When should i be using longswords/spears?

[Hedgie]

So one time i was playing, and i gave someone a longsword, i sent that guy on a caravan with someone else, they found ruins along there path , then the guy with the longsword was attacked by like 2-3 foxes, the other had a mental break, and then the guy with the longsword was downed, then died, was this just bad luck or are longswords really this bad?

[Tankfriend]

Did the guy have some armor? A longsword isn't a magical I-win-button, even against animals. Especially in a 3on1 situation.

[Dekar_Serverbot]

Gladius and clubs are better

[grapplehoeker]

Originally posted by Hedgie:

So one time i was playing, and i gave someone a longsword, i sent that guy on a caravan with someone else, they found ruins along there path , then the guy with the longsword was attacked by like 2-3 foxes, the other had a mental break, and then the guy with the longsword was downed, then died, was this just bad luck or are longswords really this bad?

Bad luck? No.
I suppose you feel that luck was involved and that, of course, you had nothing to do with it...
If there was any misfortune, then it was a crying shame that they had you to mismanage their well being to such an extent that one of them suffered a mental breakdown.
You sent two guys on a caravan for what good reason exactly?
And without guns?
They should never have been sent anywhere, especially if they cannot defend themselves against a couple of foxes, let alone hole up somewhere and keep the damn door shut.
But yeah, you keep on blaming luck ;p

[martindirt]

Originally posted by Hedgie:

So one time i was playing, and i gave someone a longsword, i sent that guy on a caravan with someone else, they found ruins along there path , then the guy with the longsword was attacked by like 2-3 foxes, the other had a mental break, and then the guy with the longsword was downed, then died, was this just bad luck or are longswords really this bad?

Long swords are good against low armored humanoids. Vs armor you want to use mace or club.
Vs small animal knife is better (faster attack rate). If you fight against medium / large animals, better if you have decent armor + melee skill 10+. Better if you shoot.

But against 3 foxes with only 1 pawn. Lost situation. Its not luck, its BAD strategy.

[Hedgie]

Originally posted by grapplehoeker:

Bad luck? No.
I suppose you feel that luck was involved and that, of course, you had nothing to do with it...
If there was any misfortune, then it was a crying shame that they had you to mismanage their well being to such an extent that one of them suffered a mental breakdown.
You sent two guys on a caravan for what good reason exactly?
And without guns?
They should never have been sent anywhere, especially if they cannot defend themselves against a couple of foxes, let alone hole up somewhere and keep the damn door shut.
But yeah, you keep on blaming luck ;p

They had guns, but i guess i did send them with kibble as a long lasting food source. This was quite a while a go so i can't remember why i sent them, but it was a small ruins event when they died

Long swords are good against low armored humanoids. Vs armor you want to use mace or club.
Vs small animal knife is better (faster attack rate). If you fight against medium / large animals, better if you have decent armor + melee skill 10+. Better if you shoot.

But against 3 foxes with only 1 pawn. Lost situation. Its not luck, its BAD strategy. [/quote]

Thanks for the help about when to use longswords, but i did originally send two colonists

[FrankTheMagicPotato]

If they had guns they should have used them.

[grapplehoeker]

Originally posted by Hedgie:

They had guns, but i guess i did send them with kibble as a long lasting food source. This was quite a while a go so i can't remember why i sent them, but it was a small ruins event when they died

Kibble is animal food, not fit for human consumption. Little wonder then that one of them couldn't take it any more o.O
If they had guns, they should have used them. They should have maintained distance and kited the critters. Or, at least have fled, since if you gave them kibble, I doubt you gave them medical equipment and so they should have avoided any encounter that could possibly cause them harm.
That includes any melee combat with manhunter animals and any bloody ruins exploration.
Learn from your mistakes and stop blaming luck ;)

[elipod]

Originally posted by FrankTheMagicPotato:

If they had guns they should have used them.

Against foxes? It'll take great luck to land killshots, before being caught in foxpile.
Only way I know to reliably beat numerous melee opponents early game is with your own numbers. Adding tame animals makes early caravaning safer.

[KalkiKrosah]

Longswords work best on large fleshy targets. Think bears, muffalo, elephants, rhinos and caribou. They are suboptimal on centipedes. Centipedes have a high armor rating. Jade clubs and uranium maces are actually your best choice against a centipede. And smaller/dodgy animals are poor targets too. If it's just one squirrel it's fine. One hit from a longsword and the squirrel is toast. But in a mass animal hunter event you may be better off with a knife or a gladius.

As far as weapon skill goes, anyone who has 12+ should be a safe bet for using a longsword. Anyone under 6 melee skill should not use it.

And longswords are a horrible training weapon. The way the melee skill works is it ticks up per attack, not per damage. So a wooden knife is actually the best "training" weapon. Longswords are one of the worst.

They work decently as an auxiliary weapon. If you can get raiders to fight you in a 3v1 situation a long sword wouldn't be such a bad option if the other two guys have quicker weapons equipped. 3 longswords is often overkill in most situations which is why it isn't a good choice to give everyone a longsword.

[Astasia]

Melee weapon type is on the lower end of importance when it comes to winning a combat compared to all the other factors involved. The quality of the weapon, the type of material it's made from, the skill of the colonist wielding it, and their stats, are all far more impactful. Armor is also crucial for any sort of melee combat. "I gave somebody a longsword" really means nothing by itself. A low melee skill colonist without armor and an awful silver longsword would have a tough time fighting a single squirrel or rabbit.

[Tarshaid]

Originally posted by Astasia:

Melee weapon type is on the lower end of importance when it comes to winning a combat compared to all the other factors involved. The quality of the weapon, the type of material it's made from, the skill of the colonist wielding it, and their stats, are all far more impactful. Armor is also crucial for any sort of melee combat. "I gave somebody a longsword" really means nothing by itself. A low melee skill colonist without armor and an awful silver longsword would have a tough time fighting a single squirrel or rabbit.

This, really. One might as well just equip the highest DPS weapon they can loot without thinking much further, and they'd still do better than trying to sort out which weapon type is optimal in what scenario without taking anything else into account. There's a lot more to melee combat, and to combat in general, than typing "best weapon in Rimworld" and pointing it in the general direction of the enemy.