Topic: Considering the War Bow vs. the Heavy Crossbow

  • Author
    Posts
  • #19671
    GlyphGryph
    Participant

    I finally got around to reading the dev log based on it, and it’s behaviour is a bit counter-intuitive, as it seems like the “damage ignores armor” stat is also a “damage armor ignores” stat and I’d never realized the damage cutoff was both 10% and that direct damage prevented in this way was ignored rather than applied to armor. Which can have some bad consequences in terms of total damage dealt. Unfortunately I don’t know what normal enemy stats to expect, but working through the numbers it seems the crossbow isn’t nearly as good against heavily armored dudes as I would have thought compared to the bows.

    Summarized from the dev diary:
    Armor is split into two types, “normal” and “direct”. Direct is the type used for the percent that “ignores armor”. Normal damage is multiplied by the armor effectiveness and dealt right to armor until armor is gone, and then it deals 100% towards health. Meanwhile, a portion of direct damage is completely ignored equal to 10% of remaining armor, and anything remaining is dealt to HP.

    So take two weapons, the War Bow vs. the Heavy Crossbow, vs. an enemy with 250 points of armor and 100 health – which is around the optimal effectiveness of the heavy crossbow as far as I can see.
    Both deal identical amounts of damage at a glance – 50-70 (We’ll call this 60 per shot for ease of calculation)
    The War Bow has an armor penetration of 35% and armor effectiveness of 65%
    The Heavy Crossbow has an armor penetration of 50% and armor effectiveness of 75%.

    You would imagine, at a glance, that the heavy crossbow would be superior against armor – especially so since it fires half as quickly as the war bow.

    So let’s break it down.
    War bow deals 21 direct damage and 25.35 armor damage.
    Heavy crossbow deals 30 direct damage and 22.5 armor damage.

    Despite it’s superior armor effectiveness, the heavy crossbow actually deals less damage against armor.

    So against our heavily armored enemy, we have the following health/armor after each shot: (I have no idea how the game handles rounding so I’m just rounding anything beyond the tenths place, it shouldn’t change the final result by a noticeable amount no matter how its done though)
    1 shot: WB: 100/224.6 – HC: 93/228.5
    2 shot: WB: 98/199.2 – HC: 83/206
    3 shot: WB: 94/173.9 – HC: 71/183
    4 shot: WB: 88/148.5 – HC: 57/160.5
    5 shot: WB: 80/125.6 – HC: 43/138.5
    6 shot: WB: 69/100.3 – HC: 31/115
    7 shot: WB: 53/75 – HC: 10/92.5
    8 shot: WB: 37/49.6 – HC: *DEAD*
    9 shot: WB: 18/24.3
    10 shot: WB: *DEAD* (armor destroyed)

    You might think to yourself “Great! The Heavy crossbow killed the dude first!”. Except, of course, that the Warbow fires either twice as quickly OR deals 10% damage, so it takes 8 turns to kill with a crossbow and 5 to kill with a war bow. Although it should be noted that the more armor your opponents get past this point, the better the warbor gets and the worst the crossbow gets in comparison (and that helmets and body armor have their own pools reduced independently)

    So the Crossbows real advantage here isn’t damage (it does less), it’s accuracy. You get a +15% accuracy improvement for using it over the bow. Assuming, of course, you fire the bow twice per turn. But you don’t have to – firing the longbow with an aimed shot not only matches the crossbows accuracy in most cases, it also improves damage by 10%! Giving us 23 direct damage and 27.85 armor damage.

    That changes our equation slightly:
    1 shot: WB: 99/222.2
    2 shot: WB: 95/194.6
    3 shot: WB: 89/166.8
    4 shot: WB: 82/138.9
    5 shot: WB: 70/111.1
    6 shot: WB: 55/83.2
    7 shot: WB: 38/55.3
    8 shot: WB: 18/27.5
    9 shot: WB: *dead*

    So in the end the heavy crossbow kills 1 shot earlier in it’s optimal scenario.

    The further you get from this point the less good the heavy crossbow is. Against a heavily armored opponent, the crossbow is *slightly* better, assuming it is used as the sole source of damage or combined with other weapons that can also kill the enemy before their armor is destroyed.

    But in pretty much every other situation the warbow pulls ahead or holds even.

    #19685
    LasseFin
    Participant

    Three things:
    1. Armor damage is dealt first, and THEN the current armor’s 10% is taken into consideration.
    2. The direct damage does NOT take away from armor damage.
    3. Crossbow perk further increases the ignore armor efficacy by a 15% to a total of 65% ignores armor.

    With your simplified 60 damage, it would look like this instead on first shot:
    War bow deals 39 (60*0.65) damage to armor, then 0 damage to HP. 60*0.35-(250-39)/10
    Heavy crossbow deals 45 (60*0.75) damage to armor, then 9.5 damage to HP. 60*0.5-(250-45)/10

    BTW, are you the same GlyphGryph from Cataclysm? Just wondering :P

    #19689
    Bananenbaum
    Participant

    Despite it’s superior armor effectiveness, the heavy crossbow actually deals less damage against armor.

    If you compare 2H Axe with 2H Hammer, it gets even worse.

    #19690
    LasseFin
    Participant

    Despite it’s superior armor effectiveness, the heavy crossbow actually deals less damage against armor.

    If you compare 2H Axe with 2H Hammer, it gets even worse.

    Except he’s… you know, wrong.

    #19713
    GlyphGryph
    Participant

    Three things:
    1. Armor damage is dealt first, and THEN the current armor’s 10% is taken into consideration.

    That is how I calculated it. I’m sorry if that wasn’t clear.

    2. The direct damage does NOT take away from armor damage.

    The dev post that described how the mechanic works says that it does. Maybe it doesn’t, or I may have misread the dev post, but it seemed very clear on the point that direct damage is removed from the damage dealt to armor. If this is not true, then obviously my post is wrong.

    3. Crossbow perk further increases the ignore armor efficacy by a 15% to a total of 65% ignores armor.

    Which would make it even worse against armor if the rest of my post is correct.

    Especially since ranged weapons generally don’t get 8 shots to hit before the enemy closes, meaning most of their time will be spent in the earlier party of the equation rather than the later part where crossbows start to pull ahead by bypassing what armor remains.

    BTW, are you the same GlyphGryph from Cataclysm? Just wondering :P

    Wow, I haven’t actually had someone recognize me from there in a long time. I am!

    #19734
    Wargasm
    Participant

    I’m pretty sure your calculations aren’t correct. The war-bow typically does ~40 damage to the armour of metal-coated orcs.

    How it goes, I think, is:

    Shot One:
    – 60 raw damage against 250 armour value
    – 65% effective vs armour = ~39 armour damage (~211 armour remains)
    – 35% of raw damage ignores armour = ~21 damage potentially done to hit points, but 10% of ~211 = ~21 and so no/miniscule damage is done to hit points

    Shot Two:
    – 60 raw damage against ~211 armour value
    – 65% effective vs armour = ~39 armour damage (~172 armour remains)
    – 35% of raw damage ignores armour = ~21 damage potentially done to hit points, but 10% of ~172 = ~17 and so only ~4 damage is done to hit points

    Shot Three:
    – 60 raw damage against ~172 armour value
    – 65% effective vs armour = ~39 armour damage (~133 armour remains)
    – 35% of raw damage ignores armour = ~21 damage potentially done to hit points, but 10% of ~133 = ~13 and so only ~8 damage is done to hit points

    Shot Four:
    – 60 raw damage against ~133 armour value
    – 65% effective vs armour = ~39 armour damage (~94 armour remains)
    – 35% of raw damage ignores armour = ~21 damage potentially done to hit points, but 10% of ~94 = ~9 and so only ~12 damage is done to hit points

    Etc. etc. and on shot five you’d actually manage to trigger a morale check.

    But it has to be said that there’s nothing in-game to indicate that 10% of the remaining armour value will be deducted from the amount that supposedly “ignores” armour. So, when you’re first playing the game, you see that 50% of 60 damage ignores armour and think “hey, I can do 30 damage to flesh with one shot that has a +15% chance to hit, and trigger a morale check to make this orc warrior run away”.

    I think the only info about the 10% deduction anywhere is on some ancient dev blog from before I discovered and started following the game.

    #19735
    LasseFin
    Participant

    Three things:
    1. Armor damage is dealt first, and THEN the current armor’s 10% is taken into consideration.

    That is how I calculated it. I’m sorry if that wasn’t clear.

    2. The direct damage does NOT take away from armor damage.

    The dev post that described how the mechanic works says that it does. Maybe it doesn’t, or I may have misread the dev post, but it seemed very clear on the point that direct damage is removed from the damage dealt to armor. If this is not true, then obviously my post is wrong.

    3. Crossbow perk further increases the ignore armor efficacy by a 15% to a total of 65% ignores armor.

    Which would make it even worse against armor if the rest of my post is correct.

    Especially since ranged weapons generally don’t get 8 shots to hit before the enemy closes, meaning most of their time will be spent in the earlier party of the equation rather than the later part where crossbows start to pull ahead by bypassing what armor remains.

    BTW, are you the same GlyphGryph from Cataclysm? Just wondering :P

    Wow, I haven’t actually had someone recognize me from there in a long time. I am!

    As Wargasm confirms above, we’re pretty sure that’s not how it works.

    But you don’t have to take our words for it, and it’s not very apparent in game either. However, one way you can confirm our assertions is by going in game to the inventory, equiping a weapon and hovering your mouse over the attack skill for the weapon. Read the tooltip, it’ll show you the amount that “ignores” armor and the armor damage amount.

    #19737
    GlyphGryph
    Participant

    So what you’re saying is that the damage is actually applied twice, once to armor and THEN once to health? So if a weapon said it does 60 damage (no armor pen, 100% effective vs. armor), it actually does (potentially) 120 damage total? 60 to armor and then, if the armor is destroyed, 60 more to health?

    I guess that would explain why the final shreds of armor falling seem to offer so little protection and lead to a surprisingly big chunk of health being knocked off.

    That isn’t how the dev log described it working (the one with the 10% number) but I agree that system seems like it would match what I’ve seen in game more accurately.

    That would mean that any armor that’s less than the armor damage done by an attack has absolutely no effect at preventing health?

    Considering how ineffective cloth is despite claiming to offer a certain amount of protection, that would make sense.

    #19738
    LasseFin
    Participant

    Yeah, the damage basically “double dips”

    #19739
    GlyphGryph
    Participant

    Ah, okay, then this is all very wrong, and crossbows are much, much better than I thought. Thanks!

    #19759
    Wargasm
    Participant

    So what you’re saying is that the damage is actually applied twice, once to armor and THEN once to health? So if a weapon said it does 60 damage (no armor pen, 100% effective vs. armor), it actually does (potentially) 120 damage total? 60 to armor and then, if the armor is destroyed, 60 more to health?

    Not exactly as above, because, if a weapon did ZERO damage ignoring armour, it wouldn’t get applied a second time and so would still just do 60 damage. If 10% of its 60 damage ignored armour, and the target hit had 60 armour, then the armour would be destroyed and 6 hit points would be taken.

    You’d actually be surprised by how well bandit/brigand bandanas (20 armour) sometimes protect them against the first headshot with a flail.

    #19760
    Wanderer
    Participant

    One would also wonder how good of shots your archers/crossbowmen are to be shooting people’s bandanas off without killing the guy.

    #19763
    GlyphGryph
    Participant

    Not exactly as above, because, if a weapon did ZERO damage ignoring armour, it wouldn’t get applied a second time and so would still just do 60 damage. If 10% of its 60 damage ignored armour, and the target hit had 60 armour, then the armour would be destroyed and 6 hit points would be taken.

    Hmm… are you sure about that?

    If you had a weapon with 50% ignores armor, that dealt 60 damage, and the opponent had 60 armor – how much damage would you deal?

    #19767
    LasseFin
    Participant

    So what you’re saying is that the damage is actually applied twice, once to armor and THEN once to health? So if a weapon said it does 60 damage (no armor pen, 100% effective vs. armor), it actually does (potentially) 120 damage total? 60 to armor and then, if the armor is destroyed, 60 more to health?

    Not exactly as above, because, if a weapon did ZERO damage ignoring armour, it wouldn’t get applied a second time and so would still just do 60 damage. If 10% of its 60 damage ignored armour, and the target hit had 60 armour, then the armour would be destroyed and 6 hit points would be taken.

    You’d actually be surprised by how well bandit/brigand bandanas (20 armour) sometimes protect them against the first headshot with a flail.

    I’ll have to test that… It doesn’t really make sense, that means the devs had to put in a special case just for these circumstances

    #19771
    Wargasm
    Participant

    Hmm… are you sure about that?

    If you had a weapon with 50% ignores armor, that dealt 60 damage, and the opponent had 60 armor – how much damage would you deal?

    It would depend on how effective it was against armour, of course. If it was 100% then the armour would be destroyed and the 50% of damage (30) would be fully applied to hit points, since no armour remains.

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 21 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.