://katewissen.blogspot.com/
Re: Why not crossbows?
« Reply #51 on: October 30, 2008, 03:55:59 am »

It should be noted that even spears and pikes can do instantly fatal damage. In fact I would wager a guess that every weapon is capable of a 1 hit kill. The reason that the crossbow seems so severe is that it's ranged. Honestly I think that it really is a helpful balance for the invaders to have. After all you could use any combination of death traps, cage traps, siege weapons, war animals. Heck you can sick dragons on your opponents. You yourself could even use them to even the odds. If you nerf the ranged combat you do severe damage to the offensive power of invading forces.

After all if there is no danger at all, how much fun would a fight be?

EDIT: Also as magic gets added this will probably become much less of an issue. Or more of one, who knows.
« Last Edit: October 30, 2008, 03:59:46 am by Kate Wissen »
Logged
Check out my current Community Fortress LostPages.



One day I hope to create the Monkey Torture Chamber of Doom!

Tormy

  • Bay Watcher
  • I shall not pass?
    • View Profile
Re: Why not crossbows?
« Reply #52 on: October 30, 2008, 07:22:24 am »

EDIT: Also as magic gets added this will probably become much less of an issue. Or more of one, who knows.

Eh....magic? Do you realize that magic won't be implemented in the upcoming years at all? [Sadly.. :-X]
http://www.bay12games.com/dwarves/dev_future.html

So basically -as it is now- Toady plans to add magic after v1.0 is completed.

Logged

Kate Wissen

  • Bay Watcher
  • Proficient Engineer
    • View Profile
    • http://katewissen.blogspot.com/
Re: Why not crossbows?
« Reply #53 on: October 30, 2008, 12:08:47 pm »

Oh I realize. I'm just noting it will be in there eventually. Ranged combat is terrifying to be sure. But I do think that it helps keep things interesting for the late game.
Logged
Check out my current Community Fortress LostPages.



One day I hope to create the Monkey Torture Chamber of Doom!

Asehujiko

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Why not crossbows?
« Reply #54 on: November 04, 2008, 01:54:23 pm »

Another interesting note about crossbows(or atleast arbalests) are the only non-gunpowder based handheld weapons that feature a noticeable recoil. It most likely won't knock you on your back like some modern day portable cannons but enough to make you stumble the first time you fired it. Repeating crossbows are tiny and that's why they are capabe of semi automatic fire at reasonable accuracy. And they are heavier then the average rifle.
Logged
Code: [Select]
Tremble, mortal, and despair! Doom has come to this world!
.....EEEE..E..E.E...EEE.EE.EE.EEE.EE..EE.EE.E.EE.EE.E.EE.
......E..EE.EE.EE.EE..E...EEEE..E..E.E...EEE.EEE...E.EEE.
.☺..EE.E...E.EE.EE...E.EE..E..EE.EE.EE.EE..E...EE.EE..E.E
.....E..E.E.E.E.E.EE.E.E.EE.E...E.EE.EE...E.EE.EE.EEE...E
....E.EE.EEE.EE..EE.EE.E..EEEE..E..E.E...EEE.EEE..E.E..EE

Robbox

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Why not crossbows?
« Reply #55 on: November 04, 2008, 04:47:08 pm »

Quote from: MagicGuigz
I was just wondering why one would use anything else than crossbows.

Because having a Legendary Champion Hammerdwarf in full plate charge into a crowd of thirteen goblin ambushers, batting them off thirty squares in every direction, and following the last one through the air, hitting him over and over before he finally lands, scattering his limbs and blood over a square mile, is just freakin' EPIC.

Cowering behind towering walls and impenetrable fortifications while shooting at the enemy from a safe distance is safe and effective, but it's not glorious.

Sounds almost like my own EPIC Melee Champion moment.  One of my champs gets ambushed and promptly begins wholesale slaughter while the rest of his team scrambles to get in a kill or two.  Well this guy has an artifact mace, so naturally he sent a goblin flying.  However the epic part wasn't him chasing the flying goblin, but the fact that he launched it dead square to a second champion.  The second champ not only caught the flying goblin, he bashed it's skull in and together they ran down the justifiably scared goblins that survived so far.  My most epic crossbow moment was watching my highly skilled champ marks-dwarf unload ten bolts to bring down a naked kobold.  Real Dwarves don't hog all the kills!

I think the problem lies not only in the range but the speed of fire.  If my deductions are right, then each shot has the same chance of piercing something important for a fast kill.  Normally with melee that's not a problem, as I don't think there is any speed factor at all (Could be wrong, my computer hates Adventure Mode for some reason so I don't get to see combat logs), however when you're getting the equivalent of 5+ attacks a round from range, it starts to get a little unbalanced.  It's not really bad at the moment but I'd prefer to see an attack rate reduction with a fair damage increase.  That way defensive skills are more effective, but the crossbow isn't useless.
Logged
Pages: 1 2 3 [4]