- v50 information can now be added to pages in the main namespace. v0.47 information can still be found in the DF2014 namespace. See here for more details on the new versioning policy.
- Use this page to report any issues related to the migration.
Difference between revisions of "Talk:Armor"
(→Armor Coverage Graphic is Wrong: new section) |
(correcting previous formatting) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| − | |||
| − | |||
'''"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. | '''"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. | ||
Revision as of 03:15, 11 January 2024
"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? 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? 109.62.205.122 21:42, 12 August 2023 (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 this would not be the case. The only instance I found of someone testing it was in 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?
66.220.251.71 03:14, 11 January 2024 (UTC)JAB