Bellwright Weapons test

In this video, I attempt to look at damage numbers with different weapons, different attacks, and how much damage reduction you might see in combat. I do most of this against a T1 armored bandit, so expect numbers to be reduced further against T3.
0:00 intro, stats, how to attack
0:40 bow and arrows
1:15 results
1:39 bow draw speed
2:16 1-hand maces
3:04 results
3:31 2-hand mace
3:58 swords
4:50 results
5:11 detailed results on 2h weapons
6:02 testing the discrepancies on 2-hand sword
7:32 results
8:29 wrapping up with 2-hand mace

[@stanco3500]

Awesome testing work , pretty sure there will be some balancing patches to come. Thanks for the video!

[@spitfroststudios]

Appreciate it

[@NevFTW]

Good to see this done, thanks.

[@spitfroststudios]

Welcome, hope it's useful

[@aesirgaming1014]

I believe that different limbs have a different damage multiplier. This also explains why the armor value from, say, gloves is much lower than chest armor. If there was no cap on damage dealt to a limb, then you'd get one-shotted through your hand. It appears this much carry over to NPC's as well and it sort of makes sense. Otherwise you'd get even more cheese with people killing high tier enemies by shoot their hands or feet. Thus, there's some sort of damage cap or reduction for hitting legs/hands/feet and appears to be a multiplier for hitting the head.

[@spitfroststudios]

This does seem most likely, I don't believe I hit the hands in any of these, probably hit the arms a lot but the arms should also be the chest. I wish I could find the exact answer to this question though.
Something like:
Weapon damage * stat multiplier * limb modifier - armor calculation = final damage
69(sword) * 1.42(stats) * 1(chest multiplier) - AC(?) = 80 final damage
69 *1.42 * .7??(Legs) - AC
= 65
It's difficult to determine exactly what the armor class and limb multipliers are but it would be something like that, and the armor class calculation might also have different resistance to different types of damage included with it.

[@newman8068]

Interesting testing. And so, does the hit depend on how high you aim, or is it calculated from the height difference?

[@spitfroststudios]

Some what, I had a lot of difficulty connecting to the chest swinging from one direction and I had a lot of difficulty swinging into the pants from the other direction. So technically yes but it's difficult.

[@spitfroststudios]

To clarify, from the 'weak' side, I hit rarely to the chest, almost always to the legs, even aiming higher. On the 'strong' side, I never got to the legs, I even was on a slope with the enemy higher than me. I was tired of testing, so it could work, but I didn't once hit the legs, always chest.

[@newman8068]

@@spitfroststudios It turns out we have a very primitive fight, hit the legs from the left, hit the torso from the right, hit the head from above? This is probably a temporary version of what they managed to do on their knees.

[@spitfroststudios]

@@newman8068 Sort of, but its not simply left or right because it is opposite on mace or sword. It looks like its just swing pattern and separate hit boxes. The legs just have much more damage reduction than the chest does, or the legs have less 'health' than the chest so less damage there in total.

[@TanTann1992]

Armored enemies take less damage from swords because of the swing pattern, it contacts on the pants, and it curves up into the chest. So, technically, if you aim higher up on the enemies hit box, you should only encounter one armor resistance. Though I have only tried this a couple times, as I have not reached tier 3 yet.

[@spitfroststudios]

Either you are claiming that the sword is getting two armor values in one, which I seriously doubt, or you're simply regurgitating something I already said in the video, not sure which.

[@TanTann1992]

@@spitfroststudios What I meant is the hitbox. It hits pants and then hits chest, thus it is dealing less damage.

[@spitfroststudios]

@@TanTann1992 that would imply 2 damage numbers. There is only one. And if you watched the video, you would see the same numbers chest and no chest, therefore there is no 'double hit'

[@TanTann1992]

@@spitfroststudios I'm merely speculating the potential that the devs actually included the resistance of armor to be applies twice if the weapon slices through 2 armor pieces. My train of thought is as follows. A sword / slashing weapon can cut through my jeans and then continue cutting my hoodie, but at a reduced capability. But a mace / bludgeoning weapon would contact one piece of armor / clothing and then deposit all the kinetic energy into it.

[@spitfroststudios]

@@TanTann1992 if you swing a giant sword in a crowd, it hits one 1 person, in 1 spot in the game.

[@BibleNumbersForLifeServantMark]

If the warrior is right handed it would be expected his swing arc from his strong side would be more aggressive. Just like in tennis where the forehand is a stronger volley than the backhand. That would explain the difference in damage for one-handed melee weapons. How do you get the game to show the damage numbers?

[@psychkick666]

Thank you sir

[@spitfroststudios]

Very welcome

[@ancientremnant7881]

Interesting, thank you. You may also add in motion of the character?

[@spitfroststudios]

I didn't notice a big difference with character motion but it's possible.

[@spitfroststudios]

A few times in the video I swung while moving and didn't notice a big difference in damage. Because there is a range in damage, it's hard to say what exactly is causing a difference from a 70 hit to a 75 hit, could be the way it's calculated, could hit the gloves, could be a partial deflection (if that's even a thing), could be movement, I can only spectulate based on the limited data and my own eyes.

[@JO-zj1km]

Will the piercing work against multiple enemies if they are stacked?

[@spitfroststudios]

It won't.

[@DanceWithTheDeviL6]

so the 1 handed mace is the best for now ? and for my people ?

[@spitfroststudios]

Seems to be a good choice

[@kellyrayx119]

Um.. Your taking no damage. Mod ?

[@spitfroststudios]

Clearly.