Print

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

[Tormy]

Well, I'm just saying that they should be pretty low priority.  Really, adding tunneling is like sugar being added to apple juice.  The other siege improvements are the juice.  It doesn't need to get much sweeter; it's sweet enough(does what people really want).  But y'all want a lot of sugar in your juice(want fancy stuff that doesn't add much).

Well, I respect your opinion, but I don't really find it valid. As I see...bridge builders + siege engines + construction destroyers = food, tunnelers = spice.   

[LegoLord]

Erm . . . how do bridges equal tunnels?

Incidently, tunneling can be rendered obsolete with a really deep magma moat.

Okay, water works fine too, but dry wouldn't cut it.  And I like magma.

[profit]

Erm . . . how do bridges equal tunnels?

Incidently, tunneling can be rendered obsolete with a really deep magma moat.

Okay, water works fine too, but dry wouldn't cut it.  And I like magma.

Water is NOT fine.

Magma is the only material dwaves may use in a moat (other than dead bodies) and not be teased about incessantly.

[bjlong]

The best way to do this is adding a whole bunch of tools--tunnelers, siege engines, bridge builders, construction destroyers, trap finders (there was a previous discussion that involved these... somewhere...), huge shields for mobile cover, and most of whatever else we can think of, and then put in an AI that's smart enough to decide which to bring and use, and at what time. If tunnelers get made obsolete by most fortresses, that's fine.

Tunnelers would also be greatly helped by realistic mining and hauling--a great many attackers would have to dedicate themselves to hauling and tunneling to make sure the tunnels work. Which would possibly leave them open to counter-strikes.

[LegoLord]

Still saying that tunneling is the best way when it's inefficient and easily made obsolete?

[nordo]

I am 100 percent positive that toady has already considered these things, and I am 1000 percent positive that all of these ideas have been posted over and over anyways...

[bjlong]

Lego Lord, the point is that there might be some cases where tunnelers aren't useless, and for those cases, tunneling enemies shouldn't be too horrific to add. Sure, "pathfinding" for the tunnels would be difficult, but that could be done by designating a start point, and giving the gobbos a "cone" of stuff to explore underground, towards the nearest dwarf tunnel.

Anyway, that's just a thought.

[Tormy]

Still saying that tunneling is the best way when it's inefficient and easily made obsolete?

Everything what you've posted about are obsolete also, using this logic.  What if you embark at a magmaless area? What if the invaders will use some "magma proof" creatures as the underground force? 

[LegoLord]

Still saying that tunneling is the best way when it's inefficient and easily made obsolete?

Everything what you've posted about are obsolete also, using this logic.  What if you embark at a magmaless area? What if the invaders will use some "magma proof" creatures as the underground force? 

The magma proof creature would make magma obsolete, but one must account for whether or not that creature can breath in magma    Any way, that would require modding, but magma

Yeah, it wouldn't always be useless, but people want stuff that is effective and can't simply be rendered obsolete.  Hence why the priority for tunneling << other siege improvements.

[Tack]

how about NOT TALKING ABOUT TUNNELING?

I'm talking about siege engines etc. I'd rather a bridge, which you can destroy after the siege, than a tunnel that never leaves.

[LegoLord]

how about NOT TALKING ABOUT TUNNELING?

Well, you are the one who brought it up in the OP.

[StrayCat]

I think it's worth noting that I haven't seen Legolord insult anyone yet, and two people have called him a douche and an asshole. I disagree with him in regards to tunneling, but I would never insult him like that. He gives an argument, not a flaming row full of ad hominem attacks, persecution complexes, strawman ploys, diverting an argument because you're losing, and more spelling errors than a chinese-to-english take-out menu.

I've already posted twice on this today, but I'd like to see Combat Engineers- Siege Engineers, Masons, Mechanics, Miners, and Siege Operators. It's not so much I think digging is necessary, just that I want it with everything -else-. I want everything the game can throw at me thrown at me, and I want to triumph over it. Sieges need to be pants-wettingly terrifying, and they're not. If I can do it, I want the game to be able to do it. And I can sap a goblin tower into a dust cloud at the bottom of a 15-z-level drop, so they should be able to mess with me if I can't take them down and stop them.

You can't see how to win? Section off your fortress with chokepoints chock full of traps, doors, floodgates, narrow corners, pit-drops, drowning/magma rooms, and hallways full of fortifications that marksdwarfs can come up behind and shred the enemy from.

You don't want to play that game? Turn it off in the init file.

Heck, I personally didn't even want any sort of dirt-fill in for tunnels, just shove walls in them and be done, but heck, if we're gonna do that, but I don't see an issue in letting others re-earth up the place- I just won't do it.

I want the goblins to give me a run for my money.

[bjlong]

Dirt-filling could turn into an interesting mechanic in its own right-- impromptu fortifications made from dirt by siegers.

[Tack]

geez, straycat has claws... but they have a point "WIT!"

soz lego, i'm just sick of the same argument being brought up over and over again, and if we just start heaving about tunnelling there's just going to be derailment of the thread. Obviously half of the forum agrees on it, and half doesn't want anything to do with it, either because they don't want the challenge of goblins breaking straight into the bedrooms, or because, like me, they like having an OCD worthy fortress, without having lines of constructed wall all over it.

I wouldn't mind having the tunnelling, because frankly i'd just send my champions to go into their tunnels and hit them in the asses, or dig to meet them, so unless we can have either,
a). Siege camps (AWESOME)
b). invisible enemy tunnelling.
c) more mortal champions
then tunnelling is just a way to spice up a siege.

[irmo]

I've already posted twice on this today, but I'd like to see Combat Engineers- Siege Engineers, Masons, Mechanics, Miners, and Siege Operators. It's not so much I think digging is necessary, just that I want it with everything -else-. I want everything the game can throw at me thrown at me, and I want to triumph over it. Sieges need to be pants-wettingly terrifying, and they're not. If I can do it, I want the game to be able to do it. And I can sap a goblin tower into a dust cloud at the bottom of a 15-z-level drop, so they should be able to mess with me if I can't take them down and stop them.

On this I totally agree with you.

I still think there should be different degrees of sieges, but (unless you're playing very badly) they ought to mostly track the state of fortress development. So there's terrifying because it's seven civilians against seven goblins with weapons, and then there's terrifying because you have a well-defended fortress but they're digging under your walls, bridging your moat, picking the locks on your gates, chucking Greek fire through the windows, and poisoning the water supply.

You don't want to play that game? Turn it off in the init file.

It seems some people will not be satisfied unless they can build right next to the biggest, baddest goblin tower in the world and not have their precious fortress layout disturbed, even while they're digging tunnels into the goblin tower, so sure, give them an init switch.

As for the aesthetic problem: Tiles that are completely blocked off by constructed or natural walls should be re-hidden. So post-siege, you can fill in the goblins' tunnel and it will be invisible again except for a single constructed wall at the entrance.

(Optionally, this could be done through a "hide" designation that resets visibility based on whether any dwarf currently has a path to the tile. With this, you could seal off the ends of the tunnel, leaving a void, and then hide the whole thing. It becomes invisible unless someone digs into it again.)