Weapon complaint!

Gort Greegog · Post by **Gort Greegog** » Tue Apr 04, 2006 9:59 pm

Every one else has to complain now so I mind as well!

Ok, I have a nice little orc guy. He uses the best staves I have ever known of. (elven mage and battle). They are both better than a hammer or mace or halberd or flail...

Lets look a swords and axes for slashing....
Fire axe, 2-handed Drow blade, Fire sword, Dark axe....

And to match the 2 best staves all you have to do is use a Double-axe or a Bastard sword.

Some super hammer or staff we don't know about? Or do swords and axes only get magical super powers?

Retlak · Post by **Retlak** » Tue Apr 04, 2006 10:02 pm

I knew this would come one day.

Huge selection of slashing weapons, A few staves and a warhammer for concussive. Slashing weapons only become magical. Hammers or staves do not

Misjbar · Post by **Misjbar** » Tue Apr 04, 2006 10:04 pm

Staves are more handyfull for mages anyhow. We can select people with it for our spells.

Arkadia Misella · Post by **Arkadia Misella** » Tue Apr 04, 2006 10:06 pm

What about the fruit?????

Magic apples I can throw like handgrenades???

KABLOWIE! PWNED!

[/sarcasm]

Fooser · Post by **Fooser** » Wed Apr 05, 2006 1:06 am

We have the holy hand gernade..

Athian · Post by **Athian** » Wed Apr 05, 2006 1:09 am

we already have molotov's in game Arkadia. and this topic has been brought up many times before. it's not a matter of you can't make more cuncussion weapons. we need idea's for new weapons and graphics to go along with them. i suggest you talk to Grobul if your down with the helpfulness.

Arkadia Misella · Post by **Arkadia Misella** » Wed Apr 05, 2006 1:19 am

You never did add my thermo nuclear weapon.
That would be one God-like concussion/fire weapon.

Post by **Nitram** » Wed Apr 05, 2006 1:23 am

Arkadia Misella wrote:You never did add my thermo nuclear weapon.
That would be one God-like concussion/fire weapon.

Are you sure?

Gro'bul · Post by **Gro'bul** » Wed Apr 05, 2006 1:37 am

I've made some magical war hammers, magical maces, and soon staves. A one handed war hammer like weapon also, suggestions are welcome. Please no staves, we have plenty kthx. It is unfortunate the lack of weapons, very much so, but hold on cause we will pwn the competition once we have remotely equal weapons that we don't have now.

Gort Greegog · Post by **Gort Greegog** » Wed Apr 05, 2006 2:31 am

mind clearing up if maces are conc or slashing? I think there both...You learn slashing as a skill first if you only use the starting mace.

Taylor · Post by **Taylor** » Wed Apr 05, 2006 2:42 am

While we're at it, why don't we add some Howitzer machine guns for ranged weapons! [/sarcasm]

Look. It's not just Conc thats down in terms of strength vrs. Slashing weapons. But this is what you don't realise.

Daggers:
The Red Daggers are twice as fast and nearly half as leathal as the bastard sword. If you have the right stats and the right skills (Ie Dodge, Punc, Slash, and Parry) beating a knight is easy as pie

Ranged: While this is mostly bitched on about being worthless and too weak. Using an archer with someone to just stand there and take hits is a easy way to kill our badly Rped Tanks. As usually, no Tank has decided to learn dodging, it would be quite easy to hit them with an arrow

And Conc:
Learn this, and learn this good. By no means are the best staves for attacking. A staff, usually, is more defensive than offensive. Let me give you an example. The Halberd. It is incredibly fast to defend, as it is more easy to manuver than a bastard sword. Allthough it's attack isn't great, it's defensive points help even the feild, to a moderatly close range. Also, most armors are quite vulnerable to conc weapons, Especially the favored Lor Angur armor which is incredibly susceptible.

My say on the matter. keep this in mind

Gort Greegog · Post by **Gort Greegog** » Wed Apr 05, 2006 2:47 am

I hate to point flaw in your concussion section but....well...I will anyways.

Halberds...with a 2-4 hit staff attack on a pig, the pig dies. Halberd was about 20 with the same skill. So I used a halberd against a player...they one...with the staff I wone with no damage being taken. Hammers do such a small amount more than a staff they're rendered usless. I have used each of these weapons over 100 times in practice.

Arameh · Post by **Arameh** » Wed Apr 05, 2006 2:53 am

Maces are only slashing*shrugs*. As staves, yes they are defensive weapons, i understand that. But did the halbert needed to be THAT weak? I have very high slashing and concussion skill, is it weak cause it needs puncture? Halbert hurts around 3x less than a staff, which already isnt great in attacking, its defensive yes, but if you dont hurt your opponent its useless. Mind if someone tell me if its underpowered? or if it uses puncture skill? And Taylor, i dont know what you talk about with your dagger, there has been no dagger even hurting me yet,i THINK they are underpowered, not sure cause i never used them. Archery sucks in pvp for now as i heard, it will be fixed in the new fighting system. As concussion weapons, i would suggest some heavy metal staves, iron fists(maybe martial art skill though), 2 handed mace and...well thats all^^.

Gort Greegog · Post by **Gort Greegog** » Wed Apr 05, 2006 2:58 am

PvP isnet really a Rp'd excuse to make somthing better, and as Taylor said, get a decent archer and have them fire at a tank while he is distracted. I mean in real life is an archer going to walk up to a huge sword swinging man and just fire at a fully armored target? I think not.(And no LOTR is not real life.. Legolas)

Jori · Post by **Jori** » Wed Apr 05, 2006 3:03 am

Back when archers REALLY started coming into use when they found out how to make pbig powerful longbows and such, archers could easily kill armored knights riding on horseback. The French would have their knights that had been training their whole life slaughtered by english peasants with very little training with bows. The bows just had so much power that they punched right through the plate mail. Maybe if certain types of armor were better against different attack types? Or maybe they already are.

Gort Greegog · Post by **Gort Greegog** » Wed Apr 05, 2006 3:06 am

To bad horses dislike dwarves or theyd be on the island.

Gro'bul · Post by **Gro'bul** » Wed Apr 05, 2006 3:15 am

Maces and morning stars are slashing weapons currently, but they won't come the new server update. I forgot to mention that.

falco1029 · Post by **falco1029** » Wed Apr 05, 2006 3:43 am

Jori wrote:Back when archers REALLY started coming into use when they found out how to make pbig powerful longbows and such, archers could easily kill armored knights riding on horseback. The French would have their knights that had been training their whole life slaughtered by english peasants with very little training with bows. The bows just had so much power that they punched right through the plate mail. Maybe if certain types of armor were better against different attack types? Or maybe they already are.

chainmail should be much better then plate asrrmor against bows. I know that. While a powerful bow wil lstill get an arrow through chain mail, its much better than plate mail for keeping arrows out. And daggers for that matter...

Arameh · Post by **Arameh** » Wed Apr 05, 2006 4:09 am

Longbows dosent pierce a heavy knight armor most of the time, unless the archer is very trained, or that the knights are making a charge in the direction of the archer. If a knight is not moving, and a regular archer shoots in the main part of the armor, the chances that it pierces are really low, im talking in real life here. If arrows would be piercing any armors, then they woulnt have used guns(which does pierce any armor) instead of arrows, and dont tel lme that they used gund because they were accurate, the first guns used were so crappy that they were less accurate than the longbows.

Jori · Post by **Jori** » Wed Apr 05, 2006 4:12 am

Yeah I meant when the knights were charging in that post shoulda made it more clear.

Arameh · Post by **Arameh** » Wed Apr 05, 2006 4:14 am

Yeah, with the speed of the horse and the arrow together, there are fair chances that the arrow pierces ther armor.

Pocal · Post by **Pocal** » Wed Apr 05, 2006 4:16 am

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

Gro'bul · Post by **Gro'bul** » Wed Apr 05, 2006 4:18 am

Jori wrote:Back when archers REALLY started coming into use when they found out how to make pbig powerful longbows and such, archers could easily kill armored knights riding on horseback. The French would have their knights that had been training their whole life slaughtered by english peasants with very little training with bows. The bows just had so much power that they punched right through the plate mail. Maybe if certain types of armor were better against different attack types? Or maybe they already are.

This is incorrect. At the time of Agincourt, English longbowmen equipped with iron arrows could not penetrate French plate armor. Its a common misconception, I watched a history channel show about this. They had a blacksmith forge an iron arrowhead, and took a peice of steel of equal strength to French armor and the arrowhead did not penetrate. How did the English win at Agincourt? Through lots of research they used topigraphical maps to figure the English lured them into a funnel, they took mud samples from the time (about 3ft deep), and experimented with sabatons their French men-at-arms wore and how much it stuck. Also tested the leather "things" the english longbowmen wore prooving the longbowmen could have easily used their agility in the mud and their short weapons to great effect. Arrows would have only slowed the calvery charge at best. These guys really prooved this thing dead, unfortunately I'm not about to republish the entire show on this post. You would also take alot more blunt trauma wearing chainmail than plate.

Jori · Post by **Jori** » Wed Apr 05, 2006 4:18 am

They did have "armor piercing" bodkin arrows too just for the purpose of getting through armor butI'm sure these were still not a surefire way of getting through the armor. Also, from what I understand chainmail armor wouldn't work against arrows all that well especially if the arrows had thin heads because it's like swiss cheese; full of holes the arrows could go through. Maybe I'm not correctly informed on the design of chain mail though but thats how it seems it would be to me.

Gro'bul · Post by **Gro'bul** » Wed Apr 05, 2006 4:23 am

Jori wrote:They did have "armor piercing" bodkin arrows too just for the purpose of getting through armor butI'm sure these were still not a surefire way of getting through the armor. Also, from what I understand chainmail armor wouldn't work against arrows all that well especially if the arrows had thin heads because it's like swiss cheese; full of holes the arrows could go through. Maybe I'm not correctly informed on the design of chain mail though but thats how it seems it would be to me.

Flattend chain mail was good against arrows even bodkins (the default arrow I'm always talking about) but unless the mail was riveted (extremely man hours intensive) theres a good chance it would open the butted chain mail. Large shields were designed to defend against arrows, not armor.

falco1029 · Post by **falco1029** » Wed Apr 05, 2006 4:24 am

Jori wrote:They did have "armor piercing" bodkin arrows too just for the purpose of getting through armor butI'm sure these were still not a surefire way of getting through the armor. Also, from what I understand chainmail armor wouldn't work against arrows all that well especially if the arrows had thin heads because it's like swiss cheese; full of holes the arrows could go through. Maybe I'm not correctly informed on the design of chain mail though but thats how it seems it would be to me.

chanmail usually has several layers and/or is tightly packed (I forget which or if its both, but either way...), so there wouldnt be any holes for arrows to go through.

falco1029 · Post by **falco1029** » Wed Apr 05, 2006 4:26 am

Gro'bul wrote:
Jori wrote:They did have "armor piercing" bodkin arrows too just for the purpose of getting through armor butI'm sure these were still not a surefire way of getting through the armor. Also, from what I understand chainmail armor wouldn't work against arrows all that well especially if the arrows had thin heads because it's like swiss cheese; full of holes the arrows could go through. Maybe I'm not correctly informed on the design of chain mail though but thats how it seems it would be to me.
Flattend chain mail was good against arrows even bodkins (the default arrow I'm always talking about) but unless the mail was riveted (extremely man hours intensive) theres a good chance it would open the butted chain mail. Large shields were designed to defend against arrows, not armor.

that isnt true. Chain mail was specifically made because plate mail wasnt very good against piercings, like arrows (or daggers)

Arameh · Post by **Arameh** » Wed Apr 05, 2006 4:43 am

These historians do not account for the fact that modern tests show that the bodkin will not penetrate good quality plate armor at anything except a perfect angle of impact

Arrows rarely penetrates good armors, like knight ones, as said so even the bodkin arrows have a hard time.

Gro'bul · Post by **Gro'bul** » Wed Apr 05, 2006 4:46 am

falco1029 wrote:that isnt true. Chain mail was specifically made because plate mail wasnt very good against piercings, like arrows (or daggers)

Just a link.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chainmail

falco1029 · Post by **falco1029** » Wed Apr 05, 2006 5:48 am

Gro'bul wrote:
falco1029 wrote:that isnt true. Chain mail was specifically made because plate mail wasnt very good against piercings, like arrows (or daggers)
Just a link.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chainmail

I know it came first. I meant it was used again because of it. And that history is wrong, plate mail originally was used by itself until they realized it absolutely sucked by itself