Print

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

[King Doom]

for the people going OMG SAPPING IS AWESOME ADD IT RIGHT NOW have you thought about just what sort of stuff Toady would need to add to make it work? consider every single map is different, and every fortress is unique, just how complex would the coding be to get it to reasonably do half the stuff you seem to want? go to map, dig down, tunnel forward till something happens, sure. Easy. How do you define what they aim for though? barracks? meeting hall? storage rooms?  whatever they do it'll ruin a large chunk of the map and probably the fort too, and if anything complex gets added it'll eat up processing power like ten thousand cats as the AI tries to decide how to tunnel to every target area at once.

TL:DR: Sapping, bad idea.

[Tormy]

for the people going OMG SAPPING IS AWESOME ADD IT RIGHT NOW have you thought about just what sort of stuff Toady would need to add to make it work? consider every single map is different, and every fortress is unique, just how complex would the coding be to get it to reasonably do half the stuff you seem to want? go to map, dig down, tunnel forward till something happens, sure. Easy. How do you define what they aim for though? barracks? meeting hall? storage rooms?  whatever they do it'll ruin a large chunk of the map and probably the fort too, and if anything complex gets added it'll eat up processing power like ten thousand cats as the AI tries to decide how to tunnel to every target area at once.

TL:DR: Sapping, bad idea.

Erm, this thread has nothing to do with diggers/tunnelers/sappers. 

[King Doom]

14) Sapping your base or starting a mass Sap (Imagine... Collasping your WHOLE fortress!)

It's been mentioned once or twice. 

[i are not good with compu]

for the people going OMG SAPPING IS AWESOME ADD IT RIGHT NOW have you thought about just what sort of stuff Toady would need to add to make it work? consider every single map is different, and every fortress is unique, just how complex would the coding be to get it to reasonably do half the stuff you seem to want? go to map, dig down, tunnel forward till something happens, sure. Easy. How do you define what they aim for though? barracks? meeting hall? storage rooms?  whatever they do it'll ruin a large chunk of the map and probably the fort too, and if anything complex gets added it'll eat up processing power like ten thousand cats as the AI tries to decide how to tunnel to every target area at once.

TL:DR: Sapping, bad idea.

Erm, this thread has nothing to do with diggers/tunnelers/sappers. 

I believe he is referring to the suggestion Neonivek made, which would probably be difficult or impossible to implement because it requires the AI to make informed decisions concerning the state of your fortress (depth, area, location, etc).  Tunnelers are a whole different area since all that is needed is simple predator/swarm AI.  And it is important keep in mind how much a suggestion relies on overly sophisticated AI.

[Neonivek]

"have you thought about just what sort of stuff Toady would need to add to make it work?"

Traditionally Sapping is a hole made right under a wall causing it to collapse. Allowing enemies to bypass your defenses without the use of siege equipment. Sappers could but generally didn't need to make long and elaborate tunnels. Remember that generally speaking digging is SLOW in real life and thus tunnels were as short as possible, people didn't dig tunnels all the way to the castle, no they tunneled from the wall to the other side of the wall.

So basically a Sapper would be an enemy who walks up to your wall and creates a short tunnel under it which collapses it.

Not exactly EASY to pull off... but then again it uses similar programming that Toady needs for enemies just Siege you in general (Attacking your walls with siege engines)

As for "Sappers" being set as "Off" by default... Gameplay is above artistic muse... Sappers do mild damage to your base that can be repaired and tucked away. So it should remain On by default. People who dislike Sappers probably don't want sieges anyhow (or at least not sieges that can do legit pernament damage to your base including collasping whole towers). Meaning that in truth the artistic needs of the community would need to turn sieges, burrowing creatures, (Semi)Megabeasts off which would be a large part of the game.

and for those saying "Slippery Slope Neonivek, how dare you" I am doing it more close to equivocation.

My thinking Process

Artist hates Sappers because they pernamently damage base
Sieges Pernamently Damage base once there are siege engines
Megabeasts Pernamently Damage base once they can demolish it
Burrowing creatures can pernamently damage base
(Technically Lava and Water can pernamently damage base but they can be worked around more easily)

Thus if Artist hates pernament base damage the artist must hate the above...

[Silverionmox]

I think the concern is rather with enemies that are impossible to control. Currently, if you draft a squad, only 1/3 are not eating or drinking or sleeping, and those that do follow your orders do so one by one, so they get slaughtered one by one. Enemies breaching your walls would mean a disruption that you can't really defend against apart from hoping that some of your recruits just had breakfast. Add to that the random nature of the attack routes of the siegers/tunnelers, and you have a perfect recipe for frustration. It's not a challenge, if you can't really do anything about it.

[LegoLord]

The reason I suggested that sapping be off by default is because it would make things incredibly difficult for new players.  I was still learning the ropes when I got my first siege.

[Neonivek]

The reason I suggested that sapping be off by default is because it would make things incredibly difficult for new players.  I was still learning the ropes when I got my first siege.

Sappers are still less of a concern then Siege engines and other possible wall destroyers.

[Milskidasith]

Caravans should still come after the siege, at least until one (or possibly more) caravans disappear, or one caravan flees after being attacked. They shouldn't magically know you are being sieged.

Also, it should be based on the size of a siege. If the siege is a horde of 200 goblins led by their king with legendary troll strike squads around the perimeter, fine, don't send caravans. But if it's a basic 30 goblin siege against a fortress with no military, just send in more guards with the caravan and beat the everliving s*** out of the goblins.

[Neonivek]

Caravans should still come after the siege, at least until one (or possibly more) caravans disappear, or one caravan flees after being attacked. They shouldn't magically know you are being sieged.

Also, it should be based on the size of a siege. If the siege is a horde of 200 goblins led by their king with legendary troll strike squads around the perimeter, fine, don't send caravans. But if it's a basic 30 goblin siege against a fortress with no military, just send in more guards with the caravan and beat the everliving s*** out of the goblins.

A Carivan is used to fighting bandits, but why would they want to break a siege?

It should depend on the size of the Carivan as well.

Also not knowing you been sieged? They should run as soon as they see the siege which should be as soon as the scouts spot the siege unless the enemy is intent on hiding so they can catch a few of your carivans.

[Tormy]

Caravans should still come after the siege, at least until one (or possibly more) caravans disappear, or one caravan flees after being attacked. They shouldn't magically know you are being sieged.

Yeah, this would make it more realistic. 

Also, it should be based on the size of a siege. If the siege is a horde of 200 goblins led by their king with legendary troll strike squads around the perimeter, fine, don't send caravans. But if it's a basic 30 goblin siege against a fortress with no military, just send in more guards with the caravan and beat the everliving s*** out of the goblins.

Eh, now you have contradicted yourself a bit. 
How should other civs know about the actual size of the sieging army?

[Athisus]

I think goblins should take more of a Mongolian approach to sieges. They should adopt more devious and underhanded methods to root out their enemies, such as poisoning water supplies beforehand, throwing dead animals over the walls with catapults to spread disease. That sort of thing would mesh well with the siege camp idea I think.

[Neonivek]

I think goblins should take more of a Mongolian approach to sieges. They should adopt more devious and underhanded methods to root out their enemies, such as poisoning water supplies beforehand, throwing dead animals over the walls with catapults to spread disease. That sort of thing would mesh well with the siege camp idea I think.

They also sent spies and assasines... something I think goblins would have a very hard time doing.

[Milskidasith]

Caravans should still come after the siege, at least until one (or possibly more) caravans disappear, or one caravan flees after being attacked. They shouldn't magically know you are being sieged.

Yeah, this would make it more realistic. 

Also, it should be based on the size of a siege. If the siege is a horde of 200 goblins led by their king with legendary troll strike squads around the perimeter, fine, don't send caravans. But if it's a basic 30 goblin siege against a fortress with no military, just send in more guards with the caravan and beat the everliving s*** out of the goblins.

Eh, now you have contradicted yourself a bit. 
How should other civs know about the actual size of the sieging army?

If they flee, of course. If they just die, they send scouts instead of caravans (or more scouts WITH the next caravan) who report any sieges (of course, this would mean a year without a human/dwarven caravan after the siege ended, but it makes sense).

Here's what I think: All caravans start coming with scouts. Said scouts have high agility. If the scout sees enemies, he runs away and reports such. (This, of course, requires scouts to have a specific LoS). If all the scouts do not report, the civilization assumes the worst and simply sends a squad of scouts instead of a caravan next year, or sends more scouts/guards with the caravan (depends on your relations with them).

Caravans should still come after the siege, at least until one (or possibly more) caravans disappear, or one caravan flees after being attacked. They shouldn't magically know you are being sieged.

Also, it should be based on the size of a siege. If the siege is a horde of 200 goblins led by their king with legendary troll strike squads around the perimeter, fine, don't send caravans. But if it's a basic 30 goblin siege against a fortress with no military, just send in more guards with the caravan and beat the everliving s*** out of the goblins.

A Carivan is used to fighting bandits, but why would they want to break a siege?

It should depend on the size of the Carivan as well.

Also not knowing you been sieged? They should run as soon as they see the siege which should be as soon as the scouts spot the siege unless the enemy is intent on hiding so they can catch a few of your carivans.

First off, learn to spell. Your posts make me CRINGE. Second of all, the caravan guards have high attributes and are quite adept at killing multiple goblin ambushes at once, so breaking a siege is not far beyond a regular caravan's defenses, let alone a buffed up one. If you are going to comment on WHY they would want to break a siege, it's simple. Money. Dwarves obviously would give you more help, especially if the king/high ranking nobles were there, because it is their land. Humans would have enough interest, depending on the profit they make each year, to send more and stronger guards to ensure their profit (IE: You give humans a lot of money in trades, they hire more guards for the next year to keep up the profit). Elves... probably not that helpful anyway.

Also, why would scouts spot the siege immediatly? For gameplay reasons, I am fine with you being able to have infinite lines of sight so that the game is playable, but sieges and caravans both should not be psychic about all the aspects of your fortress.

[Pilsu]

Artist hates Sappers because they pernamently damage base
Sieges Pernamently Damage base once there are siege engines
Megabeasts Pernamently Damage base once they can demolish it
Burrowing creatures can pernamently damage base
(Technically Lava and Water can pernamently damage base but they can be worked around more easily)

Thus if Artist hates pernament base damage the artist must hate the above...

Constructed walls and doors can be replaced. Soldiers can be replaced (also gives a great excuse to build mausoleums for the heroes) I can't fix the ruptured waterworks after the psychic goblin tunnelers dig into the bedrock to get into my apartment complex or refill that pit they dug into the soil to get under my walls

It's an underground fortress, how would they even know where to dig? How would the AI determine where to dig? It's not feasible, artistically or mechanically and would be little else than frustrating. Might as well let them teleport around