Bash & Crush vs. Cut & Slash

[Wahnsinniger]

I think AP and AN kinda have rather vague wording about whether it included natural protection or not. Good to hear for sure straight from a dev.

[Chacal]

Maybe we can imagine for a next version a type of damage for each weapon just like there are damage type for magical damages (cold, fire etc...)
-Piercing (Swords, but also arrows etc...)
-Crush (Maces, flail)

So a Mace would have for ex. do 7 Crush while Sword would do a 7 Slash. An unarmored target would take 7 by both weapons while an armored one would maybe take 1/2 Slash damages and full Crush.

Of course it's impossible with actual system.

[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.