Print

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

[Aslandus]

Biting someone in armour will usually only result in broken teeth. Kicking, punching and wrestling can do damage and be very useful for single combat, but in battle it is generally better to just stay in formation and try to break the opponent's.

Before you think I am trying to dismiss wrestling, I am not - in a 1-on-1 armoured duel, or a dogpiling situation as you described, it is a massive part of combat and very useful indeed. In fact, in an armoured sword duel, wrestling and half-swording are the main tactics. It would just not be the first tactic for battle.

Things like this make me think there should be a military menu for "martial arts" or something where, similar to how you can select equipment for a dwarf, you can select what attacks they are allowed/encouraged to use (and get angry when they don't pay attention because they have no discipline) and perhaps what defensive strategy they should use (dodging, parrying, blocking with a shield, etc.) rather than just having RNG determine attack types...

It would probably be useful in cases like live training if you want them to use less lethal attacks to make the "training dummy" last longer or to prevent your soldiers from punching and scratching the enemy when they should just be chopping its head off with their axe...

[Urist Tilaturist]

I think the player should have a moderate level of control over his dwarves - enough to tell them to charge, hold the line and so on, but not so much he can tell them specifically to dodge or shield block all the time. Whether they do these things should be down to their circumstances. Dodging is not possible when in a shield wall; using the shield to block is much more sensible. Against a beast's attack that would smash any solid defence, a dodge and possible shield deflection (angling the shield to glance the blow rather than taking it straight) would be a sensible idea, and dwarves would do it for self preservation regardless of their orders. In the same way, dwarves would not wrestle while in formation.

One feature I think players should be able to control is ordering dwarves to try to capture enemies instead of killing them. I remember seeing "non lethal combat" on Toady's development list and dwarves should be able to do it too. If dwarves are asked to capture an enemy, they will wrestle it and try not to strike killing blows. However, if the threat level escalates to the point where this is no longer possible, they will still kill the target.

Dwarves with no discipline should behave as they currently do, attacking wildly with no regard for tactics, but with less success.

[bluephoenix]

We should probably resolve the main issue why long-timed forts aren't viable - FPS - first, before we start to speak of realistic fort populations (definitely more than merely 200) and realistic siege sizes and realistic wait-times.

It would require something akin to the way Adventure mode handles armies (abstracting them if you're far away). Abstracting fort's population is gotta be more difficult without losing resolution, though, but entirely possible.

Well once you reached your pop limit, the FPS usually stay the same.
How would you abstract fort population? Would you have one dwarf represent 10 dwarves and call it "group of farmers" or something?

[Naryar]

I am quite sure all the serious, Total War-esque military orders will happen in the army arc.

Yes I want my dwarves to make spear walls/pike walls, maybe even schiltroms, spearhead formations (for charging), shield walls, and be able to set up the conflict level. Of course when a dwarf actually dies it should probably go to Lethal or even No Quarter pretty quick.

Or simply the complete lack of any formation if my dwarves happen to vastly overpower the opposition.

[Sergarr]

We should probably resolve the main issue why long-timed forts aren't viable - FPS - first, before we start to speak of realistic fort populations (definitely more than merely 200) and realistic siege sizes and realistic wait-times.

It would require something akin to the way Adventure mode handles armies (abstracting them if you're far away). Abstracting fort's population is gotta be more difficult without losing resolution, though, but entirely possible.

Well once you reached your pop limit, the FPS usually stay the same.
How would you abstract fort population? Would you have one dwarf represent 10 dwarves and call it "group of farmers" or something?

I was thinking of something like a "revolving door" type of system. So every moment there are only so many active dwarves in the gameplay, and other dwarves are not active (sleeping). The sleeping dwarves accumulate some sort of "time points", which then they use to accelerate stuff like crafting and hauling when they wake up to compensate for the time spent sleeping, but they would also have to eat/drink a lot.

[Urist Tilaturist]

If the number of dwarves is capped at, say, 200, and animals are kept constant by butchering or gelding, does FPS death still happen? If so, is it just because of items? In that case, trading or atom smashing would help. I know that atom smashing saved my 200 dwarf forts from FPS death in the past, though they ran very slowly.

[Bigheaded]

be warned of cave spider webs, literally just cleared out 6000 of them in one fort using dfhack, seemed to increase FPS by 1 or 2, and when it's at about 15, you take what you can get.

Simply the amount of dwarves & animals is probably the biggest fps killer. Although i'd say dwarves reduced it a lot more than animals.

So yes, i would say the amount of items on the map does impact the amount of FPS. Cleaning the map (removing vomit/blood etc) appears to help also.

[Sergarr]

Also, pathfinding seems to take a lot of processor time. So block off big spaces left after mining if you don't need them any more.

[Urist Tilaturist]

Also, pathfinding seems to take a lot of processor time. So block off big spaces left after mining if you don't need them any more.

Do dwarves wander through these big open spaces, or are they just considered in every pathing calculation?

[miauw62]

Also, pathfinding seems to take a lot of processor time. So block off big spaces left after mining if you don't need them any more.

Do dwarves wander through these big open spaces, or are they just considered in every pathing calculation?

They're considered in some pathing calculations, yes. Especially if they come from a higher Z and are going to a Z below the mined area. I recall some threads on the subject but I'm too lazy to find them.

[Urist Tilaturist]

Then walling off areas may make some difference, but I think number of dwarves is more important.

[CaptainLambcake]

Population: 85
Year: 4

Not a single siege or ambush, only goblin sighted was a werehamster.  I've killed my first FB and an ettin.  They are neighbors, do I just wait?

[Uronym]

Population: 85
Year: 4

Not a single siege or ambush, only goblin sighted was a werehamster.  I've killed my first FB and an ettin.  They are neighbors, do I just wait?

Back when the thread was still firmly on its rails, this was discussed. We came to the conclusion that it is essentially chance; you might get goblins like in the old versions, or you might not see any ever. We simply don't understand why they show or don't show anymore.

[CaptainLambcake]

Population: 85
Year: 4

Not a single siege or ambush, only goblin sighted was a werehamster.  I've killed my first FB and an ettin.  They are neighbors, do I just wait?

Back when the thread was still firmly on its rails, this was discussed. We came to the conclusion that it is essentially chance; you might get goblins like in the old versions, or you might not see any ever. We simply don't understand why they show or don't show anymore.

Thank you, i'll try making a new fort.

[Ancalagon_TB]

Population: 85
Year: 4

Not a single siege or ambush, only goblin sighted was a werehamster.  I've killed my first FB and an ettin.  They are neighbors, do I just wait?

I didn't get any siege at all until I exceeded 100 - then I got 2 sieges in a row (and I'm anticipating a third... at least I hope so, I built a big drowning chamber and everything!).  So perhaps wait a little bit more?