Q

[Quyneax]

Yes. Soak was never directly affected by defence level, of course equipment did depend on level.

 

I don't agree about defence being only accuracy, because a soak system can enforce the 2h > shield > dw > 2h triangle. Also, one of the major points of body armour like chainmail is that you spread the force of a blow across a larger area, reducing the pressure (force per area) on the target area, hopefully stopping bones from breaking and skin from splitting. The only armour that's about truly avoiding blows is the shield and the extremities (because you can deflect blows away without taking any damage): bracers and helmets, if the blows aren't too hard. But as I said, a heavy blow, even if deflected, will do a bit of damage.

[Sinkhan]

Also, one of the major points of body armour like chainmail is that you spread the force of a blow across a larger area, reducing the pressure (force per area) on the target area, hopefully stopping bones from breaking and skin from splitting.

 

From a RL perspective, chainmail was actually terrible for doing anything but stopping slashing attacks. In pre-EoC Jagex already logically implmented a natural weakness to stabbing attacks, but the increased defence against crush was totally bogus. Looking at actual chain mail, it's not designed to spread blunt force over a large area. It's definitely a step up from just being naked or wearing normal clothes, but in reality most of the raw force is still going to get through.

 

Chainmail was generally used as just a simple, cheap, and lighter anti-slash type armour. Platemail was actually much better suited against blunt forces because the armour would deform, absorbing blows instead of your ribs and again contrary to RS logic, it spread out the force over an area better than chain because it remained more rigid overall. Users would also have either full chainmail suits underneath their platemail or at the very least at their joints, where they needed flexible protection.

 

On those points I have two musings:

 

Armour and weapons are really heavy and can be unwieldy. Perhaps we could have weapon/armour weights affect combat somehow, like decreased adrenaline gains/greater consumption. Since running is especially weird in RS and you pretty much never care about it during combat, it would be nice if weights would actually affect more than just energy. We'd also have another reason to train agility since it'd effectively be a combat support skill like herblore and prayer.

 

All armour should degrade imo. Have it so that a greater smithing level can increase the durability of the armour and tweak it to be lighter or heavier for differing combat effectiveness.

[constrictor]

At the agility portion. Yes pls.

[Quyneax]

Wrote up a whole post in reply to Sinkhan, but I'll just quote Wikipedia at you:

The use of mail as battlefield armour was common during the Iron Age and the Middle Ages, becoming less common over the course of the 16th and 17th centuries. It is believed that the Roman Republic first came into contact with mail fighting the Gauls in Cisalpine Gaul, now Northern Italy, but even earlier in time , different pattern of chain mail was already in use among the Etruscans. The Roman army adopted the technology for their troops in the form of the lorica hamata which was used as a primary form of armour through the Imperial period.

 

After the fall of the Western Empire much of the infrastructure needed to create plate armour diminished. Eventually the word "mail" came to be synonymous with armour. It was typically an extremely prized commodity as it was expensive and time consuming to produce and could mean the difference between life and death in a battle. Mail from dead combatants was frequently looted and was used by the new owner or sold for a lucrative price. As time went on and infrastructure improved it came to be used by more soldiers. Eventually with the rise of the lanced cavalry charge, impact warfare, and high-powered crossbows, mail came to be used as a secondary armour to plate for the mounted nobility.

 

By the 14th century, plate armour was commonly used to supplement mail. Eventually mail was supplanted by plate for the most part as it provided greater protection against windlass crossbows, bludgeoning weapons, and lance charges. However, mail was still widely used by many soldiers as well as brigandines and padded jacks. These three types of armour made up the bulk of the equipment used by soldiers with mail being the most expensive. It was sometimes more expensive than plate armour. Mail typically persisted longer in less technologically advanced areas such as Eastern Europe but was in use everywhere into the 16th century.

 

[...]

 

Mail armour provided an effective defence against slashing blows by an edged weapon and penetration by thrusting and piercing weapons; in fact, a study conducted at the Royal Armouries at Leeds concluded that "it is almost impossible to penetrate using any conventional medieval weapon" Generally speaking, mail's resistance to weapons is determined by four factors: linkage type (riveted, butted, or welded), material used (iron versus bronze or steel), weave density (a tighter weave needs a thinner weapon to surpass), and ring thickness (generally ranging from 18 to 14 gauge in most examples). Mail, if a warrior could afford it, provided a significant advantage to a warrior when combined with competent fighting techniques. When the mail was not riveted, a well placed thrust from a spear or thin sword could penetrate, and a pollaxe or halberd blow could break through the armour. In India, punching daggers known as katars were developed that could pierce the light butted mail used in the area. Some evidence indicates that during armoured combat, the intention was to actually get around the armour rather than through it—according to a study of skeletons found in Visby, Sweden, a majority of the skeletons showed wounds on less well protected legs.

 

The flexibility of mail meant that a blow would often injure the wearer, potentially causing serious bruising or fractures, and it was a poor defence against head trauma. Mail-clad warriors typically wore separate rigid helms over their mail coifs for head protection. Likewise, blunt weapons such as maces and warhammers could harm the wearer by their impact without penetrating the armour; usually a soft armour, such as gambeson, was worn under the hauberk. Medieval surgeons were very well capable of setting and caring for bone fractures resulting from blunt weapons. With the poor understanding of hygiene however, cuts that could get infected were much more of a problem. Thus mail armour proved to be sufficient protection in most situations.

 

[article on plate armour]

 

Plate armour was virtually invulnerable to sword slashes. It also protects the wearer well against spear or pike thrusts and provides decent defence against blunt trauma.

 

The evolution of plate armour also triggered developments in the design of offensive weapons. While this armour was effective against cuts or blows, their weak points could be exploited by long tapered swords or other weapons designed for the purpose, such as pollaxes and halberds. The effect of arrows and bolts is still a point of contention in regards to plate armour. Longbows and crossbows could also pierce plate armour up to ranges of 200 metres (660 ft) with a lucky shot, notably in battles such as the Battle of Visby, though historian Jean Froissart suggests that the success of such weapons at the Battle of Poitiers was less due to the bodkin arrows used by the English and more due to aiming for the side or rear of the armour, which is weaker. The evolution of the 14th-century plate armour also triggered the development of various polearms. They were designed to deliver a strong impact and concentrate energy on a small area and cause damage through the plate. Maces, war hammers and the hammer-heads of pollaxes (poleaxes) were used to inflict blunt trauma through armour.

 

tl;dr

Mail is very good versus stabbing, it's not cheap (but often cheaper than plate), and it's not until the beginning of the gunpowder era that mail became obsolete. Plate is weaker to maces, warhammers and poleaxes than it is to other weapons, as well as generally big weapons which hit with a lot of force, e.g. pikes. A lot depends on the technology available, the availability of quality steel, and the relative value of armour to other items (such as food) - how easily can your average Joe buy a shirt of mail (not very easily)?

[Sinkhan]

Well I guess chain can be good against stabbing so long as it is riveted, but still prone otherwise. I'll admit my only point of reference is watching Deadlist Warriors where they did a weapons test against a set of chainmail.

 

I should have instead said cheaper when compared to plate. That all said, plate>chain in pure defensive effectiveness (so stuff like mobility and weight aside). Blunt force weapons did better against plate than swords the like, but they absolutely wrecked people in chain. Poleaxes and halberds were especially effective since the user could take advantage of rotational acceleration to drive a pointed part to puncture the armour or deliver extreme amounts of force (and realistically, there weren't many things that could stand up to that).

[Quyneax]

I'll agree that plate > chain overall, and nothing stops 2h pierce/crush weapons, I just mean to say that in general, both are good types of armour, with slash being overall the weakest and crush overall the strongest versus all types of armour. Incidentally, in M&B, this is also the case (and more or less used to be the case in RS, with the exception of higher crush def for chain), with there being no different defence values versus styles, just armour, and plate obviously having higher armour values (it also looks really bad, I use a coat of plates myself, essentially a full mail shirt with extra plates covering chest and back).

[Sinkhan]

So something like this?:

 

[constrictor]

Off topic: Q, what are you thoughts on M&B? I have a feeling you've picked apart each faction, etc. and I wanted to hear your thoughts about it all.

[Saradomin_Mage]

You guys just went full meta.

[Quyneax]

@Sinkhan: http://mountandblade.wikia.com/wiki/Coat_of_Plates

 

@constrictor: I think the factions are pretty well-balanced, personally I dislike troops that are not homogenous, with the worst being Vaegir Veterans, srs, half of them have horses and half don't. The AI is also pretty bad at using polearms (w/ shield especially) except for the initial charge, so I avoid those. NPC lords of course use large armies of all tiers mixed up, I think it's better to have a small party of 20-30 huscarls, knights, sharpshooters, get your sharpshooters in a line (stand closer 1x) with huscarls in front but down a slope (also stand closer 1x, hopefully the slope stops couched lances as well), Swadian knights or mamlukes following you, let the enemy approach under crossbow fire while you go around and charge the flank or rear, huscarls can charge as a block if you use advance 10 paces repeatedly.

 

That said, I added a little mod which allows me to upgrade camp defenders into a huscarl-type troop (same cost/stats, different equipment). It's nice, but camp defenders & previous versions are really really really bad, defenders are on par with regular bandits (no horse though), huntresses/followers/peasant women are all worse than nord recruits -.-.

 

The problem with the AI is that it's not good at tactics. I've had a lord charge me head-on with recruits and basic spearmen (about 80 of them) which basically meant they all died and I lost two soldiers.

[constrictor]

I have forgotten most of the hotkeys/controls for M&B..brb becoming reobsessed.

Do you play the original or one of the later versions?

 

Any like links to guides per chance?

[Quyneax]

I play Warband Native with only one modification, to be able to recruit women :P. I don't really use any guides, just the wiki http://mountandblade.wikia.com/wiki/Mount_and_Blade_Wiki for info.

 

In Warband, your most important thing is getting a steady income from investments, that way you won't have to keep slaughtering sea raiders for cash when you go campaigning. I think I have about 5000 denars worth of troops, some stored in my castle, for a total payroll of ~3000 denars/week, but I only lose ~800 because of the dyeworks etc. I own.

[constrictor]

I play Warband Native with only one modification, to be able to recruit women :P. I don't really use any guides, just the wiki http://mountandblade..._and_Blade_Wiki for info.

 

In Warband, your most important thing is getting a steady income from investments, that way you won't have to keep slaughtering sea raiders for cash when you go campaigning. I think I have about 5000 denars worth of troops, some stored in my castle, for a total payroll of ~3000 denars/week, but I only lose ~800 because of the dyeworks etc. I own.

 

You can buy dyeworks, etc.? Geez I forgot so much about this game.

 

EDIT: What's your favorite combat style?

I remember greatly enjoying archery/range. Getting them perfect shots was fun.

[Quyneax]

Solo, I use a masterwork war bow (8 power draw lol), two large bags of arrows and a two-handed melee weapon.

When commanding, I can't afford to put 8 points in power strike/draw, ironflesh etc. plus you spend a lot more money on troops, so no masterwork armour (yet). It's much more convenient to use a shield, masterwork elite scimitar and a regular strong bow/war bow with only one bag of arrows. It's pretty crucial to have a ranged weapon for some of the quest fights, like breaking free from a castle. It also helps attacking/defending sieges. Crossbows would work for sieges, but for breaking out you need the rapid fire ability.

Both times, coat of plates, iron greaves, gauntlets, Sarranid veiled helmet (ok I just like the look) or great helmet, hunter.

 

Horse archery is really cool to get right, very effective too, but the hardest part is blocking on manual, especially versus fast weapons. I'm always really happy when I can win against three people in a quarterstaff sparring session.

 

About dyeworks, that's only in Warband, in original M&B there was no weekly income except fiefs, and you had to visit them to collect. In Warband, you just get a weekly budget with all fiefs (garrison cost & rents from land), investments in cities (dyeworks, ironworks, bakeries etc.), and loss due to tax inefficiency (if your fiefs are quite far apart, you lose some).

 

Also woo, captured another castle all by myself (more importantly, I asked the king to grant it to me and I got it), immediately repelled a siege as well, apparently the besiegers had ~100 prisoners all together, so I was able to garrison all of them. Instant 100+ garrison, for free :D. Also captured four lords there, but I let them go. Must be about 100 honour now.

 

 

Edit: 14 plate voyage succeeded.

Also, the king for some reason saw fit to give me a village and city, which means I now have 300 extra soldiers and about 8k denars per week extra. If only he knew my goal is to become queen of all Calradia :D. Shame they're all Vaegir troops though, I never ever use them, so I guess I'll use them for garrisons.

[Aiel]

I vote we recruit more Americans to CD. I feel lonely when I play at midnight and nobody else is on.

[Fallstar]

http://forums.taleworlds.com/index.php?topic=101731.0 This is all kinds of awesome for M&B. It basically lets you edit everything however you want. I also like to change the max battle size in the .ini file, although sieges can get a bit messy when you've got 500 people trying to climb up a ladder at once.

[Quyneax]

I use the module system which works for all those things and more :P. But yeah, battle size is awesome and sometimes crashes. I have trouble when I get about ~150 in a battle (max settings).

[constrictor]

I suck so bad at M&B it's sad.

 

Steppe bandits own me when I'm by myelf.

[Quyneax]

Steppe bandits are the most annoying to fight solo, sea raiders the least (also because they can be found in relatively flat areas which is good for horse archery). If you don't have a fairly tough horse and good horse archery, you should just avoid any party with mounted troops.

 

Best thing versus steppe bandits is a double line of sharpshooters protected by a double line of tough shield-bearing troops (this also works versus nearly every kind of uncoordinated assault). Though unshielded pikemen are pretty badass too, Rhodok veteran spearmen for example. But without shields, a couple will die to couched lances which is annoying.

[constrictor]

Honestly, the hardest part of the game is starting off and not consistently being imprisoned by random bandits/deserters/etc.

[Quyneax]

Lol yeah, but taking down that first party of sea raiders will give you some nice starting armour :P.

[Quyneax]

Finished Livid. Yay :).

[Saradomin_Mage]

Congrats, still have your soul intact I see.

[Quyneax]

That's the beauty of hollowing it out, can't tell on the outside ;).

[Aiel]

There is no way I'll ever finish Angry Farm. Ever. Respect.