Print

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

[fricy]

... I have to confess I never liked the way mechanics (levers and doors) works right now, with the ethereal or wifi connection between them, are we ever going to be required to connect mechanisms on a more realistic way, kind of like axles works to connect machines?

...or have some kind of scaffolding to ease the connection of (spike) traps? Connecting 30+ retracting spikes is a tedious job now, it could be made easier if we could designate a "scaffolding" underneath the spikes that we connect to the lever. The number of mechanism required should remain the same for balancing reason, but the number of connections that we have to issue manually would decrease. By a lot. Does it make sense?

[LordBaal]

Kind of like how a waterwheel would automatically power one (or series) of pumps build right beside it? It make sense, so long the required quantity of mechanisms depends on how many traps are together. But this should be an option, in case you just want to link the "third mechanism from left to right" or "only the first and the last" cases, in which the current system is perfect.

[fricy]

Hmmm, yes kind of like that. Just to clarify:

Since you cannot build 2 constructions on a tile, one way to implement it is to have the option to build either the traps that we have now(spike/weapon, etc), or build a scaffold that uses two mechanism/tile to build, connect to a lever/repeater and drive the traps. - When the scaffold is built you can assign weapons to it that get distributed automatically on the available tiles with the usual limits of 10 weapon/tile. The dwarfs would still need a lot of time to do the work, the amount of mechanism and weapons would remain the same, but it could be designated so much faster.

[Footkerchief]

... I have to confess I never liked the way mechanics (levers and doors) works right now, with the ethereal or wifi connection between them, are we ever going to be required to connect mechanisms on a more realistic way, kind of like axles works to connect machines?

...or have some kind of scaffolding to ease the connection of (spike) traps? Connecting 30+ retracting spikes is a tedious job now, it could be made easier if we could designate a "scaffolding" underneath the spikes that we connect to the lever. The number of mechanism required should remain the same for balancing reason, but the number of connections that we have to issue manually would decrease. By a lot. Does it make sense?

Hmmm, yes kind of like that. Just to clarify:

Since you cannot build 2 constructions on a tile, one way to implement it is to have the option to build either the traps that we have now(spike/weapon, etc), or build a scaffold that uses two mechanism/tile to build, connect to a lever/repeater and drive the traps. - When the scaffold is built you can assign weapons to it that get distributed automatically on the available tiles with the usual limits of 10 weapon/tile. The dwarfs would still need a lot of time to do the work, the amount of mechanism and weapons would remain the same, but it could be designated so much faster.

Friendly reminder: suggestions go in the Suggestions forum.  We'd all like feedback on our feature requests, but that's not what this thread is for.

The current trap system is slated to be completely replaced:

Improved Mechanics
    Better traps
        Stone traps should require the stone be placed above the tile that is targeted
        Stones should be able to roll (perhaps if they are started from or land on a ramp tile)
        Weapon traps should be multi-tile and require a spring or other potential energy source -- automatic resetting should require some explicit establishment of a feasible mechanism
    Large pipe sections -- walk on them or crawl inside them, allow passage for fluids
    Moving fortress sections (lifts, crushing traps, etc.)
    Waterproof axles through some mechanism
    Rock grinders? Fans? We'll do some other machines around this time -- whichever feasible ones are the most entertaining for dwarves and treasure hunters

Rainseeker:   Yeah, because, right now the way I defend against a siege is I ignore it, pretty much; [1b]I put up a bunch of traps and they all die, then they run away.
Toady:   Yeah, right now they're ridiculous. Just kind of a meat grinder simulator. Any time you've got people taking a core game mechanic and treating it like it's sort of an optional challenge - are you going to build traps or not, because then sieges matter, or they don't - that's something that needs to be fixed. It's always been the plan to fix that and there's a million different ways to do that that are all going to be coming up. After this big release we're going to work on making sieges better and a lot of the things you guys said are in the works, and more beside that. So there's the notion of nerfing traps because obviously they're a little overpowered right now, and how we'd do that ... probably just make more mechanisms necessary, more map tiles necessary, so you can't just make a trap, you'd actually have to create a trap from some more pieces. I don't know if there might be templates to make that an easier process but certainly just having a weapon trap existing in a square without having to put something in a wall or put something in a floor is kind of strange, and having a stone-fall trap exist in a square out in the middle of a room with no ceiling ... what does that even mean? Is it shooting up from the ground and then landing on top of them? It's kind of weird. So just changing that would be helpful [...]

[...]

Toady:   I think it's too easy in terms of attacks ... I'm not sure if attacks used to be any easier because traps have always been a spoiler for attacks and I think the main thing that's going to help there - and where I think that should be made more difficult - is in the difficulty of making traps, but not just the difficulty of making traps, but the fun of making traps. When traps are multi-tile, which is the main thing that's going to happen here, and you'll be able to think about and do many more horrible things ... they won't just be a little button that people step on and then die, but they'd be a button that people step on and then something is put into motion and then somebody dies, but then maybe it has to be reset every time or something, unless you've got a whole infrastructure invested to make it reset itself. But that should be something that you have to do, then it would be up to your own creativity in terms of defending your fortress, and we'll have to reevalute the difficulty level at that point. But if traps are larger, multi-tile, things, then they'd also be easier for people to stop once they've fallen for the first time because they could do things like dig through them or otherwise mess them up. There's the whole traditional notion of being able to disarm traps, and if siegers did that that would be quite a trouble, and it wouldn't even involve digging.

[fricy]

Thx for that info Footkerchief, and sorry about spamming the wrong thread...
I heard some kind of nerf is coming to the traps, but didn't know the details. This is only a quick and dirty way to make our lives easier until a rewrite comes. I'll try my luck in the suggestion forum, maybe it's a low hanging fruit. Maybe not, The Great Toad will know.

[LordBaal]

I was thinking more of pipes like in the way mine tracks or even smoothing or engraving works right now, you designate the construction and some dwarf comes along with the pipes and embed them to the wall or the floor.

As for things like toilets and such working as mechanisms, I have to confess I never liked the way mechanics (levers and doors) works right now, with the ethereal or wifi connection between them, are we ever going to be required to connect mechanisms on a more realistic way, kind of like axles works to connect machines? I mean the case of levers and doors/foodgates/traps/cages... where a wifi connection is made between them.

[Caldfir]

That quote from Toady makes me realize that stone-fall traps are already better simulated by a pressure plate below a trapdoor with a rock on it.  For the damage that kind of thing can do, the difficulty in set-up seems appropriate.  To me it seems like the game is going to evolve towards a state where there aren't really dedicated "traps" items, but rather just clever arrangements of dangerous goodies designed by the player.  If you have pressure plates and lever-controls, you can already do the job.  Some sort of mechanic where a cage landing on top of a creature has a chance to trap the creature in the cage would fill the "cage trap" role, and being able to link some kind of launcher like a ballista to a pressure plate would work for weapon traps.  Not sure if that's what Toady has in mind, but it sounds potentially along those lines. 

I would enjoy such a system.  Sieges being totally non-threatening is something that would be nice to resolve. 

[10terrapin01]

I was wondering with combat divided up will we be able to mod ourselves to move fast enough to flash step?  If we are really fast, can we run up to someone, cut them to bits and re-sheath our sword before they even notice?

[Eric Blank]

I was wondering with combat divided up will we be able to mod ourselves to move fast enough to flash step?  If we are really fast, can we run up to someone, cut them to bits and re-sheath our sword before they even notice?

It sounds to me that we will definitely be able to define our movement speed and (in some manner) combat speed in the raws, so we'll probably be able to use a short-term interaction to do that. However, movement speed and combat speed aren't going to be the same now, so although you could run up to them extremely fast, take a swing and run back out of range again if you buffed your movement speed, you wouldn't necessarily be able to attack any faster than they would, so killing them might take the same amount of time as it would if you hadn't buffed your movement speed. You'd just be able to GTFO-of-there without needing to worry about them being able to chase you down.

Actually, maybe you wouldn't even be able to run back out of range before they struck you, because their movements also wouldn't occlude their ability to attack you anymore so even if they're standing still compared to you zooming around like a rocket they might be able to smack you the instant you're in range... Which I guess kind of sucks, but it's still better than them being able to outrun you and out-smack you at the same time, or being unable to perform both a move action and an attack at the same time.

[King Mir]

If you aim an attack at a friendly target, do they realize you are attacking them and are no longer friendly immediately, or after the attack lands, or does it depend on their observer skill? What about witnesses? What if by some fluke the target dies before the hit lands, would a witness still consider that assault?

When attacking with a ranged attack, what counts for witnessing the attack? Does the bystander need to see the you, your target, both, or either?

[Putnam]

I was wondering with combat divided up will we be able to mod ourselves to move fast enough to flash step?  If we are really fast, can we run up to someone, cut them to bits and re-sheath our sword before they even notice?

This is possible in the current version and will be fixed next version.

Technically, it'll still be possible next version, but in a different way.

[Mel_Vixen]

I was wondering with combat divided up will we be able to mod ourselves to move fast enough to flash step?  If we are really fast, can we run up to someone, cut them to bits and re-sheath our sword before they even notice?

It sounds to me that we will definitely be able to define our movement speed and (in some manner) combat speed in the raws, so we'll probably be able to use a short-term interaction to do that. However, movement speed and combat speed aren't going to be the same now, so although you could run up to them extremely fast, take a swing and run back out of range again if you buffed your movement speed, you wouldn't necessarily be able to attack any faster than they would, so killing them might take the same amount of time as it would if you hadn't buffed your movement speed. You'd just be able to GTFO-of-there without needing to worry about them being able to chase you down.

Actually, maybe you wouldn't even be able to run back out of range before they struck you, because their movements also wouldn't occlude their ability to attack you anymore so even if they're standing still compared to you zooming around like a rocket they might be able to smack you the instant you're in range... Which I guess kind of sucks, but it's still better than them being able to outrun you and out-smack you at the same time, or being unable to perform both a move action and an attack at the same time.

Well i guess you could even mod a potion/secret that does speed you up considerably or the opposite to throw upon your enemies. As it stands right now your movement-speed also factors into the equation so if you move at lightning speed punching somebody (unblockable with a weapon atm.) you could punch them to pieces (like DC flash without the unfortunate implacations)

[Nicolo]

Hi Toady,

You've mentioned deep dwarves being different biologically then hill dwarves in the past; does this mean that dwarves will have a special 'cave adaptation' tag, the current cave adaptation tag will be expanded on, single creature entries can designate different properties depending on which biome the creature is located, or single entity entries will be able to assign different creatures according to different biomes?

[Valtam]

Hi Toady,

You've mentioned deep dwarves being different biologically then hill dwarves in the past; does this mean that dwarves will have a special 'cave adaptation' tag, the current cave adaptation tag will be expanded on, single creature entries can designate different properties depending on which biome the creature is located, or single entity entries will be able to assign different creatures according to different biomes?

Greened so it can be answered.

[arkhometha]

Toady, how hard do you think it is to implement the fourth thing the in eternal suggestion voting (Full graphics support) and how high is it in your priority list?