About piercing attacks

Brainstorm ideas of possible additions to the game. Read this before posting!

Moderators: Forum Moderators, Developers

Forum rules
Before posting a new idea, you must read the following:
User avatar
Sapient
Inactive Developer
Posts: 4453
Joined: November 26th, 2005, 7:41 am
Contact:

Re: About piercing attacks

Post by Sapient »

Casual User wrote: 2. charging cavalry is useless against skeletons which would normally be trampled
Then maybe experienced horsemen should get a "hoof (impact)" attack? A trampling attack is problematic. For example, you can't trample anything as large as yourself.
Casual User wrote: 4. polearmsmen have bonuses against drakes, bonus aimed at knights, and penalties against skeletons
Drakes:

Spears and lances are the preferred method of attacking dragons, so the impaling bonus makes sense to me. If drakes are anything like dragons, they should be far weaker to impaling than archery.

Knights:

What better way to harm a charging calvary (even a knight) than impaling its horse? Someone else already pointed this out.

Skeletons:

Skeletons are only going to be harmed by a spear if you use it as an impact weapon. You can do that, but it's not the weapon's main purpose. Therefore, it hurts, but not as much as normal. This is already modelled correctly by the damage resistance.
Casual User wrote: -very small units, like goblins, could have a 10% resistance to missile
Goblins:

Now you are confusing evasion with damage resistance. An arrow should hurt a goblin just as normal. The goblin's small size should grant him a bonus on his terrain defense.
Casual User wrote: -largefoot units would have no resistance to missile
Not necessarily. Trolls, for example, have toughened green skin which gives them certain types of damage resistance.
Casual User wrote: 5. for some weird, otherworldly reason, muskets are piercing...
Seems right to me. Unless you are an animated rock, it should pierce you.
Elvish Pillager wrote: ...they (Gryphons) have melee only and cost a lot. This make them relatively vulnerable to atrchery.
Well there's got to be some way to kill those flying freaks. They're stronger than trolls for crying out loud. And last time I checked, they have 0% weakness to arrows. I'm going to agree with Casual User on this one.

So, although I disagree with some of your statements, I agree that horses should be weaker to impaling than arrows, and griffons should be weaker to arrows than impaling. Does this warrant a split in the damage type piercing? Maybe. I think it would be nice.

The problem is there is a third branch of piercing damage (very thin swords). Slashing is not a damage type in Wesnoth. It is called "blade" and it is just a general term that covers everthing you do with a normal sized blade. This includes stabbing and slashing (or in the case of teeth, chewing).

Very thin swords such as a rapier should, in my opinion, be classified as piercing because they lack the properties of a normal blade. However, we would be unable to do this if we split piercing to impaling and arrows.
unsung
Posts: 708
Joined: May 15th, 2005, 5:54 pm
Location: Raging somewhere..

Post by unsung »

Wow, unction's a word.


What's with all the topic revivals lately?

I still think mounted units should have trample and a resitance ot impact so you can't trample them.


There, I used correct spelling and gramar. I want a cookie. NOW.
Oh no look out its a ray gun.
You should move to avoid the rays
the rays are coming out of the gun
if you are hit by the rays
you will be shot by the rays
the rays are fast so you should be fast to
can you win against the fast rays from the gun?
User avatar
Tomsik
Posts: 1401
Joined: February 7th, 2005, 7:04 am
Location: Poland

Post by Tomsik »

unsung wrote:I want a cookie. NOW.
Best way to get it is not asking for it.
unsung wrote:I still think mounted units should have trample and a resitance ot impact so you can't trample them.
I don't think horses should have trample, it would be very unrealistic or not KISS, also there is thing called game balance.
Horses have 20% resistance to impact right now.
User avatar
Casual User
Posts: 475
Joined: March 11th, 2005, 5:05 pm

Post by Casual User »

Good afternoon!
Duke Guillermo wrote:How would one go about implementing a new damage type (such as the suggested "missile" etc.)? Is it as simple as EP's last post?
Yes.
Tomsik wrote:Wait... there are very much unit's you would need to rebalance, also you must add such line to every unit and change type of attack for every archer.
Usually, the easiest way is to make a few compromises. In a custom campaign, for instance, you can usually get around it by using either piercing or blade as pseudo-missile attack and special resistances. However, you only really need to screw around with the movetypes and the unit cfg files.
Sapient wrote:Then maybe experienced horsemen should get a "hoof (impact)" attack? A trampling attack is problematic. For example, you can't trample anything as large as yourself.
Interesting idea, warhorses were usually trained to attack. No need to give it only to experienced horsemen.
Sapient wrote:Spears and lances are the preferred method of attacking dragons, so the impaling bonus makes sense to me. If drakes are anything like dragons, they should be far weaker to impaling than archery.
Actually, in most stories, dragons were killed by swords...

But, yes, they should be a little resistant to arrows. BTW, I meant the bonus against drakes was meant for knights to have it.
Sapient wrote:Skeletons are only going to be harmed by a spear if you use it as an impact weapon.
Not true. Arrows have a tough time hurting skeletons because they slip in through the ribs, but in close hand to hand combat where you use spears, you can aim for the head which can very well be shattered by a spear-head. Polearms should be as effective as swords against skeletons.
Sapient wrote:Not necessarily. Trolls, for example, have toughened green skin which gives them certain types of damage resistance.
Arrows can hit vital parts of a troll's body which melee weapons would be too short to reach.
Sapient wrote:Now you are confusing evasion with damage resistance.
It is no harder to hit a small guy than a big guy with a sword as long as they are just as nimble. The big guy, however, would be much easier to hit with and arrow. By using resistances, we can model these little differences.
Sapient wrote:So, although I disagree with some of your statements, I agree that horses should be weaker to impaling than arrows, and griffons should be weaker to arrows than impaling. Does this warrant a split in the damage type piercing?
Yes! Being good against cavalry is THE special identity of piercing attacks. If it only makes sense for impaling but not for arrows...

Since I mentionned the musket, may I mention that the main reason for the developpement of pike and shot tactics in the 16-17th centuries was that musketeers simply couldn't deal with cavalry. In the middle ages, battle after battle proved that cavalry was only vulnerable to archers in very, very special conditions.

That's why it makes no sense for me to have archers deal 20% more damage to cavalry, and in fact 50-60% more than the other physical attack types.
User avatar
Cuyo Quiz
Posts: 1777
Joined: May 21st, 2005, 12:02 am
Location: South America

Post by Cuyo Quiz »

tomsik wrote:Best way to get it is not asking for it.
I have found otherwise, since asking actually lets the other part choose and recognize your desire for cookies, which he may abide to.
Cuyo Quiz,where madness meets me :D
Turn on, tune in, fall out.
"I know that, but every single person nags about how negative turin is; it should be in the FPI thread "Turin should give positive comments" =)"-Neorice,23 Sep 2004
theCAS
Posts: 50
Joined: August 24th, 2004, 4:26 pm

Post by theCAS »

My proposal.

Divide piercing damage in 2 classes:
1) puncture (daggers, arrows, bullets...).
2) impaling (polearms, lances...)

AND introduce a new modifier that changes unit defense on terrain when attacked with a ranged weapon.

Example Skeleton
puncture: -20%
impaling: 10%
ranged: 120%

The skeleton is hard to hit with an arrow and the damage is inferior.
Impaling does more damage.

Example Yeti
puncture: -30%
ranged: 80%

The huge mass results in arrows doing less damage but hitting more often.

Example Goblin
puncure: 20%
ranged: 130%

A melee attack with a dagger does significant damage, but hitting the goblin with an arrow is difficult due to its size.
Disto
Posts: 2039
Joined: November 1st, 2004, 7:40 pm
Location: Cambridge, UK

Post by Disto »

Tomsik wrote:Wait... there are very much unit's you would need to rebalance, also you must add such line to every unit and change type of attack for every archer.
Actually you don't (as far as I'm aware), the resistance would you go as 0% in either way (100% in the unit's cfg) thanks to the default system.
Creator of A Seed of Evil
Creator of the Marauders
Food or Wesnoth? I'll have Wesnoth
Post Reply