Cataclysm-dda: Bow/crossbow strength requirements are unrealistic

[chaisawlajatang]

Describe the bug

The recent archery update seriously brought up both damage and strength requirements for bows and crossbows. I dunno about damage, buth the STR requirements seem very unrealistic. I keep in mind design values - an average human has 8 strength, a strong human has 10, a very strong person has 12, a top-tier athlete has 14. Look:

1. A 205 crossbow/200 lb composite crossbow requires 12 strength to draw, compound crossbow requires 11. Here we have a man, drawing about 150 lbs with his bare hands, 300 lbs in sitting span and even more with very basic devices (1500 lbs with a windlass, so the ingame heavy crossbow can be easily upped from the current 800 lbs). He's really not looking like a world-class athlete for me.
2. Here's another average man drawing crossbows. Yes, he's using basic devices - goats foot lever, the spanning belt and the gaff lever, but they're like REALLY basic ones - every survivor should be able to use one. He claims you're able to draw about 450 lbs this way.
3. Here's the guy drawing 80 lbs bows. 80 lb in-game bow requires 12 (!) strength, and the guy from the video is seriously not looking like the athlete or heavylifter.
4. Here's a man with 110 lb bow (14 STR req). Yeah, he's definitely strong, but he's not a world-class powerlifter.
5. Here's a regular man easily drawing a 60 lb bow (10 STR req). Is he really about a half-way to the olympic championship?
6. Here's a strong man indeed drawing 210 lb bow. Ingame wooden 145 lb greatbow requires 19 (!) STR. Man from the video is not a cyborg or mutant, I'm sure.
7. Here's a 100 lb bow.
8. Here's a 90 lb one.

There are lots of evidences, I think you got the point - both bows and crossbows, despite the great drawing weight, do not require tremendous physical strength as they require now.

Steps To Reproduce

1. Start as an average person with 8-9 strength.
2. Spawn a compound bow (high), composite bow, reflex bow, hybrid longbow, crossbow or composite crossbow.
3. There's no way to shoot with them.

Expected behavior

Able to shoot from a bow or crossbow. A bow/crossbow with req 12 or even 14 STR is probably a ballista or similar siege machine. I don't touch damage or range, because they are calculated by some complex formulas, but STR req is set arbitrary, so it can be changed more easily.

The lower cap is currently 30 lbs with 10 lb/1 STR. I suppose to remove the cap - straight 10lb/1 STR would be fine: i.e. 6 STR person could draw a string of a 60-lb hunting bow, but stronger person would still benefit in bonus range. 8 STR person could draw a 80-lb bow, etc.

Self bow - 30 lbs - I guess even a feeble person or a kid can draw 30 lbs.
Short bow - 50 lbs - maybe leave it as is at 6 STR, I guess, or lower to 5.
Compound bow (low) - 40 lbs - it seems even a feeble person is able to draw it.
Compound bow (normal) - 60 lbs - lower the requirement to 6 STR.
Compound bow (high) - 80 lbs - to 8 STR. Compound bows are very easy to draw thanks to a pulley system.
Composite bow - 110 lbs - to 11 STR.
Recurve bow/Reflex bow - 60 lbs - to 6 STR.
Longbow - 80 lbs - to 8 STR.
Wooden greatbow - 145 lbs - to 14 STR. Maybe 15 if it strictly designed for superhumans only.
Compound greatbow - 120 lbs - to 12 STR.
Reflex recurve bow - 50 lbs - to 5 STR.

8 STR max for all crossbows (and even without the req at all with drawing devices).

TL;DR: 8-9 STR should be more than enough for most string weapons, more for the heaviest ones only.

[Tamiore]

Crossbows don't HAVE a minimal strength requirements last I've checked (strength effects reload speed).
Strength 14 bow IS effectively an almost siege engine.
Other bows can be adjusted for strength.
What exactly is your problem, again?

[chaisawlajatang]

Crossbows don't HAVE a minimal strength requirements

They do.

What exactly is your problem, again?

8-9 STR should be more than enough for most string weapons, 10 STR for the heaviest ones, as the current requirements are unrealistic.

[Tamiore]

they do.

We need to find PR that introduced it, then, and roll it back.
It was either a mistake or an oversight from what I can tell.

[chaisawlajatang]

We need to find PR that introduced it, then, and roll it back.
It was either a mistake or an oversight.

Ok, here it is.

Strength 14 bow IS effectively an almost siege engine

Strength 14 bow, as declared, has 90 lb draw weight. This is the 100 lb IRL bow, this is 90 lb - do they look like siege weapons?

[Tamiore]

I see no mention of minimal strength required to shot a crossbows being purposefully introduced.
So, yea, pretty sure it's an oversight.

[Tamiore]

Strength 14 bow, as declared, has 90 lb draw weight. This is the 100 lb IRL bow, this is 90 lb - do they look like siege weapons?

So the problem is inconsistent description?
You want str 14 bow to list higher draw weight?

[chaisawlajatang]

So the problem is inconsistent description?

The problem is inconsistency between description, strength requirement and damage. A weapon shoud either deal more damage and/or have a description of a hand-wielded siege ballista (and more common realistic weapons be in place), either have strength requirements and/or damage lowered.

[Tamiore]

The problem is inconsistency between description, strength requirement and damage. A weapon shoud either deal more damage and/or have a description of a hand-wielded siege ballista (and more common realistic weapons be in place), either have strength requirements and/or damage lowered

Ok, so what draw weight should it have in it's description to be consistent with the game stats?

[ghost]

In the linked PR , Kevin stated "There's no coherent case for crossbow poundage limits, so these are all set at 8 when the style of crossbow calls for it, and the limit is absent in cases when there is some built-in mechanical advantage."

If there are crossbow strength requirements higher than 8, then thats an oversight, from what I can gather.

[chaisawlajatang]

Ok, so what draw weight should it have in it's description to be consistent with the game stats?

My _main_ concern is _not_ the description.
Looks like the numbers were a bit arbitrary

A somewhat more arbitrary number is the mapping of strength stat to weapon poundage.
The document that Darktoes put together perpetuates the assumption that each point of strength stat is good for 10 pounds of draw weight on a bow. This doesn't make much sense, as it places the low end of bows at 30lbs within the reach of an incredibly feeble str 3 character, and the main "used by fit hunters" 60lb draw bows in reach of a still significantly-weaker-than-average str 6 character. AFAICT the goal here was to keep the mapping trivial and to have that simple mapping span all the way to nonsensical 200lb draw weight bows. I've instead opted to try and place the 30lb draw at the low end of strength but not utterly feeble, and to place the 60 lb draw at a bit over average, and then the very high draw weight bows land in the upper limits of strength.

So I suppose 10lb/1 STR would be fine: i.e. 6 STR person could draw a string of a 60-lb hunting bow, but stronger person would still benefit in bonus range. 8 STR person could draw a 80-lb bow, etc.

[Tamiore]

My main concern is not the description.

Ok, but what is it, then?
What exactly to you propose to change about the 14 str bow?

advantage."

If there are crossbow strength requirements higher than 8, then thats an oversight, from what I can gather

The screenshot seems to show a requirement to shot the crossbow, not to reload it. That does not make any sense. You should be able to pull the trigger with strength 0.

[chaisawlajatang]

Ok, but what is it, then?

Sure, I'll copy it again.

The problem is inconsistency between description, _strength requirement and damage_. A weapon shoud either deal more damage and/or have a description of a hand-wielded siege ballista (and more common realistic weapons be in place), either have strength requirements and/or damage lowered.

I'll rephrase it - the bows require too much strength for their draw weight.

What exactly to you propose to change about the 14 str bow?

I propose to change STR requirements: make them 8 for all crossbows and set STR requirements for bows in ratio 1 STR=10 lb draw.

[Tamiore]

I'll rephrase it - the bows require too much strength for their draw weight.

Bows in the game don't technically have a "draw weight" in any sense other than whatever is written in their description. Damage is not really a strict function of draw weight beyond "the higher the draw weight, the higher the damage".
So changing the draw weight for the bow with the highest draw weight is effectively just changing the description. Unless you want to change the damage as well.

[chaisawlajatang]

Bows in the game don't technically have a "draw weight" in any sense other than whatever is written in their description

But draw weight is tied to STR requirement in ratio I posted above.

So changing the draw weight

My main proposal is not changing the draw weight, but rather change STR requirements to be lower.

Unless you want to change the damage as well.

Damage is not really a strict function of draw weight, there's apparently a lot of complex calculations made not tied to draw strength.

The rationale for the damage numbers is that we make some assumptions about weapon draw weight and efficiency based on the understanding of what real-world item each weapon represents, and once we have an estimated power output, we take the square root of the presented projectile momentum as the base damage number. Then this number is modified by the terminal ballistics characteristics of the arrow, mostly the head, to determine the final damage number. In practice this falls into a handful of categories.

[Tamiore]

Ok, so I went ahead and checked the latest experimental.

What … the … hell?

Compound crossbow has TWICE the damage of heavy crossbow with 1/5 the reload time.
Compound bow has damage BELOW compound GREAT-bow. And the damage is (with good arrow) 75(!!!) That's about twice the damage of best polearms! In what world an arrow deals twice the damage of a glaive?!?!
Etc, etc?
Huh? What's going on?

[jeremyshannon]

What's going on is the archery system is being reworked, and it's not done. So now is a good time to talk about it, and for him to bring up his observations -- if you don't need to be a world-class strongman/Olympic athlete just to draw that composite bow from the sporting goods store, then 14 str is definitely too high a minimum requirement for that.

[Tamiore]

then 14 str is definitely too high a minimum requirement for that.

What bow are you talking about?
No bow (that I know of) with min str 14 requirements exists in latest experimental.

[UndeadMoose]

[Tamiore]

Ok, that helps, thank you. I didn't check the lower-tier bows.
These stats are part of a very recent change.
Whoever made that PR really is the only one who can explain whatever is that bow supposed to be.
Because to me it's not making much sense.
Because it's an auto-learn bow made with a sharp rock from a few sticks and bones that has damage on part with assault rifle.
Strength requirements are basically only scratching the surface with how questionable that thing is.

[Zourin2]

The problem has occurred largely in disproportion to the fact that now 14 strength is the upper boundary for human strength. The average human is more than capable of using any bow except maybe the compound greatbow, which exists for the purpose of advanced strength individuals.

Even slightly weaker individuals are able to use competitive bows, as the archery skill itself can easily account for the specific muscle groups the activity trains without having to turn the character into an olympian. The current system is untenable and I've had to go edit this BS out of the json.

Self bow should be 6 (weak, -2 average), compound bow/longbow should be 7 (lithe build -1 avg), composite/reflex/recurve 8 (average male), reflex recurve 10 (strong +2 str), compound greatbows 12 (olympian/advanced +4), and greatbow 14 (herculean/mutant).

Until there are winch/reloading mechanisms for crossbows to reduce requirements, I can't say placing strength restrictions on crossbows is smart. While the heavy crossbow is heavy, we have character weight capacity for a reason.

[FuelType-Memes]

I have watched the videos that you've linked and there is a great point Joe Gibbs, archer with a 200+ pound bow, makes: modern techniques are for modern bows, traditional warbows require traditional technique. When he draws a bow he uses muscles that aren't used that much in modern archery. Thus, I suggest, that STR requirement should somewhat depend on the archery skill, because even though you can be very strong, your lack of technique would prevent you from applying your strength effectively

[Zourin2]

Compound bows and crossbows are designed to substantially reduce draw weights, because this dude Archimedes figured out how pulleys work. The same pulleys on compound bows and crossbows. A 200lb compound bow only requires 50lbs of draw weight because, surprise, two pulleys. And as someone who has used compound bows, the pulleys are off-center so that it requires even less force to maintain the draw without impacting the resulting force imparted to the arrow/bolt.

[kevingranade]

Thanks for the sources!
The Tod's workshop video is nicely informative, he claims 150lbs is doable for hand spanning (no stirrup, no other tools), so we can take that and call it doable for a strength 8 "average strength person". I'll take a look at bumping the basic crossbow to 150lbs, requiring 8 strength and adjusting damage commensurately. Sitting spanning and use of a stirrup will need to wait as this crossbow is still stuck at incredibly low requirements for construction. Alternately I could stick a stirrup on it, bump it back to 200lbs, and ditch the (actually terrible) crafting recipe. Something similar applies to the remainder of the crossbows except the pistol crossbow and the Gantz-Rustang (which I'll be renaming to Arbalest, but not until after 0.E).

Someone can mess with adding a seated spanning feature and then we can revisit weights again. Luckily the outcome of all my research was that I can map from poundage to momentum to damage in a pretty straightforward way, so I don't have to redo a ton of work when we tweak this stuff.

Everything about spanning devices is irrelevant, until someone adds support for using them, we're going to pretend they don't exist. The exception is the windlass crossbow where it's baked into the item.

"This guy (that's clearly not a bodybuilder) can do X":
You've stumbled across a shortcoming of the stat system, which is that a character with X strength has uniform fitness across their entire body. It's incredibly common in various sports for someone to overdevelop specific muscles without "looking like a bodybuilder". You can develop an incredibly strong set of back muscles without it being visible and draw a stronger bow than it "looks like you should be able to". As you can see with the guy drawing the 210 lb bow, he intensively trained for this, at the end of which his muscles that he's using for drawing the bow are world-class.

What that means for the game is that in order to do any feat of strength, you have to "pay for" having that level of strength across your entire body. I'm not against revisiting that somehow in the future, but until we do, your character is going to need to pay for a certain level of strength in order to use it. That means that yes, you need to have above average strength to shoot a bow with above average draw weight.

"A bow/crossbow with req 12 or even 14 STR is probably a ballista or similar siege machine."
No, it's not. There is a fairly well known range of usable bow and crossbow weights, and long before you have something you would call a ballisa or siege engine, the strength requirement has gone away entirely because there's no possible way for any human to draw/span them without massive mechanical advantage. That 1,500 lb arbalest? still not a ballisa.

The highest weight your source calls out as achievable for spanning a crossbow by hand is the 380 lb (and I'm assuming they mean with a sitting span or stirrup or spanning belt). So maybe we can stick a pin in that and revisit it later, but I don't see any reason to have crossbows above the 250 lbs you get with a stirrup and an "average shooter" except the arbalest which comes with a windlass.

In short, I'll concede your point and stick all crossbow strength requirements at 8, since based on your sources (Tod's workshop, the rest don't help), that yields a usable amount of draw strength and therefore damage.

Now bows are another thing. Basically your sources don't make the case you seem to think they make, and your other rationales don't hold up either. In particular, "Compound bows are very easy to draw thanks to a pulley system." is wrong, the rating of a compound bow or crossbow is based on the effective draw weight at the bowstring, not anything to do with the limbs. In other words, if you have a 80lb draw, you are still going to need to pull with 80lbs of force at some point in the draw.

In other other words, you need to be just as strong to draw an 80lb compound bow as a 80lb straight bow. I don't see anything that makes me inclined to revisit the existing bow draw strengths.

[Zourin2]

"You've stumbled across a shortcoming of the stat system, which is that a character with X strength has uniform fitness across their entire body."

Wouldn't it be sane to say that the related skill includes the more specific muscle groups for an item that requires one. Archers and people who would use bows/crossbows regularly don't require 'general' body strength as most are pretty lithe. "Too weak to even handle" is a pretty low bar for ranged weapons.

If strength MUST be incorporated for the whatever reason, why not just make them "auto-tuned" for the persons' strength and adjust the damage accordinly. This ties your 'momentum' to 'strength' without telling someone they're too weak to pull a trigger or lift a hunk of wood they would have no problem carrying otherwise. This avoids the "making a weapon you can't use" scenario, since bows are often crafted with the aid of a "Tillering tree" that allows the user to test the draw and draw balance while making the bow itself, and crossbows likewise can simply be made with a slightly looser cord if it's strung so tight as to be unusable.

"In other other words, you need to be just as strong to draw an 80lb compound bow as a 80lb straight bow. I don't see anything that makes me inclined to revisit the existing bow draw strengths." Archimedes would like to have a word with you regarding pulleys. The cams on a bow enable a 'let off' of the force required to maintain a draw. Unlike a normal bow, you aren't trying to HOLD an 80lb bow at full draw. In fact, you may only need to get it past a certain point before the cams reduce it to a 40lb draw strength to hold, aim, and fire.

http://bestcompoundbowsource.com/compound-bow-draw-weight-chart/

from https://simplearchery.com/how-does-a-compound-bow-work-the-simple-explanation/
"For instance, if you have a 60-pound bow with %50 let off, this means only 30 pounds of force is needed to hold the bow at full draw. Most compound bows are advertised with this let-off percentage which is usually between 60%-80%."

[Zourin2]

"Power
You’ll find that the top end of bows on the market for both styles coming in at around 70 lbs of draw weight. 70 lbs is enough power to accomplish pretty much anything anyone wants to accomplish with a bow. Manufacturers and retailers don’t tend to stock 80 lbs bows for this reason, these isn’t much call for them.

In an ideal world, with ideal conditions and ideal measurement a 70 lbs draw weight compound bow should perform better than a 70 lbs recurve drawn to an optimum length and using exactly the same length and weight of arrow. You’d think they should both impart the same force but in reality the compound system of string and cams is more efficient at flinging arrows and ends up being more powerful in the field"

https://targetcrazy.com/archery/resources/compound-vs-recurve/

I've done a fair bit of archery myself and have used both recurves and compound bows. They do not require much 'overall' strength, as the 'specific' strength comes with practice, so any damage or strength consideration would be a matter of the archery skill. I still think you're overdramatizing what an average, effective bow demands.

[FuelType-Memes]

I must reiterate that archery skill should represent your body becoming more comfortable with drawing the bow. I would even go as far as to say that when you have low archery skill it should increase the required strength for bows because you lack the proper technique that makes drawing and shooting easier

[Zourin2]

On crossbows:
"The principle specification that distinguishes a hunting crossbow from a target model is draw weight. Fortunately, most states have taken the guesswork out of determining what is sufficient by establishing a regulatory minimum. While those regulations vary considerably from state to state, the overall range runs from 75 to 125 pounds of draw weight.

With little exception, any crossbow in that range should be adequate to kill a whitetail deer at moderate ranges. That said, most of the better hunting crossbows are in the 150 to 175 pounds range, with a few topping out over 200 pounds. In general, bigger is better—or in this case, faster. Keep in mind that you can go too heavy, too, as at least one state—Ohio—has a maximum allowable draw weight of 200 pounds."

"In medieval times, a bow of 100–150 pounds draw-weight could be drawn to firing position with the hands and a foot-stirrup, or with a belt hook and a foot stirrup." Thus, I would say a 'foot stirrup' is a part of core design for any crossbow if you have any intention of loading one. Unless you plan on "heroing" the cord, in which case, sure, draw a crossbow like a dumbass. Any sensible design will have either a metal or well-fastened leather loop at the end so a not-ripped historian can load one. It's all in the legs, as a stirrup-and-hand method is the fastest and least materially expensive option. If you can lift 100lbs with your legs, you can lock a crossbow. We have a stat for that already.

[Tamiore]

To stress the obvious: while a minimal strength (of 8, or whatever) might be warranted requirement to reload a crossbow without any aid, that's what it should limit: reloading. Not shooting it once it's already reloaded.

[JoeFreeman-Adv]

Just a little tidbit:

In his newest video Joerg Sprave (the slingshot channel guy) modifies a 110 pound warbow with his instant legolas device.
While the video and the device itself is pretty interesting the thing that really caught my attention is how hard it is for him to use the bow on it's own.
It shows the difference of having general upper body strength and the technique and muscles needed for firing such a weapon.

https://youtu.be/Ovl6_UEIWGY

[Zourin2]

Just a little tidbit:

In his newest video Joerg Sprave (the slingshot channel guy) modifies a 110 pound warbow with his instant legolas device.
While the video and the device itself is pretty interesting the thing that really caught my attention is how hard it is for him to use the bow on it's own.
It shows the difference of having general upper body strength and the technique and muscles needed for firing such a weapon.

https://youtu.be/Ovl6_UEIWGY

Also, to note, a 100lb war bow is also an outlier, as half that is closer to a serviceable average for hunting and marksmanship. Nobody's going to have a book on bow making then make a bow and be like "I've never shot a bow before, lets make a 100lb composite recurve bow".

[AncientSion]

Make a boy that is usable str 8 then.
Self bow is 6
Short bow is 9.

What about the AVERAGE guy at str 8 ?

[kevingranade]

See #38657 4 bows are now str 8 or lower, and three more are 9 or lower.