Firstly, weapon discussion.
Thanks all for your thoughts/contributions. There are currently twenty classes of weapons (and this will almost certainly not be added to), which fall into categories of short weapons, slashing weapons, long weapons, & heavy weapons:
In order of approximate best-to-worst:
Short weapons are kunais, daggers, stilettos, knives, and sais.
Slashing weapons are scimitars, shortswords, sabres, katanas and longswords.
Long weapons are pikes, spears, halberds, ranseurs and naginata.
Heavy weapons are clubs, warhammers, flails, maces and axes.
HOWEVER, some have particular specialties - warhammers will be best at pulling foes off horses, etc.
increased mass with identical acceleration would result more force, so a hammer made out of copper (fairly dense) would be better than a hammer made out of iron (less dense) because a hammer would be attempting to put as much force into the other person's body.
a sword, on the other hand, would be better is made out of iron than copper because iron is harder and can hold an edge (and get a sharper one) than copper, so it's be better for slicing through someone.
This; even without implementing the physics models of DF, there should be different hierarchies for different roles. Also, warhammers are generally piercing weapons.
That... is an interesting point. Currently materials make all weapons deadlier the better the material they are made out of. Different weapons and different classes are better at doing internal damage, external damage and various other factors, but the materials are a linear progression. On the one hand, changing the hierarchy for each weapon seems like the kind of detail I want, but on the flip side I don't want to make the process by which weapons are assessed too bizarre for the player to easily understand. Additionally it would make it far tougher for the AI to assess the quality of weaponry. However, I do see what you're saying; I'll have to think about it
If you have equipment wear/damage in place you could model things like that. A copper mace might be nice and powerful, but it'll hold up worse than a steel one.
Both weapons and armor can be damaged, deform, etc, though it's in a fairly basic form at the moment. I actually intend to keep this aspect quite simple since I don't want constant repair/management etc to detract from the gameplay I'm actually interested in. Basically, they drop in condition as you use them, and once they're at the lowest condition, they then carry a risk of breaking. There is also a risk of breaking at the second-lowest level of condition if something particularly violent happens to the item, too.
yes, but if you had weapons degrade, depending on what it is made of, you could have an interesting choice. A steel mace that'll last ages, or a silver one that'll be demonic in combat, buit will deform after a few whacks, and after a while, will become completely unusable...
also, will there be fantasy metals? if so, will they have any special effects, or just be super-strong etc.?
Materials do degrade at different speeds, you'll be pleased to hear!
No fantasy metals at the moment, and I'm 99% sure it'll be staying that way.
Another thing to keep in mind with bashing weapons is that heavier isn't always better. A really heavy maul will hit hard, but you might have a hard time hitting at all with how slow it is. Also, you're going to tire out a lot faster using that heavy of a weapon.
That's why most period weapons only weighed a few pounds at most. If you're going to have to fight for an extended amount of time, like all afternoon, you need to be able to do so without exhausting yourself. It doesn't really matter if you incapacitate the first 10 guys you come across if you're so tired that the 11th cuts you down easily. Your side might win battles that way, but it's a bad way to stay alive as a soldier.
Definitely - the weights of weapons is important for how rapidly you can swing them. Heavy and long weapons are tougher to swing than a sword, which is in turn tougher than a knife. Using weapons will affect stamina appropriately, too.
The skill table is... big. Very big. I think there's 90 skills at the moment, unless I'm greatly mistaken, each of which gives out something special (for you, and for creatures) at 30, 50
Will it be possible to randomize a bit these bonus? Instead on fixed level 20, make it happen at level 18 + 1D4. So this way something with level 20 won't necessarily have the cutting edge on a level 19 one. And maybe shift the level up or down depending of the species. Like elven recieve the bonus for the bow skill at 28 + 1D4 - 2 and Dwarfs get it at 28 + 1D4 + 4. This way it might be a little incentive to specialize accordingly to the species strengths.
And for the piercing hammer http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_hammer.
Oops - I actually didn't finish typing that sentence, and what's there is hugely inaccurate since I changed it in the process of writing the reply. Disregard it! Each skill goes from 0->100, and special upgrades are currently going to come at 40, 70 and 100. However, I like the idea about changing it a little for each person, and each species. I might alter it so that certain species reach certain landmarks a little sooner, but I'm less sure about introducing a little randomness for each creature. With that said
, I'm not yet entirely certain that the idea of offering special upgrades at certain levels is actually entirely in keeping with the theme of the rest of the game. For now, these upgrades exist, but it's actually very possible they won't make the final cut and there will simply be a linear progression of skill as your skill raises. Or, more likely, for command skills each 10 levels allows you to control an extra squad, or something of that sort, so each 'landmark' and the kind of landmark will be unique to each skill.