Print

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

[AlexanderTheIncompetant]

 Greetings fellow overlords.
 Recently UristMcNoob found it annoying that siege weapons are operated by a single civilian. Don't you think it would be better if they were operated by a squad like team composed of a loader, shooter, aimer, leader, guard and whatnot (with their own skills), like in real life. Not because I'm one of those people who are obsessed with realism, even in a fantasy game, but because it would be so much more efficient. You could assign certain balistae and catapults to be used for training by a squad, like barracks, then you would assign them a combat weapon. they would reload and fire faster, not go to civalert burrows, not run away from the enemy, have weapons and armor assigned to them and choose the ammo and where to aim if their is a target in front of them.

[Niddhoger]

Only if there was a massive buff to siege engines.  As they stand, needing 5+ people for a single crappy siege engine would be beyond overkill.  So we would need an accuracy buff, piercing damage instead of blunt, speed increase, and the ability to shoot across multiple z levels. 

[AlexanderTheIncompetant]

Even without the squad thing, siege operators should be qualified as military personnel (resistance to death, bravery, choosing armor...). That really needs to be added.

[StagnantSoul]

We got accuracy added, we got piercing damage, speed shouldn't change, it crosses the map very fast, multi z layers is planned.

[C27]

Also the option to have siege engines be constructed as an immobile rotating turret, or on wheels so they can be moved into battle as needed. The first gives you much better control over where one is deployed and how well it's protected, while the advantages of the second are obvious. Optionally, have squads be able to take down a siege engine into parts and carry it that way, assembling it in the field during combat - as a third option, this would make the engine far easier to move as it wouldn't take up a 3x3 space like a wagon and could be moved through stairs, but it'd take time to assemble before it's ready to fire. Unlike simply constructing the engine on site normally, this wouldn't be interrupted by enemies approaching and the engine would be constructed and deconstructed automatically as needed, but on the other hand you'd need to train siege engineering for the crews to be able to set the engine up properly and in time.

[StagnantSoul]

I like that idea. +1 support.

[AlexanderTheIncompetant]

Another cool idea would be modifying siege engines/special items for the artillery teams, like an aiming instrument, a pot of oil to set ammo on fire, a bullet (for lack of a better name) shield, xyz rotation (not sure if this is what you meant by multiple z level firing), and animals that carry siege ammo/dismantled siege engines to build on your idea.

[AlexanderTheIncompetant]

To continue with my idea of siege operators as military personnel, it would be nice if they could be integrated into normal squads and autonomously use their siege weapons to take down the squad target. naturally, this would only work if many of the aforementioned changes are applied, ie rotating/moving turrets, siege teams (you cant help take down a single target if it's being attacked by five people at the same time and you take five minutes to load your weapon), selective targeting/ammo choice.

[AlexanderTheIncompetant]

And another thing that I sadly found to be unmodable is ballistas firing zipline type things, that can block/behead passing enemies (given they are fast enough and don't stop), allow dwarven tight ropers to quietly infiltrate enemy camps and immobilize giants, megabeasts etc.

[C27]

Do you mean grappling hooks on ropes/chains? That would be really fun once we have the ability to lead player-controlled armies, and though it'd be really interesting for goblins to bring to your fort I suppose that getting them to use them intelligently would be difficult.

[AlexanderTheIncompetant]

Yes!

[Detros]

Do you mean grappling hooks on ropes/chains? That would be really fun once we have the ability to lead player-controlled armies, and though it'd be really interesting for goblins to bring to your fort I suppose that getting them to use them intelligently would be difficult.

Or call elves for more FUN. They should be quite able to use some grappling techniques on your fortress.

[Waparius]

Do enemies consistently approach from one direction yet? Because that's a big thing that needs improvement first, along with cliffs and other large-scale geographical features being properly integrated into fort mode. Honestly the big problem is siege engines are currently too long-ranged for the smaller horizontal dimensions of 3D forts.

That said, it might be interesting to bring in some kind of battlefield-map for those who don't want to take the framerate hit of a larger fortress map - something that's like the outside used to be in 2D, only able to have limited interaction, but also not fully loaded all the time. So you can fire your siege engines and send troops out to meet the enemy, but it's not part of your fortress proper and so undeveloped.

[C27]

Or call elves for more FUN. They should be quite able to use some grappling techniques on your fortress.

I'm now picturing an elf wrestler trying to suplex my battlements.

Do enemies consistently approach from one direction yet? Because that's a big thing that needs improvement first

Why should enemies approach from a predictable direction? Sneakiness and surprise make them more dangerous.

[Itsdavyjones]

Do enemies consistently approach from one direction yet?

If you want the enemies to approach from one direction, tear up the ground into a path that they must take to enter your fort, and load it with traps.