Editing Talk:Armor

'''"Items in Dwarf Fortress must be equipped in a specific order. For example, a dwarf must equip a layer type of Under before he equips a layer type of Over. The complete order is: Under, Over, Armor, Cover. It is common among civilians to see a dwarf equip pants with no undergarments due to this restriction, even when an undergarment is available. This issue doesn't typically occur with soldiers, however."''' - doesn't seem to be true? Make a few loincloths (under) on embark, dwarves wearing trousers will equip them just fine.

'''"† It appears that equipping footwear on one foot can affect what can be equipped on the other. For example, if a uniform calls for socks and high boots, a dwarf will only equip 3 of those 4 items between both of their feet."''' - This seems to be a uniform bug, not an equipment-on-one-foot-affects-the-other issue. Dwarves can equip two boots fine over two civilian socks.




Heard that Dwarves may have knees now. This could affect armor coverage.

== Armor size scaling. ==

Does the size of armor's user affect protective properties of armor? In other words: is it harder to penetrate armor piece used by [[Elephant man]] than armor piece used by [[Dwarf]], if both pieces are identical in all but user's size (same model, material, quality, state of worn, same weapons with same attackers, ETC). Also, does armor used by bigger creatures get heavier than one used by smaller ones? [[Special:Contributions/109.62.205.122|109.62.205.122]] 15:14, 12 August 2023 (UTC)
: If previous description was too complex: is elephant-sized breastplate thicker than man-sized breastplate? [[Special:Contributions/109.62.205.122|109.62.205.122]] 21:42, 12 August 2023 (UTC)

:It does scale, in an unintuitive way. It is not any thicker (as far as the game is concerned), but part of the penetration calculation is the attack contact area. Both the weapon and the armor have contact area values based on their size, and the smaller of these is used as the contact area of the attack. For blugeoning and peircing weapons, the size of the armor rarely plays a role, as the contact area for those attacks is quite small. For slashing attacks however, the default contact area of the attack is quite big, and so the armor contact area comes into play. This makes it easier for an axe to cut through a gauntlet than a breastplate, all else being equal. Unless, of course, that gauntlet belongs to an elephant man. More information is available on the wiki [[Material science|here]], though I have no idea how any of this was confirmed. -JAB ([[Special:Contributions/66.220.251.71|66.220.251.71]] 03:33, 11 January 2024 (UTC))
:: Fully-grown [[Elephant man]] has size of 2525000 cm<sup>3</sup>; that means what he has following size of equipment: helm-40905; breastplate-90900; mail shirt-102262,5; gauntlets-8837,5; leggins and greaves - 119306,25; high boots-17359,375. That is my approximation, in reality their size is even bigger. There are weapons what have so massive contact area, what they are smaller than Elephant Man's armor surface area; for example, elephant-sized Greaves could fully accommodate slash of [[Two-handed sword]]. Essentially, the big size of armor makes weapons with big surface area inefficient against him. --[[Special:Contributions/109.62.215.230|109.62.215.230]] 19:47, 27 February 2024 (UTC)
:: Also, on more reasonable scale, that means what Helm protects better than Cap, and High Boots better than Low boots - not only because Helm has more coverage and High Boots covers bigger part of the body - but also because, due to bigger size of Helm and High Boots, they are harder to cut through. --[[Special:Contributions/109.62.215.230|109.62.215.230]] 19:47, 27 February 2024 (UTC)
::: Helm also has bigger Armor Class. Also, Helm and High Boots have same metal bars cost as Cap and Low Boots. Helm and High Boots return more bars than Cap and Low Boots (High Boots return more normal metal than was used). That means what Cap and Low Boots are simply unneeded. --[[Special:Contributions/109.62.215.230|109.62.215.230]] 19:58, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

== Armor Coverage Graphic is Wrong ==

There are quite a few mistakes.

* The shirt has the UBSTEP:MAX token. The graphic does not include face coverage
* The toga, leather armor, and mail shirt have UBSTEP:1. The graphic incorrectly depicts these as covering the face.
* Tunic has UBSTEP:0 and LBSTEP:1. The graphic shows the tunic as covering the upper arms but not the upper legs.

This is, of course, assuming that the coverage tags have been described correctly. 

I've been referencing this chart for years and never noticed. In particular, I've seen the claim that chainmail covers the face often repeated, but as far as I can tell it's just plain wrong and originates from this graphic.

There is something else that bothers me. I suspect that all headwear covers the face, much like how all footwear covers toes and all gloves cover the fingers. I can find nothing in the raws that suggest otherwise. The only instance I found of someone testing it was in [http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=102348.0 the bay12 forums back in 2012], but it was a very different game back then. Searching the bug reports is not working on my machine. Can anyone confirm, via testing or search?

-JAB ([[Special:Contributions/66.220.251.71|66.220.251.71]] 03:14, 11 January 2024 (UTC))

== Armor zones analysis. ==

Armor Level = "AL". Something with AL of 0 or what's not made of metal is "Rag". --[[Special:Contributions/95.71.113.173|95.71.113.173]] 10:36, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

The most heavily armored body part is Lower Body - it is protected by 2 AL3 pieces (Breastplate, Greaves), 3 AL2 pieces (3 Mail Shirts), and 25 rags (6 Cloaks + 16 Capes + 3 Long Skirts). The second most protected is Upper Torso - Breastplate, 3 Mail Shirts, and 22 Rags. --[[Special:Contributions/95.71.113.173|95.71.113.173]] 10:36, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

The mouths, noses, eyes, and cheeks are unarmored at all. Feet, head, fists (zones protected by Gauntlets) are only protected by 1 metal item, what is pretty small and have AL2. Also, head has 8 Rags (Hoods) - while boots and fists only have 1 Rag (Chausses, Socks). --[[Special:Contributions/95.71.113.173|95.71.113.173]] 10:36, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

Capes are covering body parts what metal armor can't - like throat. Also, "Rags" are pretty weak and break a lot faster than metal armor - especially the "'''Over'''garment" type (Capes, Cloaks, Hoods, Mittens). Last time i played in Adventure Mode, my Demigod character frequently fought, and cloaks were regularly worn down to zero, basically becoming consumables of sorts. --[[Special:Contributions/95.71.113.173|95.71.113.173]] 10:36, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

Besides, did someone test efficiency of "Rags" - basically, comparing dwarf in full metal armor to dwarf with full metal armor + full complect of rags? --[[Special:Contributions/95.71.113.173|95.71.113.173]] 10:36, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

Also, is there any differences of protection value of clothes and leather armor? --[[Special:Contributions/95.71.113.173|95.71.113.173]] 10:36, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

Also, what Armor Level does, exactly? Is it armor thickness? --[[Special:Contributions/95.71.113.173|95.71.113.173]] 10:36, 5 February 2024 (UTC)
* Also, [[Material science]] has Armor size - for example, Cap is 162, and Helm is 973. That is surface area - but is it simultaneously armor thickness? --[[Special:Contributions/95.71.113.173|95.71.113.173]] 11:10, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

Also, Mail Shirts are the '''only''' metal armor piece what can be stacked. The other two metal armor pieces what are technically shapeless are Flask, High Boots and Low Boots - but Flask doesn't offer any protection (it just hangs out there), and both Boots variants can't be stacked due to their Size being smaller than their Permit. --[[Special:Contributions/95.71.113.173|95.71.113.173]] 10:51, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

The optimized suit of metal armor costs 14 bars to make (1 for helm + 3*2 for mail shirts + 3 for breastplate + 1 for gauntlets + 2 for greaves + 1 for high boots), and [[Shield]] costs another 2. --[[Special:Contributions/109.62.215.230|109.62.215.230]] 20:02, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

: I'm unsure if it's actually beneficial to wear multiple mail shirts (of the same material) -- for 100% coverage armor, it either blocks the attack or it doesn't, it's not random, and chain in particular can only blunt attacks instead of completely negating them, which can only be done once.  This really needs practical evidence, though, and I can't find any because the forums are down.  As for shields, it's better to make them from wood or leather, because metal is heavy (and armor user skill doesn't help) and doesn't actually provide additional protection.  They will break often, but it's still cheap.  [[Special:Contributions/89.20.133.78|89.20.133.78]] 09:16, 28 February 2024 (UTC)
:: First - you could wear multiple shirts of different materials - or just multiple of the best material avaiable. Also - by that logic, wearing lots of rags is not needed - so, protective properties of all those cloaks and hoods also need to be tested. --[[Special:Contributions/109.62.215.230|109.62.215.230]] 10:04, 28 February 2024 (UTC)
:: Multiple mail shirts would be helpful in blunting very strong attacks - for example, if your mail shirts are copper, and weapon is made of steel; or if mail shirts are made of good materials, but attack is made by someone very strong (like [[Minotaur]], or [[Elephant man]]). --[[Special:Contributions/109.62.215.230|109.62.215.230]] 10:09, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

== Fallin objects damage and size correlation. ==

I heard what, in old versions of game, '''big''' falling or thrown objects (like anvils or big boulders) dealt practically no damage at all (just like in old cartoons). Meanwhile, small objects (like seeds or coins) dealt devastating damage (that can be compared to bullets and shrapnel in real lief).

There's an explanation for that: [[Material science]] states: "Since momentum = velocity * mass, and lighter items can be swung faster, '''attack momentum is largely independent from weapon weight'''". However, the contact surface of some objects are bigger than other - and it's logical what big objects have bigger contact area. That means what, in game, both anvil and coin have same momentum (N), but because coin's contact surface is smaller, it's momentum is distributed on smaller area - therefore, there is bigger momentum per contact unit ratio - and therefore, it's more deadly.

Was that fixed? Nowadays, bigger objects are more deadly - coins are so weak what they are used in [[Danger room|Coinstar Room]] for training, while anvil can maim or kill someone. That's because nowadays speed of falling object correlates with actual speed on which it's flying - while on earlier versions, game treated falling objects hitting someone similarly to as if that someone was whacked by improvised melee weapons. --[[Special:Contributions/109.62.247.160|109.62.247.160]] 20:12, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
* Wait - that means what, in modern version, throwing small items is preferable. Think about it - the force with which the object is thrown is the same, '''but''' small object is faster (= less time to move out of it's way, and bigger range), it has smaller contact area (= more penetration), and you can carry more of these. Unless there is a meaningful cap on object speed, throwing coins is better than throwing something big. Am i right? --[[Special:Contributions/109.62.247.160|109.62.247.160]] 20:19, 10 February 2024 (UTC)

: The bit you quoted is only true for ''dwarves'' swinging weapons.  It doesn't apply to weapon traps or gravity, which have constant velocity and acceleration respectively.  It also doesn't apply to very light objects, which do have a significantly lower momentum -- particularly adamantine weapons, which is why candy hammers are so bad (edged weapons compensate by having 10x sharpness).  Coins are pretty light too, so they won't be very damaging.  Although I heard that the coinstar exploit is no longer safe in recent versions.  [[Special:Contributions/89.20.133.78|89.20.133.78]] 06:47, 11 February 2024 (UTC)

== [[Material science]] and Charged attacks. ==

Does using charge(d) attack increase the strength of the attack? In other words - does charging into someone make hit harder? I expect answer to be something like "it will be stronger, but in a rather counter-intuitive way"; still want to hear it, though. --[[Special:Contributions/109.62.215.230|109.62.215.230]] 18:27, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

== Weapon size variability? ==

Does [[Weapon]] size change depending on who made it? In other words - will be a weapon made by [[Elephant man]] be bigger/heavier than weapon made by [[Dwarf]]? --[[Special:Contributions/109.62.219.200|109.62.219.200]] 14:53, 23 March 2024 (UTC)
:Weapons should always be the same size, no matter what size creature makes them. --[[User:Zippy|Zippy]] ([[User talk:Zippy|talk]]) 03:22, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

== Ultimate weapon; Whip vs Scourge ==
It seems like [[Whip]] and [[Scourge]] are the best weapons in the game. Both have very small contact areas and great speed; scourge has size 300, edge, contact area 10, penetration 50 (smallest in the game) and speed 2.0x; whip has size 100, blunt, contact area 1, speed 5.0x, 4 ticks to attack and 4 to recover (75% as often as other weapons), no multi-attacks.

So, what of them are the best weapon? '''As i think, [[Whip]] is the best''': [[Material science|size of weapon doesn't affect strength of blows]], but it makes weapon more compact and usable for everyone, also it has smaller contact area and bigger speed - meaning a lot bigger impulse; edge of [[Scourge]] doesn't matter much, because, due to it's small penetration, attack will quickly become blunt anyway; [[Whip]] can also be usually used by [[Humans]]; less often attacks and lack of multi-attacks are acceptable drawbacks.

What do you think? --[[Special:Contributions/109.62.164.162|109.62.164.162]] 12:20, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
* There are my calculations: i put all numbers into Excel, for Whip, Scourge, War Hammer and Mace - all default quality and made of steel. Steel Whip has momentum 203,5084687, scourge 117,1059175, war hammer 123,8984611, mace 135,7055391. And then you factor in the surface area; if we put these numbers in, then we get what '''Whip will have a pressure of those same 203''', while scourge 11, hammer 12, mace 6. Therefore, '''whip is superior'''. --[[Special:Contributions/109.62.164.162|109.62.164.162]] 12:41, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
** I just took density of [[Steel]] as was written on that page. [[Weapon]] density has that value divided by 10^3. I don't know if that does ruin the calculation, but the point of it still remains intact; that would just change numbers a little bit. --[[Special:Contributions/109.62.164.162|109.62.164.162]] 13:27, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

: "Pressure" (momentum divided by contact area) determines the armor-piercing ability but '''not''' damage.  Whips still do good damage, but it's essentially concentrated in a single point on the body, so if you don't choose this point well (i.e. an aimed attack), it probably won't do much.  In particular, fortress mode dwarves aren't very smart about this.  It's still good in adventure mode -- as a human outsider you can even start with a platinum whip, which is about 20% stronger than a silver one.  [[Special:Contributions/95.221.237.87|95.221.237.87]] 20:34, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
** However, the damage is determined by momentum - and whip has about twice as much momentum as other blunt weapons. So, the raw damage is also going to be bigger. Not to mention what it effectively ignores armor. The momentum could be made even bigger by heavy/wild attacks and stealth attacks. --[[Special:Contributions/109.62.164.162|109.62.164.162]] 13:24, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
** When you strike, the blunt attack would completely ruin everything in that one point of the body. Then, after everything on this tiny point is ruined, the remaining force goes to other portions of the same body part. Then, remaining momentum goes to another body part - and if there is still remaining momentum, to yet another. If it is very strong strike - like heavy stealth strike - then it will be one of the few cases where attack would twist multiple additional body parts. So, concentrating everything in one point wouldn't decrease the raw damage. --[[Special:Contributions/109.62.164.162|109.62.164.162]] 13:30, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
** Because it has huge momentum and low surface area, it would be more accurate to compare DF Whip strike not to lucerne hammer or really big club; but rather, to .50 caliber bullet. --[[Special:Contributions/109.62.164.162|109.62.164.162]] 13:41, 1 May 2024 (UTC)

== Miscellaneous weapon use effectiveness ==
How does miscellaneous objects compare to proper weapons in effectiveness? Did anyone experiment with this - like, arming the dwarves with some kind of misc.items to use in serious fights, or experimenting on that? What kind of item would be most effective? Maybe something really small and really dense - like individual platinum coin, or an platinum earring, or something like that? Or maybe, the biggest - and also very dense - item your characte can wield? Also, did anyone tried to carry [[Trap component]]s in hands and punch someone with it - was it effective, and what skill was used in this case (they are big, so IDK if a human could wield it; probably someone even bigger could)? --[[Special:Contributions/109.62.164.162|109.62.164.162]] 16:26, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

== Flesh toughness ==
[[Weapon]] has stats of various materials. I would want to add materials of living beings to it - skin, flesh, various tissues - for comparison. Besides, i can't find such stats anywhere. --[[Special:Contributions/109.62.164.162|109.62.164.162]] 17:32, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
* Also chitin, nerves, tendons, and other things. Maybe even sponge tissue. Just all materials used in living creatures. I know what they are weak - but i would like to know '''exactly to what degree weak'''. --[[Special:Contributions/109.62.164.162|109.62.164.162]] 17:38, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
* Maybe also add various types of cloth for comparison. --[[Special:Contributions/109.62.164.162|109.62.164.162]] 17:52, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
* There's some fan theories:
** 1st is what Armok loves metal and inorganic materials in general - and he filled the world with weak living being to make metals look better in comparison.
** 2nd theory is: Armok was planning to fill the world with metal beings - but had to fill it with living beings as part of a contract with other unknown Gods (where Armok is god of Dwarves, and other Gods are Gods of other species). Those Gods are less skilled in world-making than Armok, but can create things Armok can't make (just like other civilizations can make Exotic [[Weapons]]); and therefore, those Gods pay Armok with those unique things in exchange for Armok making worlds for them (or perhaps they pay with some sort of unobtanium). Essentially, it is a result of "design by committee" anti-pattern. The "fill the world with living beings" idea in question probably belonged to God of Elves, what loves everything natural - and Armok agreed because payment was good, but nevertheless was so pissed off what it spilled into the world - que Dwarves hating Elves. That could also explain why biology and physiology works strange in Dwarf Fortress - Armok never though he would need to make living beings at all, cue them being made rushed and crude - by Armok's standards, of course. --[[Special:Contributions/109.62.164.162|109.62.164.162]] 18:51, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
@@ Line 102: / Line 102: @@
 * There's some fan theories:
 ** 1st is what Armok loves metal and inorganic materials in general - and he filled the world with weak living being to make metals look better in comparison.
-** 2nd theory is: Armok was planning to fill the world with metal beings - but had to fill it with living beings as part of a contract with other unknown Gods (where Armok is god of Dwarves, and other Gods are Gods of other species). Those Gods are less skilled in world-making than Armok, but can create things Armok can't make (just like other civilizations can make Exotic [[Weapons]]); and therefore, those Gods pay Armok with those unique things in exchange for Armok making worlds for them (or perhaps they pay with some sort of unobtanium). Essentially, it is a result of "design by committee" anti-pattern. The "fill the world with living beings" idea in question probably belonged to God of Elves, what loves everything natural - and Armok agreed because payment was good, but nevertheless was so pissed off what it spilled into the world - cue Dwarves hating Elves. That could also explain why biology and physiology works strange in Dwarf Fortress - Armok never though he would need to make living beings at all, cue them being made rushed and crude - by Armok's standards, of course. --[[Special:Contributions/109.62.164.162|109.62.164.162]] 18:51, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
+** 2nd theory is: Armok was planning to fill the world with metal beings - but had to fill it with living beings as part of a contract with other unknown Gods (where Armok is god of Dwarves, and other Gods are Gods of other species). Those Gods are less skilled in world-making than Armok, but can create things Armok can't make (just like other civilizations can make Exotic [[Weapons]]); and therefore, those Gods pay Armok with those unique things in exchange for Armok making worlds for them (or perhaps they pay with some sort of unobtanium). Essentially, it is a result of "design by committee" anti-pattern. The "fill the world with living beings" idea in question probably belonged to God of Elves, what loves everything natural - and Armok agreed because payment was good, but nevertheless was so pissed off what it spilled into the world - que Dwarves hating Elves. That could also explain why biology and physiology works strange in Dwarf Fortress - Armok never though he would need to make living beings at all, cue them being made rushed and crude - by Armok's standards, of course. --[[Special:Contributions/109.62.164.162|109.62.164.162]] 18:51, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
-* We can see various materials in [[Material]]. --[[Special:Contributions/109.62.164.162|109.62.164.162]] 19:41, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
-** For example, [[Nervous tissue]]: Density 0.5 [IMPACT_YIELD:10000] [IMPACT_FRACTURE:10000] [IMPACT_STRAIN_AT_YIELD:50000] [SHEAR_YIELD:20000] [SHEAR_FRACTURE:20000] [SHEAR_STRAIN_AT_YIELD:50000]. [[Leather]]: Density 0.50 IMPACT_YIELD 10 IMPACT_FRACTURE 10 IMPACT_ELASTICITY 50000 SHEAR_YIELD 25 SHEAR_FRACTURE 25 SHEAR_ELASTICITY 50000. For comparison, [[Copper]], weakest metal: Density 8.93 IMPACT_YIELD 245 IMPACT_FRACTURE 770 IMPACT_ELASTICITY 175 SHEAR_YIELD 70 SHEAR_FRACTURE 220 SHEAR_ELASTICITY 145; [[Steel]], best conventional metal: Density 7.85 IMPACT_YIELD 1505 IMPACT_FRACTURE 2520 IMPACT_ELASTICITY 940 SHEAR_YIELD 430 SHEAR_FRACTURE 720 SHEAR_ELASTICITY 215. --[[Special:Contributions/109.62.164.162|109.62.164.162]] 20:02, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
-*** Basically, living materials other than [[Skin]] and [[Bones]] are absurdly fragile - more fragile than [[Leather]]. Calling them "fragile as glass" would be an '''understatement''', as they are '''more fragile than actual [[glass]] and [[obsidian]]''' (Density 2.6 for [[Glass]] or 2.67 for [[Obsidian]]; IMPACT_YIELD 1000 IMPACT_FRACTURE 1000 IMPACT_ELASTICITY 2222 SHEAR_YIELD 33 SHEAR_FRACTURE 33 SHEAR_ELASTICITY 113). "Once I understood the weakness of my flesh, it disgusted me"; or more like "Because I understood the weakness of your flesh, it will disgust those who will see your body parts flying off in arcs". --[[Special:Contributions/109.62.164.162|109.62.164.162]] 20:11, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
-**** Incorporating DF memes: "Once i understood weakness of your '''XX'''flesh'''XX''', it was inevitable". --[[Special:Contributions/95.167.182.205|95.167.182.205]] 19:25, 15 June 2024 (UTC)
-**** I was thinking about the hypothetical project - "adamantium dwarf" or something like that - the RAW-files experiment of creating the most overpowered creature '''ever'''. From lore perspective, this is a experimental prototype model made by Armok himself, for farfare between Major Gods (= those who are comparable or stronger then Armok himself), created and tested in his own private custom (demi)plane. Perhaps i could do it in [[Dwarf_Fortress_Wiki:Sandbox]] and them save in WebArchive. --[[Special:Contributions/95.167.182.205|95.167.182.205]] 19:37, 15 June 2024 (UTC)