Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[jcochran]

Which makes me a tad curious. Being at war with the gobbos or the normal state of things. What's the difference? Still gonna get ambushes, sieges, and attempting snatching of children. So why even bother with 'War'?

[BetaOrion]

Goblins are usually hostile. Being at war means that they will attach more, stronger and sooner.

[Quietust]

The difference is that the goblins will presumably start sieging you immediately rather than starting with snatchers and gradually escalating to ambushes and sieges.

[ShadowHammer]

The difference is that the goblins will presumably start sieging you immediately rather than starting with snatchers and gradually escalating to ambushes and sieges.

Not necessarily true. I've been at war with gobbos several times, and they followed the regular escalation of aggression. I find that it mostly affects migrants: you will likely get more soldiers rather than farmers and such. However, I'm not sure about this:

Goblins are usually hostile. Being at war means that they will attach more, stronger and sooner.

But it seems logical.

The main difference between open war and regular hostility happens in world gen: it causes more city razing, looting, pillaging, enslaving, etc.

[Linkxsc]

I've had "at war" goblins for years before they ever sent sieges (and by then I was well ready for them)
On other cases I've had "peaceful" goblins... who even sent traders, still sending snatchers (who were getting eaten by my cages and stored, was trying to figure out why they were attacking even if they were actively trading. Lost the save, in hindsight the traders may have been a different civ than the attackers)

[Boltgun]

This means that you have an active history of war and fighting with the gobs. You also have a slight chance to have a goblin king. Otherwise you may get more soldiers, as those are picked in the raised armies.

Note : Goblins should not trade, they have no pack animals for that, unless you modded your raws. Even then, hostile civs should not send you traders. That's really weird.

[Matoro]

You also have a slight chance to have a goblin king.

You always have. The goblin leader (leader/general/law-giver) will always eventually show up, in every fort- However if he leaves the map unharmed, he won't come back.

[cyberTripping]

You always have. The goblin leader (leader/general/law-giver) will always eventually show up, in every fort- However if he leaves the map unharmed, he won't come back.

I'm pretty sure boltgun meant a goblin king of dwarves, since if there is war, it would cause gobbos to be integrated into the society, giving a chance for Cacame-esque goodness

[MDFification]

Goblins will always use the gradual escalation of babysnatching since they have the BABYSNATCHER tag (which is also why you can't be at peace with goblins any more - it used to happen rarely, but it can't now unless in a glitch). Being at war changes nothing in fortress mode, except the combat skills of immigrants, because they're more likely to have been in battles before. War can actually make goblin attacks less frequent by reducing the population of goblins - they can't send a siege unless they have enough for at least a squad or two.

If you want more frequent goblin attacks, you should embark by some dark fortresses.

[CaptainArchmage]

This means that you have an active history of war and fighting with the gobs. You also have a slight chance to have a goblin king. Otherwise you may get more soldiers, as those are picked in the raised armies.

Note : Goblins should not trade, they have no pack animals for that, unless you modded your raws. Even then, hostile civs should not send you traders. That's really weird.

In DF2010, there were reports of goblin traders coming. Was it for this reason - that they had pack animals at the time?