Print

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

[Scoops Novel]

The Army Arc is on the horizon, and it begs the question of how exactly you would conduct war with the various races, creatures and mounts in the game. We have the backdrop of medieval combat, sure, but they didn't have beakdogs, dwarves, crundles and goblins riding sea snakes to worry about. I think we could do some of the legwork for Toady, and exercise some !!CONCEPTUAL DWARVEN SCIENCE!! to speculate on how a bug-free battle with the typical combatants in the game would work, if organised by a industrial or desperate mind.

Anything from the best use of chinchilla giants in deserts to treatises on Ettin Raiding are welcome.

[fortydayweekend]

I really like the way things work now - most games give you near-complete control over every unit, which is unrealistic. Dwarves have a mind of their own, leading to delays in following orders, suicide-charges etc etc which make it the frustrating and addictive game it is.

You have complete control only over the battlefield, using constructions, mechanics etc to control line of sight and available pathing. (And obviously also to create traps that mean you don't even need a military at all). This gives you the basic tactics of dividing the enemy into manageable portions so you can outnumber each portion and guarantee a win of each individual engagement, using either ranged or melee troops. The majority of tactics is fortress design, with only minimal control over dwarven actions.

This would change if the AI has the ability to tunnel, destroy walls/bridges, use artillery etc and you'd need to rely on commands as you'd need to move dwarves to adapt to defending the new paths created. You'd need a shift towards controlling dwarves more.

Personally I hope that it keeps the spirit of realism and makes it difficult - most obvious would be orders issued via a command structure that requires dwarves being within say shouting distance of each other. With messengers being needed to transmit orders a long distance. With maybe an order list and more options (move there and then move back after x time, kill a particular enemy then retreat). I doubt it would turn into yet another turn-based or pausable-RTS game and I really hope it doesn't.

I think more personality effects are in the next update which should be good. It would be great to have more variation in dwarf action depending on their situation too - e.g. if they are scared and have a path back to safety they will take it, but if you've closed the bridge behind them and they have no option they'll fight.

I'd also like to see cavalry charges with collisions causing more damage (and weapons like pikes being able to be braced against the ground). Formations for trained troops and the ability to hold their ground instead of charging (if they are disciplined enough). Environmental effects like sunstrike and moving under cover of darkness would also be good, but might need a change of time scale (or not).

[smjjames]

I would still like them to be able to understand basic orders like stand your ground or retreat midbattle.

Before we can have strategies and tactics we need them to understand and respond to basic orders besides go here or kill these things. And maybe a bit of discipline. I'm sure we can do all that without losing the individuality of the individual soldiers.

[Scoops Novel]

Man, this is all mechanics, much as i appreciate it. I'm after what a "realistic" tactic for seiging goblins (Immortals who you can't starve out and aren't particularly vulnerable to psychological warfare) would be, say. The warfare in Dwarf Fortress wont be the same as ours by a long way.

[smjjames]

Goblins are only immortal because they don't age. Any non-member of the fort doesn't need to eat, even captured trolls.

You also can't starve out a fort that has it's own self sustaining food supply.

Even if the warfare is different, the most basic tactics and orders still apply.

[Scoops Novel]

They do, but I'm going for blue-sky's thinking. I'm taking the inclusion of all relevant tactics, orders, bugfixes and features for the purpose of this thread as a given according to DF's stated goals. Tactics and orders have been pondered extensively in the suggestion threads, so I'd rather not retread ground. I've read the threetoe stories and realize there's been some thought given to the lore, but I'm certain we can and will hash out ideas that otherwise would never have been thought or at the least save a lot of time.

If i make any assumptions about a race or creatures canon that are actually bugs, feel free to correct me. I do think goblins are intentionally immortal however, much like elves.

Obligatory "Getting Us Started post" coming up.

[Urist McVoyager]

Well, just going by the mechanics of the game so far . . . If we were discussing any other immortal race, I'd go with advanced scouting by diplomats to root out traps and figure out where the sappers need to go to disable the farms.

With goblins? Dwarven Wave tactics. Overwhelm the fortress with massive numbers of artillery pieces and sappers, try to dig your way into the Fortress. You need overwhelming numbers, because you just KNOW you're unlikely to outlast them with a siege.

And I'm sure the goblins will have their own ways of getting word out to reinforcements. So time is of the essence. You need to storm that tower and break it down quick!

[fortydayweekend]

Well, what's the dwarven strategy in attacking goblins? Probably not conquest of territory since dwarves can always just dig for more space. Not for pillage surely, there's always far too many troll fur socks as it is. Presumably it would be to preemptively weaken/destroy them to prevent future attacks; take revenge for raids; or just out of pure hatred of evil.

All 3 strategic goals suggest that dwarves would want a spectacular bloodbath with lots of painful goblin deaths, and they'd want to scorch the earth to prevent the goblins from rising to power again. So, almost so obvious that it doesn't need this long introduction - lots of magma.

[wooks]

well, I don't know what tactics you guys are looking to be implemented. As far as medieval combat goes, there isn't much tactic aside from what weapon you want to fight with to best defeat your enemy. That said, I wouldn't mind seeing mounted units (which would be fantastic with the upcoming fear system.) and some way to place a rally point for my retreating dwarfs (again, fear system) to try to get to, or for my squad to meet at before the go on to the next order. Other than that, I I can't think of much you can't already do, or isn't infeasible with archaic weaponry.

[Mlamlah]

well, I don't know what tactics you guys are looking to be implemented. As far as medieval combat goes, there isn't much tactic aside from what weapon you want to fight with to best defeat your enemy. That said, I wouldn't mind seeing mounted units (which would be fantastic with the upcoming fear system.) and some way to place a rally point for my retreating dwarfs (again, fear system) to try to get to, or for my squad to meet at before the go on to the next order. Other than that, I I can't think of much you can't already do, or isn't infeasible with archaic weaponry.

If that's really what you think of medieval combat i suggest you do a little research, you may be pleasantly surprised.

[wooks]

If that's really what you think of medieval combat i suggest you do a little research, you may be pleasantly surprised.

Hmm, I was going to try to defend my argument, but, in light of your pleasant signature I've elected to take the advice, and do some research instead.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medieval_warfare

The experience level and tactical maneuvering ability of medieval armies varied depending on the period and region. For larger battles, pre-battle planning typically consisted of a council of the war leaders, which could either be the general laying down a plan or a noisy debate between the different leaders, depending on how much authority the general possessed. Battlefield communications before the advent of strict lines of communication were naturally very difficult. Communication was done through musical signals, audible commands, messengers, or visual signals such as raising a standard banner or flag.

The infantry, including missile troops (such as archers), would typically be employed at the outset of the battle to break open infantry formations while the cavalry attempted to defeat its opposing number. If the cavalry met foot soldiers, the pikemen would engage them. Perhaps the most important technological advancement for medieval warfare in Europe was the invention of the stirrup. It most likely came to Europe with the Avars in the 7th century, although it was not properly adopted by the major European powers until the 10th century.

Okay, let's make a Dwarf-Checklist.
      [√] Diplomats/Command structure (I suppose it would be nice to see a command structure be involved in signaling...)
      [  ] Signaling System
      [√] Ranged Weaponry
      [√] Battlements for Ranged Weaponry
      [  ] Cavalry (currently can't be used by your dwarfs)
      [√] Pikemen (granted, I'm not sure it actually helps them fight mounted targets.)

Hmm, well, those things do sound nice. Let's keep digging.

Building fortifications [Castles, Walls, Battlements, etc.] was a good way to provide refuge and protection for the people and the wealth in the region...[snip]...The ability of the heavy cavalry to dominate a battle on an open field was useless against fortifications...[snip]...Building siege engines was a time-consuming process, and could seldom be effectively done without preparations before the campaign. Many sieges could take months, if not years, to weaken or demoralize the defenders sufficiently...[snip]...In the Medieval period besieging armies used a wide variety of siege engines including: scaling ladders; battering rams; siege towers and various types of catapults such as the mangonel, onager, ballista, and trebuchet. Siege techniques also included mining in which tunnels were dug under a section of the wall and then rapidly collapsed to destabilize the wall's foundation. A final technique was to bore into the enemy walls, however this was not nearly as effective as other methods due to the thickness of castle walls...[snip]...[The] use of machicolations and murder-holes, as well the preparation of hot or incendiary substances [was employed]. Arrow slits, concealed doors for sallies, and deep water wells were also integral to resisting siege at this time. Designers of castles paid particular attention to defending entrances, protecting gates with drawbridges, portcullises and barbicans.

      [√] Ability to construct traps, and such.
      [√] Long Sieges
      [  ] Siege Equipment
      [  ] Ability to dupe/confuse Seigers
      [  ] Siege Sappers (Digging goblins and such)

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

http://www.bay12games.com/dwarves/dev.html
Military

    Dwarven armies
        Ability to send out fortress dwarves to lead larger groups of surrounding dwarves out around mid-level maps (or just go alone)
        Ability to send equipment and fortress dwarves out to train surrounding dwarves
        Ability to attack sites and entity populations with your dwarven armies
        Ability to set fires and select supplies to haul back when sacking a site
    Villain interactions
        Must adjust villains etc. to allow them to operate at dwarf mode time scale
        Make armies/beasts that attack fortress come from actual groups moving on world map
        Ability to fight other armies with your dwarven armies
            Larger armies should spread over multiple mid-level map squares
            Ability to create fortifications/lines/etc. instead of spreading haphazardly
            There are complications to be worked out if you can zoom in to battles and control them at the local level, concerning what happens to your fortress
            If you can zoom in, situations like being surrounded need to be respected and have the desired results regardless of what area is zoomed in on
        Allow villains to attempt to demand tribute from you
    Improved sieges
        Eliminate remaining edge-of-map exploits
        More highly trained attacking soldiers when approprate
        Many trap exploits are handled above by requiring more to produce a trap, things like cage traps should make more sense vs. large creatures etc. (respect
        strength/ability vs. material, large cages might be separate object)
        Coming up with a plan to overcome pathing obstacles to reach fortress innards
            Ability to dig (optionally, default on)
            Ability to build bridges/ramps
            Ability to use grappling hooks/ladders/climb
        Learning from mistakes if first attempted assault plan fails badly
            For instance, if many siegers are killed, caged, etc. in a given hallway, they shouldn't generally go that way again, even if that means building/climbing
            /digging
        Siege engine improvements depend on state of boats, lifts/moving fortress sections, since these should all use the same framework

Other resources I'm not going to bother quoting, b/c it would get a bit lengthy: http://deremilitari.org/primary-sources/

      [√] Varied armor and weapons (however, more could always be added: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_medieval_weapons )
      [  ] Watercraft
      [  ] Ability to siege others

Well, I have to say there is room for improvement, no doubt, but I do have to mention my awe at just how broad the ability we already have in this regard is. I'm sure I've missed some things, but for a couple hours research I think this serves as a relatively good sample of what future dwarfen military strategy could include.

[Urist McVoyager]

At the moment pikes don't do anything more than pierce the enemies with two-handed force. It helps, but not nearly as much as a true pike would. The game doesn't take size into account for range when it comes to melee weapons. It works for damage, but not range. Once weapon size affects how far away the weapons can hit, then we'll get proper pikes.

We'll also need more control over troops. A single pikeman is only a nuisance to cavalry, not a threat. Get a few mounted warriors in there, and the pike will only keep them at bay if they're packed tightly enough for the wielder to swing it back and forth. Which gets tiring, since the things are so damn long. You need your pike folks standing tightly packed, with a large number of crossbow folks to kill the backed up cavalry.

Really, a lot of our current problems could be solved with proper use of the discipline stat. Highly disciplined troops would stick to formations and fight together, while the ill disciplined soldiers could be shot forward ahead of them as a screening force to distract the enemies until their more skilled brethren came in for the kill.

It's how things really worked back then. The peasant horde soaked up enemy arrows while the armored knights and sergeants marched into action.

[Mlamlah]

The ability to create formation will need to be prioritised if we ever start getting into large scale battles. Complex formation tactics will be tricky, but simple formations are manageable i think, especially if we get drill sergeants and stuff up to speed, and better incorporate discipline and training stats.

[Urist McVoyager]

It'd be nifty if the General had a screen attached to the office so you could design simple formations and get your soldiers training at a parade ground. There's a lot of mechanical things that need to catch up before we can get to large scale wars.

[Mlamlah]

It'd be nifty if the General had a screen attached to the office so you could design simple formations and get your soldiers training at a parade ground. There's a lot of mechanical things that need to catch up before we can get to large scale wars.

That would be neat, being able to form your own formation in kind of a preplanned grid pattern, especially if you could insert conditions for changes in formation.