Bash & Crush vs. Cut & Slash

[ElectricEel]

Mace, Morningstar, Flail, Hammer, Maul. Some of them would probably need negative dmg values, or they would effectively have damage values way higher than now.
Perhaps mace -2 (6 lower than now). Evens out at prot 12. It bugs me a bit to have a negative dmg value though.

Looking at the weapons from a historical perspective...

Maces and other similar weapons have the advantage of being more effective against armor than most other weapons, as the impact can injure the target even if the blow doesn't penetrate the armor.

Maces vs. spears: Spears have the advantage of reach, which is a big deal in reality. Not sure if it is in Dom3...

Maces vs. swords: Swords can be used to parry blows. They can be used to thrust or cut as well as swing, giving more options for attacks. Being cabable of inflicting bleeding wounds and puncturing internal organs, they are more effective for killing poorly-armored targets (but being hit with a mace will still probably at least take you out of the fight).

Given the above, and the limitations of the Dom3 damage system, I'd say it would be OK if maces did more damage than swords on average - but swords should get more bonuses to defense and attack (or maces penalties, which would probably be less likely to cause unbalances).

[Warhammer]

ElectricEel said:
Looking at the weapons from a historical perspective...

Maces vs. spears: Spears have the advantage of reach, which is a big deal in reality. Not sure if it is in Dom3...

I think this works the same as in reality. Spears get their repel attack. On quality units, this will keep attackers at bay, or make it painful for them to attack. Once inside the wall of spears, the mace would make short work of the defenders, just as the Romans did against the Greeks once they were under the spears.

ElectricEel said:
Maces vs. swords: Swords can be used to parry blows. They can be used to thrust or cut as well as swing, giving more options for attacks. Being cabable of inflicting bleeding wounds and puncturing internal organs, they are more effective for killing poorly-armored targets (but being hit with a mace will still probably at least take you out of the fight).

Given the above, and the limitations of the Dom3 damage system, I'd say it would be OK if maces did more damage than swords on average - but swords should get more bonuses to defense and attack (or maces penalties, which would probably be less likely to cause unbalances).

I'd say that these are all in play already as well. Maybe the bonuses/penalties need to be emphasized more, but they are already in there and are quite significant.

[Archonsod]

The thing is, from a historical perspective men in plate wore padding underneath the armour precisely to mitigate the effects of blunt weapons.
Looking at it from a historical perspective doesn't make much sense though. Knights in the real world never faced the problem of people chucking lightning bolts at them (and if they did, metallic armour would probably be right out). That's before we consider that lava-blooded humanoids weren't prevalent throughout the medieval era either.

Personally, I'd rather see something that kept recruitable troops competetive into the late game.

[BigDisAwesome]

Archonsod said:
Personally, I'd rather see something that kept recruitable troops competetive into the late game.

Perhaps someway to upgrade your troops with cash, resources, or gems? There could be set costs to upgrade your recruitable troops. And you would have to upgrade each fort separately, so that it doesn't make the better troops easy to mass without a bigger investment.

Sounds neat, but I'm not sure I care for it.

[jutetrea]

Would be complicated but:

Second form for all units with slightly increased stats/resistences. Resistances would be tough, may need multiple forms for the different combos...hmm. Possibly just stats then.

Province specific "dome" type enchantment that induces the 2nd form to show up as recruitable. Or "unlock" additional recruitables. Const 7 maybe.

or

Mytheology mod has spells which summon a Menhir type unit (immobile) that gives province specific bonuses (+morale, +growth, -unrest, etc) which I THINK work. Presence unlocks second form. "all units built in the presence of the molten altar receive 50% fire resistance". Limit 1 per province or make them unique per nation?

Would say +20% to all stats make units more worthwhile or would it have to be more significant? Say +60%?

[Taqwus]

On repel... more than once I've wondered whether multiple long weapons in a single square should have synergies in repel.

A single pikeman repelling... not effective. Too easy to go around.

Multiple pikemen -- much more dangerous.

[Chacal]

Taqwus said:
On repel... more than once I've wondered whether multiple long weapons in a single square should have synergies in repel.

A single pikeman repelling... not effective. Too easy to go around.

Multiple pikemen -- much more dangerous.

That's where Dom3 lacks a formation thing. Regular, trained, pikemen should be very efficient, particularly against mounted charging them. But they would be vulnerable to a mobile oppononent able to turn them. Maybe one day...

[Chris_Byler]

You can already upgrade your troops with Strength of Giants, Legions of Steel, Weapons of Sharpness, etc... since that's a major strength of earth magic, I think it would be problematic to make it available to everyone.

And there are already too many ways to get through armor - that's why the armored nations are weak, they pay four times over in increased resources (often needing productivity), higher encumbrance and lower defense skill and mobility for armor that then only protects them against some attacks. What we need are easier ways to buff resistance against the common AN attacks like lightning, poison and shadow blast, not even more ways to kill Ulm.

It *would* be appropriate for blunt weapons (including slings, which could really use the help) to do a small amount of AN stun damage per hit whether or not they do any HP damage through armor/shields, but I'd be concerned that the effect of such a change by itself would be to further weaken the effectiveness of armored troops.

Well, in reality the reason that with the increasing popularity of plate armor more unpleasent blunt implements were being used has little to do with armor piercing effects. A sword of comparable weight is more effective at hitting plate armor than a blunt hammer and only beaten (haha) by pointed weapons. For piercing armor you need a fine point so something like a pick works best, but when you can't pierce the plate anyway and just cause some blunt trauma, weight of the weapon is the only thing that matters, not if it's hammer or blade shaped.
But it is a lot more expensive to forge high-quality steel for a sword that does not break after a couple of dozen hits to plate armor than to simply put a big lump of iron on top of an oak pole, giving you a functional if unrefined weapon.

[Endoperez]

In Dominions terms, a Great Sword is dam 9, att 1, def 3, length 3 and costs 5 resources, while a Maul is dam 9, att 0, def -1, length 3 and costs 1 resource. The difference between Great Sword and a Maul is that in Dominions, the resource difference between the two is much, much smaller than it would be in real life. Battleaxes are identical to mauls except for def 0 and resource cost of 3 (+1 def costs 2 res). I Great Sword's cost scaled similarly, they'd cost about 9 resources.