Crossbows vs. Longbows

[Omnirizon]

Originally Posted by Aezeal

Well I'm not getting it, maces aren't armour piercing in any way right? (IRL I mean) so why would THEY get AP and not something that could actually penetrate armour even on specific weak points.

no i suppose they arn't piercing in the way we typically think of it, but it is the type of damage they do, blunt force trauma, that made them more effective than cutting weapons against armor.

[Lingchih]

Thanks for all the replies. This has, of course, gone way off post, but in a good way. I like all the lances and slingers talk.

Still. Nothing posted has deterred me from thinking that longbows should be AP.

[Horst F. JENS]

Originally Posted by cleveland

On the original question of armor penetration, I think it's really a Terminal Ballistics issue.

Neither the arrow nor bolt would be rotating (like a rifle bullet) so the longer arrow would be more subject to yawing & pitching than the bolt.

Actually, arrows (and bolts) are rotating. That's the reason you put the little feathers on the end of an arrow (usually 3 feathers for an arrow, 2 for an bolt). The feathers are slightly curved to give the projectile a spin in flight. This spin stabilize the flight.


As for armor-penetration, different arrow tips are used even today for different purpose. There exist hunting arrow tips (three or two razor-sharp bladed to cause flesh wounds), "sport" tips (cone) to penetrate (not too much) a target and blunt tips for bird hunting (stun rather then kill).

I have once seen historical special designed "armor-penetrating" arrows... those things had practically a pyramidal-shaped steel needle on it's top. Certainly not cheap or easy to produce.

Possible solution for Dom3 regarding armor-piercing longbowmen:


Create a new unit type "Elite Longbowmen" with armor-piercing longbows. Damage still lower than a crossbow but AP. Good stats, but more resource and gold cost than a "normal" longbowmen.


Off-topic fact:
bowmen used to urinate on the arrows to cause infected wounds.

[Agema]

Originally Posted by cleveland

Lances aren't quite as potent as you'd think. I ran some tests, reported in this post, which showed that a Heavy Cavalry's Lance deals just 22 damage...certainly better than a spear, but nothing a 25-prot thug should really fear.

Even chain-mail infantry survive a Heavy Cav's Lance more often than not (17 prot).

Fair enough. I've not run tests, but I've had cavalry knock a lot of HP off well-armoured thugs in games I've played: in one game one took 30 damage from 3 cavalry on first contact. Although I appreciate that may be unlucky.

[Gregstrom]

Originally Posted by Horst F. JENS

I have once seen historical special designed "armor-penetrating" arrows... those things had practically a pyramidal-shaped steel needle on it's top. Certainly not cheap or easy to produce.

You mean bodkin-heads? The cruder examples look a bit like a medieval nail with a socket at the base. I'm hardly an expert, but I'd have thought that the various barbed arrowheads would take more time to make.

[Sombre]

Originally Posted by Endoperez

What do you mean by "dmg 7"? Damage 7, no-str or the sum of strength and weapon damage being 7? I've changed hammers, but not maces/clubs, to be dmg -4 and armor-piercing. Details below.

Yes, sorry, I meant around 3-4 damage or so, as a weapon stat. I was mixed up with strength being 10 and 7 being less or something.

I don't see why hammers with AP make more sense than maces? Why doesn't ap on a mace make sense on a markata or hoburg?

[Endoperez]

Originally Posted by Sombre

Yes, sorry, I meant around 3-4 damage or so, as a weapon stat. I was mixed up with strength being 10 and 7 being less or something.

I don't see why hammers with AP make more sense than maces? Why doesn't ap on a mace make sense on a markata or hoburg?

I can't imagine Markata (they don't use maces), Hoburgs or the monkeys in general as something that thugs and heavily-armored, mounted knights should be especially afraid of. On the other hand, low-strength Hoburgs couldn't hit through armor even if their weapons were armor-piercing.

Finally, I don't want to make Lanka's Kala-mukha have armor-piercing weapons.

Thanks for asking about the hammers, since after you asked I read more about them and found out armor-piercing doesn't fit them at all.
I thought the spike at the other end of a war hammer was like a pick-axe, meant to push through the armor, but according to Wikipedia it was for hooking the opponent's leg, neck, weapon or such. It also didn't penetrate armor as such, but "transmitted an impact through even the thickest helmet". I've seen videos of a longer "poll-axe" being used in such a manner, and it looks great. Unfortunately you can't model tripping in Dominions.

[Horst F. JENS]

Originally Posted by Gregstrom

You mean bodkin-heads? The cruder examples look a bit like a medieval nail with a socket at the base. I'm hardly an expert, but I'd have thought that the various barbed arrowheads would take more time to make.

You are right. So bodkin arrows should cost less resource and do less damage than "normal" arrows, but bodkin arrows should be armor-piercing.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bodkin_point

[Agema]

I think the reflection of AP on weapons like axes, maces and so on is not that they penetrate the armour per se, but that armour could much less effective at stopping the damage from them compared to a sword. Armour was generally about stopping penetrative damage from thrusts (eg. spears, swords) and slashing (swords). Weapons like maces and warhammers were designed to apply a lot of force into a very concentrated area. Even if the armour wasn't penetrated (in the case of plate armour probably leaving a huge dent), the blow could pulverise bone and flesh under it.

[Aezeal]

well I don't think that is AP, that is just high damage since on an unarmoured person it would do much more damage too. (I'm not sure a well padded armour would give the wearer that much problems from a blow of a mace)