Bay 12 Games Forum

Please login or register.

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

Author Topic: weapon size vs weapon weight  (Read 4490 times)

Lagslayer

  • Bay Watcher
  • stand-up philosopher
    • View Profile
weapon size vs weapon weight
« on: July 03, 2011, 01:55:23 am »

After all the talk of whip modding recently, I gotta know. Would modifying the weapon size in the RAWS have an effect on the weight of the weapon as a whole? A solution to the whip problem was to reduce the size, but if this would also reduce the weight of the weapon as a whole, then a weak dwarf would be able to swing it mush faster than normal (assuming strength has a non-linear relation to weapon swing frequency). So a whip would go from size 100 to 1, meaning even a weak dwarf would be able to swing it as fast as a superdwarvenly strong military behemoth (albeit with less force).

It's a relatively small problem, but it keeps nagging at the back of my mind.

AutomataKittay

  • Bay Watcher
  • Grinding gears
    • View Profile
Re: weapon size vs weapon weight
« Reply #1 on: July 03, 2011, 02:00:00 am »

you can make a separate copy (so you don't accidentally play what you're tweaking to test ) of DF and try it out in arena mode. I believe that weapon size does relates to mass, and more mass makes things deadly in first place.
Logged

Alastar

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: weapon size vs weapon weight
« Reply #2 on: July 03, 2011, 03:06:21 am »

It would. Weapon size is the volume of the weapon in cm³, which gets multiplied by the density of the material to get the weapon weight.

Regarding whips: Reducing the weight used in the impact calculations is the whole point of tinkering with their size. Weak dwarves swinging them quickly isn't a problem either - it takes little strength to accelerate a whip tip to supersonic speed.

Attack rate has bigger problems: Balance is imbalanced. Hammer-liked weapons that have a lot of weight concentrated at the business end are rewarded with higher velocity modifiers, but aren't penalised for being harder to control (this should result in lower attack rates and being less suitable for parrying).
Logged

Girlinhat

  • Bay Watcher
  • [PREFSTRING:large ears]
    • View Profile
Re: weapon size vs weapon weight
« Reply #3 on: July 03, 2011, 05:01:31 am »

Weapons come down to three issues: Size, Weight, and Contact Area.  A large copper dagger tends to be very lethal due to its very small contact area, 5.  That's measured in cm2 btw.  For comparison, a dwarf-made spear has a contact area of 20, meaning that the dagger gets its damage 4x more concentrated for stabbing power.  The second issue is size, a dagger has a size of 200, and a spear has a size of 400.  That means 200/5 = 40 size per contact, while a spear has 20 size per contact.  The dagger is approx. twice as good at penetrating than a same-material spear.

When it comes to blunt weapons, mass is a big issues.  Warhammers and Whips, warhammer is size 400, contact 10.  Whip is size 100, contact 1.  That's right, 1.  Warhammer gets 40 size-per-contact, whip gets an incredible 100-per-contact.  Silver has a density of 10940.  Given the wiki's forumala that weight = density * (size / 1,000,000) then the weight of a silver warhammer is 4.376Γ and a silver whip is 1.094Γ in weight.  Taking their size-contact ratio into account, a warhammer will exert roughly 0.4376 kg/cm2 pressure, and a whip exerts roughly 1.094kg/cm2 pressure, which is exactly 2.5x more directed pressure.

But there's an added twist.  The Velocity Multiplier is somewhat poorly understood, but is presumably a direct multiplier of force.  A warhammer has a 2.0 multiplier, copying the way the hammer's mass is concentrated at the tip and allows heavier swings, the weapon's power gets a 2x multiplier.  The whip, on the other hand, gets a massive 5.0 multiplier.  This means those previous numbers come up to an effective 0.8752 kg/cm2 and 5.47 kg/cm2.  That's a difference of 6.25x more power for the whip than the warhammer.

This is all assuming silver weapons.  A silver war hammer compared to a steel whip (heaviest and lightest weapon metals, respectively) still comes out to .8752 for the hammer and 3.925 for the whip, a ~4.48x difference in effective power.  This is why those goblin whip lords will chip bone on every single strike through 4 layers of armor and 3 layers of clothes.  They're basically throwing around live ammunition.  It doesn't take long for a dwarf to give in to pain, and then when he's on the ground, every shot is a headshot.  That ☼Adamantine Helm☼ is garbage against a -Silver Whip-.  The dodging and shield skills are the only thing that will save you.

Also, this is all assuming I'm not talking out of my ass.  I could be completely wrong, but reading the numbers off the raws/wiki, it's obvious to me that whips are grossly overpowered due to their contact area and velocity multiplier.  You may perform modding attempt and/or ‼Science‼ according.

EDIT: I just realized that I wrote a much shorter response on the Terraria forums a while back.  Someone was suggesting a crossbow as a fast-firing, low-damage type of bow.  I wrote out a response describing the crossbow's use in history and firing style, and that it was most commonly preferred because it hit very hard and could pierce a knight's armor.  The only response I got was "lol, I wouldn't have written a response that long."  Sometimes I take B12's community for granted...
« Last Edit: July 03, 2011, 05:06:18 am by Girlinhat »
Logged

CriticallyAshamed

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: weapon size vs weapon weight
« Reply #4 on: July 03, 2011, 05:20:43 am »

I thought whips were only powerful against unarmored people? Maybe that was an older version however. I distinctly remember it saying that whips were incredibly good against unarmoreds as they would quickly chip bones but were not as effective against armor. I don't have much experience with lashing though so I'm probably talking out the wrong end.
Logged

Girlinhat

  • Bay Watcher
  • [PREFSTRING:large ears]
    • View Profile
Re: weapon size vs weapon weight
« Reply #5 on: July 03, 2011, 05:22:02 am »

They should actually do very well against armor, as blunt strikes tend to hit through armor.  It's like putting a sheet of metal over a piece of jello and then hammering it.  The metal transfers the force of the impact.

kotekzot

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: weapon size vs weapon weight
« Reply #6 on: July 03, 2011, 09:21:14 am »

Attack speed = movement speed. The encumbrance difference between a 1 urist item and a 0.1 urist item is negligible.
Logged
Dwarf Fortress: Where violent death is a renewable resource
Bro, your like... thinking like a square man... its like, the WHOLE lamprey is just like, one big NECK dude, you know? its like hahahaha! dude protect the trees though, seriously. *inhale*... anyways... you like, want this dead black bear, bro?

Teneb

  • Bay Watcher
  • (they/them) Penguin rebellion
    • View Profile
Re: weapon size vs weapon weight
« Reply #7 on: July 03, 2011, 10:19:09 am »

In DF, as shown by the numbers Girlinhat posted above, whips are, literally, the ultimate weapon and one of the things that can make goblin sieges dangerous even when you fort has been going for years. In real life, whips are supposed to much damage as possible to the target, while not dealing as much damage. This is why they were often used to punish criminals.
Logged
Monstrous Manual: D&D in DF
Quote from: Tack
What if “slammed in the ass by dead philosophers” is actually the thing which will progress our culture to the next step?

Lagslayer

  • Bay Watcher
  • stand-up philosopher
    • View Profile
Re: weapon size vs weapon weight
« Reply #8 on: July 03, 2011, 10:31:09 am »

Attack speed = movement speed. The encumbrance difference between a 1 urist item and a 0.1 urist item is negligible.
I had never even considered this. I just cross-referenced with the wiki and it holds up. I no longer have any serious questions about modding whips to be smaller.

Oliolli

  • Bay Watcher
  • [PREFSTRING:unlikeability]
    • View Profile
Re: weapon size vs weapon weight
« Reply #9 on: July 03, 2011, 10:52:51 am »

Attack speed = movement speed.

Remember anyone playing adventurer mode, do not carry around all those trophy kill corpses.
Logged

Quote from: Girlinhat
When all you've got is an adjustable spanner and an entire freight warehouse of terrifying cogs and gears, everything looks like "just a prototype".
Quote from: ThatAussieGuy
You all turned Swordthunders into a bastion of madness that seems to warp in on itself under its own hatred of sanity.  I'm so happy!
Quote from: Loud Whispers
drowning babies everywhere o-o

Girlinhat

  • Bay Watcher
  • [PREFSTRING:large ears]
    • View Profile
Re: weapon size vs weapon weight
« Reply #10 on: July 03, 2011, 12:10:56 pm »

I seem to have missed that part of the OP.  While a lighter weapon WILL increase their attack speed, it will be in fractions of frames at best.  With the numbers I posted, a whip should weigh less than 1.2 urists at all times (unless you get a platinum mood, I guess).  Compared to their armor, shield, hell even compared to their waterskin, the whip weighs next to nothing, and you would have to increase its weight by several magnitudes to see a change in attack speed.

Basically: Size of weapons makes no real difference in attack speed, unless your weapon is actually a FB's corpse.

Anathema

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: weapon size vs weapon weight
« Reply #11 on: July 03, 2011, 12:50:25 pm »

Basically: Size of weapons makes no real difference in attack speed, unless your weapon is actually a FB's corpse.

I expect that's a side effect of having a single speed stat for both movement and attack. If weapons had a significant influence on speed, and say a guy with a dagger attacked 2x as often as a guy with a sword, he'd also have to run twice as fast.

According to the development page, for release 7 Toady's planning:

Quote
    Release 7
           
    • Combat move/speed split
    • Purchasing livestock/pets in adv mode
    • Mounted combat rewrite and related changes

That sounds like he's going to split movement speed and combat attack speed into separate stats? Should make weapon balance more interesting, with the possibility of significant differences between attack speeds, without the side effect of screwing up movement speed. ..And of course, different movement speeds (mounted soldier vs. infantry) without also attacking faster.
« Last Edit: July 03, 2011, 12:58:20 pm by Anathema »
Logged
The good news is that ghosts die of old age.

Girlinhat

  • Bay Watcher
  • [PREFSTRING:large ears]
    • View Profile
Re: weapon size vs weapon weight
« Reply #12 on: July 03, 2011, 01:01:38 pm »

Correct, he's mentioned this a few times but to me seems like "putting it off in favor of other things."  This will also allow for actual cheetahs.

Alastar

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: weapon size vs weapon weight
« Reply #13 on: July 04, 2011, 12:48:37 am »

In DF, as shown by the numbers Girlinhat posted above, whips are, literally, the ultimate weapon

Just a small correction: They're the ultimate can openers, not the ultimate weapons. A badly armoured and relatively unskilled goblin has a (worse-than-even but non-neglegible) chance of defeating a candy-clad champion when wielding a whip, but that champion could do better than whips to kill badly armoured goblins or random beasties.

The reason I suggested reducing whips' size is that most of the weapon exists to accelerate the tip and won't contribute its mass to the impact. Reduce size to 1 for a bullet-like tip, and you have a weapon that's still excellent at disabling through pain and capable of chipping bone, but stopped effectively by metal armour.
Logged

Girlinhat

  • Bay Watcher
  • [PREFSTRING:large ears]
    • View Profile
Re: weapon size vs weapon weight
« Reply #14 on: July 04, 2011, 12:50:48 am »

Reduce that velocity modifier instead.  5x velocity is more than any other weapon by far.
Pages: [1] 2