Damage Types: Pierce, Slash, and Crush

[Saber Cherry]

Damage types could open strategic options that are currently unimportant. Choosing which indy province to fort, in order to use the local troops to suppliment your national troops' range of damage types, is one example... and labbing a death-mage province to recruit mages who can summon skeletons, when faced with an opponent who relies too heavily on archers (cough *Man*), is another example.

Damage types would also increase the difference between leather (low pierce protection) and metal (high pierce protection) armors, allowing specific counter-strategies versus opponents who attack with massed cheap leather-wearing units, or opponents who attack with only piercing weapons (spears and bows).

I would say... it increases strategic depth.

Oh, and the more I think about it, the more I think dual-typing is necessary. For example:

Bow: Pierce
XBow: Pierce
Spear: Pierce
Javelin: Pierce
Lance: Pierce

Mace: Crush
Hammer: Crush
Fist: Crush
Flail: Crush
Pincer: Crush
Hoof: Crush

Sword: Slash
Claw: Slash
Scythe: Slash
Whip: Slash
Shuriken: Slash

Dagger: Pierce/Slash
Halberd: Pierce/Slash
Spike Whip: Pierce/Slash
Spike Tail: Pierce/Slash

Bite: Crush/Pierce
Ballista: Crush/Pierce
Mattock: Crush/Pierce
Spike Club: Crush/Pierce

Axe: Crush/Slash
JotunSword: Crush/Slash

For dual-type weapons, the more effective damage type is chosen. This should reduce problems introduced by a new system, while keeping it streamlined and straightforward. It would also make certain units more flexible than than other units... Historically, halberds were an excellent weapon due to their flexibility, and this system would recreate that effect. Currently, a halberd is just a different-looking spear.

-Cherry