But is it really a meaningful sacrifice if you “sacrifice” an ability to do something that you were not planning to do in the first place (because it is very much a high risk low reward strategy even under more “optimal” conditions)?
Yes, you are removing potential options, or sacrificing them, in return for other options.
Bows typically require more strength and skill to wield and one can draw multiple arrows at a time or try different quiver styles (vertical vs horizontal).
Crossbows are very noob friendly and take longer to load because instead of pure arm strength you’re using levers or hands and feet.
Each has their uses.
Crossbows take no strength to hold at full draw so you can leave a small one loaded to fire at an approaching enemy then switch to melee with relative ease.
Bows (especially the longer variety) are more of a commitment. Bow wielders may only hold a skinning knife or dagger as a melee weapon.
I’m not sure how either work in-game aside from marking practice targets and grinding levels.
Well, I guess I don’t really see how removing an option to do something that was never a good option in the first place is a meaningful trade-off.
I mean, yes, technically it’s a trade-off. Just not a meaningful one.
It’s always nice to have more strings to your bow, if you’ll pardon the terrible pun 
1 Like
Well, yes, but going out at night to zombie-infested areas without a vehicle (without or without “natural” night-vision) is less of “more string to your bow” and more of a “more holes to your torso” (courtesy of the local feral predator). 
P.S. Also, nothing like a “surprise boomer from behind a tree that made you blind AND glowing”.
It’s not any more “difficult to craft” than a normal compound bow at the stage in the game where you can craft either one of them: it requires no “rare” ingredients (you might realistically have any shortage of) and both are perfectly craft-able with fabrication 8 (a level everyone and their dog attain anyway just to craft survivors gear reliably).
As for “taking a lot of strength”, again, 18 is a perfectly viable starting value without any mutations or CBM’s. And strength is already by far the best stat in the game, the last thing CDDA meta-game needs is MORE reasons to prefer characters with high strength and low-ish everything else.
Except with a melee weapon you will:
- Put yourself into melee range, where you will get pain, deep bites, equipment damage, actual damage and face whatever special abilities enemies have (grappling you, throwing you, knocking you down, “boomering” you, etc,etc,etc,etc). A greatbow will keep you comfortably out of range of ALL zombie attacks/abilities. Every single one of them.
- You can use bow effectively with absurd torso encumbrance.
- Since you can take your time aiming, pretty much every shot is good hit or above.
- Using bow does not really consume stamina (unlike melee), so you are free to run away if things don’t go your way. Just in general, the risk vs reward here is not even in the same ballpark: a ranged character usually knows that things are “not going as planned” before taking any damage/pain.
Is it not intended then that compound crossbow can NOT be accurized?
We’ve already been over this: game-balance is always a combination of real-life considerations and meta-game considerations.
Day 77, but that’s when I found the book. Could have made it on day 20+ otherwise.
Do I have rifles? A few, yes.
Do I have AMMUNITION for said rifles? Not really.
Would those be “better option” if I had enough ammunition? Nope, not even close. Both greatbow and a rifle one-shot most Z’s, but bow is SILENT, while rifle is not.
Again, comparing melee to ranged in pure damage is not fair — risk for using ranged weapons is orders of magnitude lower (see the 4 reason above).
One should compare to other ranged weapons. And the closes equivalent for compound greatbow is compound normal bow.
That thing has almost TWICE the damage 40 vs 22 base, 46 vs 28 accurized, and is practically identical otherwise.
That’s +18 damage (for 10 extra strength). Waaay other the top. Strength adds +1.5 damage per 2 points for melee, the best I can see balanced for a ranged weapon is +1 damage per 2 points.
Also, compound bow on HIGH takes only 8 strength (an average human strength) to draw…? Is this intended?
Yeah, 8 melee, 8 dodge and 8 unarmed are viable starting values too. And they make the game ridiculously easy too. You deliberately min-max to hit pretty high stat levels - you get the appropriate result.
I’ve got no desire to discuss this a second time. Find the old thread and read my responses there if you want. Find my open PR and read the changes if you want to see the incoming changes. I’m not going to discuss this a second time and I’d appreciate not clogging the thread with this discussion.
Ok, three short questions:
- Is no accurization for compound crossbow intended?
- Is 8 strength (average human strength) for compound bow on HIGH setting intended?
- Is 40 damage for compound greatbow base damage intended?
No. All compound bows/crossbows should be accurisable with gun kits, since all it really requires IRL is some knowledge and an allen wrench.
Yes. Modern compounds are almost never above 80lb and 10lb of draw requires 1 strength.
Yes, at present. My PR changes it to 31 and reduces the strength requirement to 14, while adding a compound monsterbow with a requirement of 20 for 37 damage. The justification for these numbers is explained on my change spreadsheet.
As far as i can tell you have no real reasoning for the damage being too high, since none of the current use costs count as costs to you. I agree that 18 strength shouldn’t be without sacrifice, but that’s an issue with the uselessness of the other three stats, not with the compound greatbow.
1 Like
That’s something you can only get with ONE very specific profession.
18 str is possible for ANY profession and scenario in the game.
You simply set your stat values. 18 str is not fundamentally different from any other stat value from 4 to 20 (i.e. you don’t need a specific profession, or train, or mutation to have that value).
So an average untrained human (that’s what 8 str is) can use compound bow at the highest setting?
It’s still perfectly doable. Your entire argument is based on “I can do X to start the game in this particular way, streamlining my ability to get a particular item.” You could do the same by just putting enough points into fabrication to make .50 cal bullets then finding a Barrett and using that. Or putting your points into dodge and starting with a high-end martial art.
The compound greatbow is on the higher end for crafting requirements as far as weapons go. The strength requirement prevents pretty much anyone who doesn’t either focus on mutations or abuse starting stats from using it. You seem to be the sole person that feels it’s unbalanced, and yet you could put your points into strength and find a mace in any mansion, then do far more damage per turn.
There’s an assumption that the player has moderately developed musculature from within their strength range, and the average person could absolutely develop sufficient muscle to use an 80lb compound bow reliably. I worked out the 10lb = 1 strength system with Kevin, it’s unlikely to change.
1)You need to spend 28 character points (fab 8 and marksmanship 7) to know how to craft 0.50 ammo from the start. Str 18 only takes 14 points.
2) You keep seemingly ignoring the fact that rifles are not silent (it’s a huge factor in CDDA) and that you need much rarer components to make rifle ammunition.
Also, str 18 is a good value to start with irregardless of the greatbow considerations.
So is compound bow.
Here we go again. You call a particular stat distribution an “abuse” even though it’s not in any way fundamentally different from any OTHER stat distribution.
Again with the “ranged weapon are not intrinsically different (and much safer to use) than melee weapons, so there is no reason for ranged to have much lower damage” argument?
With all respect, I’d have a tiny little bit of a doubt Kevin is ok with a compound bow on “high” setting requiring just an average strength of an average person to use for full damage.
I don’t know what to tell you. I don’t think your reasoning is correct and I’ve got no desire to further discuss this, so I won’t.
Fair enough. Let’s wait for Kevin, I guess.
I just want to stress than my problem at this point is specifically with compound greatbow and, to a much lesser degree, with compound bow only needing 8 str for high setting.
Make it 10 or 12 str for high setting on compound and then scale it at about +1 damage for 2 points of strength for any “larger” bows, and I wouldn’t see any further issues.
P.S. +1 point for 2 str because melee damage scales + 1.5 per 2 str, and ranged attacks should, presumably, be somewhat less efficient at turning raw strength into damage.
That’s not how the numbers work out IRL though. I could justify the 80lb compound having far higher strength. Even at current numbers, the K.E of the 180lb one would have to be at least twice that of the 80lb one, which would still result in around 35 damage.
Bows don’t scale like melee weapons with strength and even if they did, it sounds like melee weapon scaling needs to be adjusted. Having twice as much strength shouldn’t result in such a measly damage increase.
Game-balance comes before IRL considerations if those two openly conflict. (In my opinion anyway.)
Your opinion is wrong. The lead dev has openly and clearly stated that realism is the driving force of the game. My numbers are, as far as I can tell, correct. If melee weapons don’t scale correctly or strength is too easy to minmax, that’s not a problem with bows.
Strength being too easy to minmax is a known and ongoing issue, melee strength scaling probably hasn’t been touched in a long time, but apparently nobody cares enough to deal with it so eh.