Crossbowmen could use bp (body Piercing)

[Venatio]

Looks likes its time again to bring up how we can make firepower more intimidating

In this edition, we note how Crossbows are rather.. underwhelming. The higher atk and AP bonus do little to mitigate the fact that they fire so FREAKING slow. This, Combined with the rather avergae, if unimpressive casualties from each volley, and you have a unit in need of a bit of a facelift. Its a crossbow after all, these things were scary on the medieval battlefield. Dwarves arent the only race with Crossbows; Isengard has them, and so does Rhun. After peering through the Export_unit text I realized that, in edition to ap, there is another primary attr called bp, which was clarified to be Body Piercing. Used by ballista units, this essentially allows the projectile to go through one unit and hit another (or was that go through all units...). So thats when I thought "Hey, its a Crossbow, they are taking Forever to wind it up. It sure better pack a heck of a wallop!". After testing on the battlefield, it seemed a perfect match up; when attacking with a clear line of fire, casualty rates went up by 20 orcs (decent) when enemy goblins hit my lines. At the same time, indirect fire still stinks, as bolts dont benefit from bp since they are just landing in the ground afterwards. This increases the crossbow's effectiveness against horde units without even increasing the attack or accuracy values.

More testing needs to be done, but atm I personally feel this brings crossbow units a little more in line with bow wielding units, who still have superior mobility, indirect fire, and overrall effectiveness. As such I will be implementing it across all of my crossbow units.

Your thoughts on the matter Tatw community?

[Jean=A=Luc]

If x-bows are too weak for ya just increase their attack. Giving them "bp" would only befit some "let's get silly" sub-mod.

[Russian Gondor]

By body piercing I imagined Uruks with rings in all their places.

[Lord Butters I]

By body piercing I imagined Uruks with rings in all their places.

The freaky thing is this is probably someone's fetish.

But on a less disturbing note, it would probably be a better idea to just up the attack power. Bring crossbow damage up to what Elven archers do, something in the range of 11 or 12. That would be somewhat consistent with the way Vanilla handles them.

[Russian Gondor]

The freaky thing is this is probably someone's fetish.

But on a less disturbing note, it would probably be a better idea to just up the attack power. Bring crossbow damage up to what Elven archers do, something in the range of 11 or 12. That would be somewhat consistent with the way Vanilla handles them.

And no, piercings are ugly

[Venatio]

By body piercing I imagined Uruks with rings in all their places.

Heh, and in a world with rings of Power.

As to a damage increase, I felt crossbow damage was overrall fine. The purpose of the bp was to simply make them more viable against hordes, not neccesarily more so against trolls, cavalry, or such (although that would help). A dmg increase also wouldnt help alleviate the problem of to few volleys due to reload. Also, even with bp, the chances of bolts hitting more than one target isnt perfect, since you have to account for arc, unit spacing and accuracy.

On a more historical note, the brutality of crossbows is well documented. In a a medieval encyclodpedia, there were instances of bolts that penetrated the shield, Knight, and then impaled themselves against a wall. While not necesarily ground for increasing unit effectiveness, I think that this gives far more distinction to crossbows as a unique weapon in Tatw, rather than just AP bows with a heck of a reload and low ammo capacity.

I also personally feel a dmg increase is more intrusive in overral unit balance, while at the same time not addressing the issues pertaining to the unti in the first place. True, an increase in dmg would result in more consisten volley casualties, but it would have to be a heck of an increase to bring crossbows up to par with bows, which are still far and above superior overrall.

Body Piercing also has the distinction of making the crossbow more lethal the closer the unit is to its target; shots arced for distance are more likely to hit dirt afterwards, while a point blank range will send a shattering volley straight into the enemy ranks, drastically increasing the chance of multiple penetrations for bolts (Nothing compared to what a firethrower unit could do, but it still hurts). Of course, by then it would be far to late for your crossbowmen to avoid atleast a few casualties from melee. This could add more dimensions to the unit; Pull your men back now into safety, or holdout for that final devastating salvo?

[Brave Brave Sir Robin]

Crossbows are meant to be anti-armor units, not horde killers. Thats what archers are for.

[Venatio]

Crossbows are meant to be anti-armor units, not horde killers. Thats what archers are for.

More testing needs to be done, of which I dont have the time for tonight, but this change does not change crossbowmen into horde killers. On the contrary, the overral casualties inflicted in my tests wasnt particularly substantial (166 orcs from 144 previoulsy). It simply helps them fill out a broader role, and makes them better at what they do best; Holding the firing line right up untill the melee is upon them. Bows are still better Horde killers, and on a side note seem more effective against the Heavy Infantry turf of the Crossbows. Crossbows direly need infantry support to give them breathing room, while bows are flexible enough to kite and harry flanks.

[Xwhyzed]

Crossbows are meant to be anti-armor units, not horde killers. Thats what archers are for.

Historically the crossbows main advantage was (appart from grater range and power)
that it was easy to use, while it takes a lot of practice to master achery, the crossbow was relatively accurate even in a newbies hand.

It would be better to increase their range (if possible) and to lower the upkeep or replenishment time of crossbow units.

[Russian Gondor]

Well, I still believe if you have 50-100 bolts fired at a block of 150 men I would say at least 25-30 should die or be wounded to an extent where they cannot fight.

[Yarrum]

I just tested giving the Iron Crossbowmen the Body-Piercing attribute. One battalion of unupgraded Iron Crossbowmen versus one unit of unupgraded Eorling Militia on Grassy Plains, clear daytime conditions with no stakes deployed and starting positions for both battalions. In both tests, he crossbowmen had time for four volleys before having to engage in melee. The Eorling Militia were reduced to sixty-six men in the vanilla test and fifty men in the body-piercing test. It's not an overpowering change and the "missiles can impale several men" string doesn't appear in the unit description. This seems like a subtle way to boost crossbow power without upsetting the game balance too much.

On an unrelated note, why don't the Dwarven Axethrowers have a shield stat? The axethrowers actually use their shields in combat while the Iron Crossbowmen keep them on their backs and get a shield bonus of two.

[Venatio]

Thank you Yarrum for testing out the bp addittion, your results seem to match up with my own so far. As for your 'unrelated question', I happen to think it a very good one, and asked it in an earlier thread today baed on those lovable metal throwers:

http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?t=425817

I was very confused as to why this was so, but if I had to guess the original reason it was that the shield would be incorporated into the generic armor value for balance sake. I personally think AxeThrower melee defense could use an increase so that they could help out in combat more, and applied a +2 shield bonus to my own (aswell as other changes as detailed in the post).