Armour & weapon designs - a plea (part IV).

[SophosTheWise]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Pur30aiOAg

[Yonjuro]

For those interested in early firearms - I just read an interesting article about those huge wall and rampart guns I mentioned in my previous post, they were actually called ''Amusettes'' and according to various old documents that kind of firearm was more accurate than any field artillery, cannon, bow and crossbow! In fact, they were so amazingly accurate they could hit an A4-sized sheet of paper at 500 yards and the guns was still regarded effective out to 1000yds! For comparison - standard smooth bore muskets had an effective range of 60yds. 

 

I find it amazing to get that much accuracy out of a extremely simple smoothbore gun from the 1600's. 

 

  That's cool.

 

  (It might even be a little too cool. If they were more accurate than weapons that shot bigger ammo, that sounds like

 they may have had rifled barrels (or something), no? As we know, size matters; the bigger the ammo the more accurate the smooth

 bore gun. If they were more accurate than heavier weapons, it sounds like there is more going on here.)

 

 In any case, I definitely want one (as a  supplement to "the blunderbuss of 'accuracy'" mentioned earlier).

[Woldan]

They did not have rifled barrels, the guns simply must have had a fortunate match between the extreme barrel length, the caliber and sight radius. I guess they could have made equally accurate cannons and field pieces, but with a similar caliber-barrel length ratio those cannons would have been HUGE and heavy. And pin-point accuracy is not the point when using cannons. 

 

That barrel is almost two meters long, a cannon shooting a cannon ball 5 times the size would have needed a barrel at least 10 meters long. You'd need a lot of horses to move such cannon.  

 

Edited January 3, 2014 by Woldan

[Yonjuro]

... 

That barrel is almost two meters long, a cannon shooting a cannon ball 5 times the size would have needed a barrel at least 10 meters long. You'd need a lot of horses to move such cannon.  

 

 I haven't done the math, but I didn't think it worked like that. I thought that if you had two barrels of the same length the heavier projectile would fly straighter (assuming a large enough charge to get an equal muzzle velocity).

 

  (Also, if there are two sights, more distance between them helps, so longer means more accurate for that reason too.)

 

 The length also increases the burn length and, hence, the muzzle velocity but so does the size of the charge, so I was assuming that with a larger diameter ball, one uses enough of a charge to get the muzzle velocity high enough.

 

 But, I don't really know the details, am I leaving something out? It's not obvious to me why it's the ratio that's important. 

[Jarmo]

In fact, they were so amazingly accurate they could hit an A4-sized sheet of paper at 500 yards and the guns was still regarded effective out to 1000yds! For comparison - standard smooth bore muskets had an effective range of 60yds. 

 

I find it amazing to get that much accuracy out of a extremely simple smoothbore gun from the 1600's. 

 

Even considering the barrel length, that is so unbelievable I actually can't believe it.

Unless the sources mean, you can hit an A4 paper on an extremely lucky shot instead of being able to do it reliably.

I mean, that's the kind of accuracy you'd be happy to get on a WW2 antitank rifle, and those were rifled long barrel things.

 

Not saying it's not true though, just that I'm not a believer on first hearing.

[Woldan]

@ Jarmo

 

According to the old military trials reports it sounded like they could hit said paper with each shot. Thats what I read anyway, however, there is another well known military report from the mid 17 century mentioning a similar accuracy result with a super sized version of the Brown Bess musket, a wall gun version in 25mm caliber. The shooter and the soldiers testing it were really happy with it. 

 

This is an exact modern copy: 

 

 

There is also this article: http://militaryhistorynow.com/2013/09/18/big-shots-amusettes-jingals-and-other-super-sized-muskets-and-rifles/

 

To quote the important part: 

 

 

A typical amusette measured up to seven feet from butt to muzzle – more than two feet longer than a British Brown Bess. While standard European and North American muskets varied in caliber from .69 to .75, an amusette fired a much larger ball — sometimes 1.2-inches (30 mm) in diameter. And it fired much farther too. The average smooth-bore long-arm of the era was accurate to about 50 to 100 yards – an amusette’s 60-inch barrel could propel a a lead ball weighing a tenth of a pound or more 10 times as far. And they were accurate too. American general Charles Lee of the Revolutionary War boasted in a letter that practice shots from his newly acquired amusettes had struck paper targets at up to 500 yards. [1] Some fired as far as 1,000 yards.

 

They didn't mention the size of the paper target though, but since its a military trial I bet it was torso-size or smaller. 

 

I can neither confirm nor deny those claims about the accuracy from wall guns and amusettes, I can only recite what I read in some old documents - though I can say from first hand experiences that smoothbore weapons (especially those with larger calibers) of any kind can be surprisingly accurate when the projectile is a snug fit and a good patch is used.  

Another thing to consider is that those wall guns and amusettes had -contrary to the smaller general issue muskets- very thick heavy barrels which always makes a positive impact on accuracy, even on todays guns. (less barrel whip and better harmonics)

 

Personally, I think its very possible that a paper target the size of a mans chest could be hit with such weapon at up to 500 meters under perfect conditions. 

 

Should I ever get my hands on a large caliber smoothbore musket I'll surely make extensive tests with it.

Edited January 4, 2014 by Woldan

[Jarmo]

From the article in Woldan's post:

 

 

Oooo yeah, I want the one in front. That's one manly gun!

Make mine double barrel though, and I'd like the option to use shotgun type grapeshot.

 

Anyway, I'd still assume, in this case a paper target would be something more like 1x1,5 m with a man drawn on it. 

Even hitting one like that reliably would be something to be real happy with.

 

I guess I'll walk away with the notion amusettes were real damn surprisingly accurate, but go no further in the specifics.

Edited January 4, 2014 by Jarmo

[Woldan]

Moving away from guns I'd also like to see various maces, my favorite blunt weapon! Sadly an extremely overlooked weapon type in all medieval and fantasy games....

 

 

Personally, I'm a fan of the less elabrorate simpler designs. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited January 5, 2014 by Woldan

[JFSOCC]

Yes, maces, batons, clubs, and sticks! we need more of those!

[SophosTheWise]

[AGX-17]

Moving away from guns I'd also like to see various maces, my favorite blunt weapon! Sadly an extremely overlooked weapon type in all medieval and fantasy games....

Improved armor penetration/negation isn't as romantic as cutting a dashing noble figure with a fine longsword. It doesn't help that game designers frequently make the base damage of blunt weapons lower than that of swords, especially when it's a game whose sword animations consist entirely of slashing motions which wouldn't even penetrate simple iron chainmail. Unless it was some kind of atomic-level sharp carbon fiber sympathetic vibrating plasma-coated sword.

 

 

batons, clubs, and sticks! we need more of those!

Those sorts of weapons are decidedly pre-bronze age. Bottom tier weapons for fending off opponents wearing woolen britches and linen shirts as armor.

Edited January 6, 2014 by AGX-17

[Dark Elf]

Like it is in Warhammer 40k, where Power Mauls have the worst armour penetration of all power weapons. Don't know enough about Eternity's combat system to say anything about it, but it would sure be nice if weapons worked a bit more in line with how they are supposed to work. Full plate makes you pretty much swordproof, they began using hammers and axes for a reason. When you see a heavily armoured knight, that's when you reach for your poleaxe.

[Lephys]

When you see a heavily armoured knight, that's when you reach for your poleaxe.

Or your LIGHTNING! *villainous cackle*

[Jarmo]

 

When you see a heavily armoured knight, that's when you reach for your poleaxe.

Or your LIGHTNING! *villainous cackle*

 

 

_{BTW, fully armored knight is grounded.} 

Might get burns, but much less vulnerable to electrical attacks than someone wearing leather or something..

[Dark Elf]

This is why you only fight knights on wet metal floors.

[Mendosa]

I agree with what most are suggesting here in terms of more simplified and historically accurate looking armor/weapons.

 

I believe only truely rare or difficult to earn weapons and armor should have ornate/unique designs, possibly aquired toward end game. Obviously, rare items should look much different, as well as Set items if they make it into this game.

 

On a side note: Has there been any rumblings of "legendary" or extremely rare items making it into the game?

[Jarmo]

On a side note: Has there been any rumblings of "legendary" or extremely rare items making it into the game?

 

Not specifically, to my knowledge. But I'd be super million surprised if there weren't any.

Also I'd expect rare epic stuff to look different, but not in an epic thundering three meters long two meters wide cutlass of doooom kind of way.

[Woldan]

More heavy crossbows drawn with winches, cranequins, belt-hooks, and goats-foot levers because huge projectile weapons are awesome against them big beasties. 
 



 

  

Edited January 7, 2014 by Woldan

[Tsuga C]

Moving away from guns I'd also like to see various maces, my favorite blunt weapon! Sadly an extremely overlooked weapon type in all medieval and fantasy games....

Gotta like that first one as I've always thought that flanged maces had an element of elegance to them despite the fact that they're bone breakers.

[Lephys]

 

Or your LIGHTNING! *villainous cackle*

 

_{BTW, fully armored knight is grounded.} 

Might get burns, but much less vulnerable to electrical attacks than someone wearing leather or something..

 

Well, I wasn't going to be the one to tell Fantasy Fysics that there's no Santa Claus, but, I guess now it knows.

[Woldan]

Gotta like that first one as I've always thought that flanged maces had an element of elegance to them despite the fact that they're bone breakers.

Back in the day a lot of people liked those maces so they made extremely pompous specimen which would evolve into generals scepters and later into the ceremonial marshal's baton.

 

Italian mace, 16th century:

 

Edited January 8, 2014 by Woldan

[Lephys]

There should be one store in the game that specializes in blunt weapons.

 

It could be called "Macy's".

 

*dodges rotten vegetables*

[Woldan]

What about Rocky's?

 

I know.  

[Elerond]

 

 

http://www.etsy.com/listing/175112598/cat-battle-armor

[JFSOCC]

poor cat