Print

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

For !

Against !

[Timst]

More than 100 users (102) has voted now, and the odds are 71.6% for the implementation of tunellers, and 28.4 % against.

[Nesoo]

Nor can I believe people are actually talking about abstracting sapping away as 'they make an entrance on the surface and then a while later an exit magically appears somewhere' in the game that simulates whether you get blood on your pig tail coat from the goblin who's first finger, right hand you just chopped off.

Yeah, I had thought some more after posting it, and decided that there should be an actual tunnel which takes time to mine and walk through; I just don't want to see it, hence the "nydus canal" like entrance and exit. I had hinted that such could be the case when I said that it could be pathed if easier, but further thought lead me to believe that it should, period.

The other suggestions that I've seen, such as temporary tunnels that collapse (if they go black again) or if the tiles that are no longer visible (because of rewalling) went black again, are perfectly fine in my book.

I'd also prefer an init toggle for tunneling.

In any case, I change my conditional "For" to a regular "For". I'd get used to it eventually, regardless of what form it takes.

[Shaostoul]

I wouldn't mind the idea. Moats would be dinky little 1-5z level moats. I'd have something like a top to bottom moat surrounding my entire fortress that is 20 tiles wide and then slowly filled with the corpses and trash and other various things that'd be tossed in there. So then I could live out my true dream of a massive miasma moat of green death of mutated moat dwelling creatures...

Okay that was just for fun mostly...

But it would give you incentive to defend more than just a tiny front entrance. A reason to not just smooth and engrave all walls. A reason to replace native wall with constructed wall for added strength.

An AI to plan to drown your subterranean fort with the near by major river. Brilliant! Terrifying... but ya.

[Silverionmox]

We might want on-duty civilians: that way they'll ignore the knee-deep water and keep building the wall that would contain the water.

[Tormy]

More than 100 users (102) has voted now, and the odds are 71.6% for the implementation of tunellers, and 28.4 % against.

Weird...only 106 users has voted so far....I suppose we have much more active users that that? 

[Mu.]

just put an option in the init that lets you disable sapping units if you're a baby you don't want your fortress messed up

[Granite26]

More than 100 users (102) has voted now, and the odds are 71.6% for the implementation of tunellers, and 28.4 % against.

The problem is, if you read the comments, everybody wants it in theory, but not if it means the enemy tunnels into THEIR fort

[LegacyCWAL]

just put an option in the init that lets you disable sapping units if you're a baby you don't want your fortress messed up you want the goblins not to be even dumber than they already are

Fixed

[Footkerchief]

More than 100 users (102) has voted now, and the odds are 71.6% for the implementation of tunellers, and 28.4 % against.

The problem is, if you read the comments, everybody wants it in theory, but not if it means the enemy tunnels into THEIR fort

Pretty sure that's not what I meant at all.

[Foa]

More than 100 users (102) has voted now, and the odds are 71.6% for the implementation of tunellers, and 28.4 % against.

The problem is, if you read the comments, everybody wants it in theory, but not if it means the enemy tunnels into THEIR fort

Pretty sure that's not what I meant at all.

I want to be able to replace the enemy dug soil with soil from some other place.

And if that is implemented, we'll be able to clean up after the miners, then all will be happy.

[Mephansteras]

Seems to me more like the general consensus is: We want tunnelers, but we don't want them to be excessive. Giant rock tunneling megabeasts should exist, but not every fort should encounter them. Goblins should bring tunnelers with them sometimes when they siege, but not every siege has tunnelers and you only get a few trained miners with any given siege.

Tunnelers should, in general, be smart enough not to tunnel into damp/warm rock and get themselves killed. Yes, that would also suck if they killed your fort with magma that you couldn't stop, but even more then that I don't want them suiciding themselves to get into my fort. Especially since most of the time it would mean that tunnelers would just screw up and dig into a pond or river or something and never even get to the fort. Which would be silly at first and boring eventually.

And, of course, not everyone wants the same thing. Ultimately it'll be up to Toady to decide exactly what he wants to put in and what concessions he needs to make for fun gameplay and game speed.

[Neonivek]

Dwarf Sieges make a lot of sense to use the Tunneler strategy much more often then Elf Sieges who should hardly ever do so.

So use of Tunnel strategies should be based on personality and technology.

[Rawl]

I'm for this. I'm also for the "collapse" option, but this has to be balanced, I don't want to see a way to create infinite dirt and rocks.

People keep mentioning siege weapons. Think about like you are actually there. You see a mountain with giant doors. Somehow I just can't picture a trebuchet, catapult, or cannon doing much damage to the side of an entire mountain.

It's also been discussed in other threads, but sappers and tunnelers wouldn't want to dig 20 zlevels down. If your trying to invade you want to dig as minimally as possible to reduce fatality. Anyone ever play Fantasy Warhammer? Some of the armies use tunneler teams and chances were useally good that they would die horribly or "get lost" on the way and never show up on the battle field.

And as far as building supports for tunnels, I feel that the invading army would have to do that or face cave-ins while dwarves don't have to worry as much about supporting thier tunnels. I don't view this as a player cop-out I just feel that dwarves are so great at it that when they dig tunnels they wouldn't need supports unless of course they are digging a hollow 20x20 chamber, theeen, yeah they would need supports.

[Neonivek]

"Somehow I just can't picture a trebuchet, catapult, or cannon doing much damage to the side of an entire mountain."

A lot of Forts are not built into the side of the mountain and some that do have a considerable front outside.

Add in that the Siege weapons can target infantry, doors, thin natural walls into the fortress, and towers and it starts to seem a lot more effective even with the Mountain build Fortress. Even Champions have to be wary of siege weapons.

So while it can't reasonably dismantle a whole mountain its selective uses can make it indespensable during a siege even in some of the more tricky locations.

[Timst]

IMO, siege machines will be an headache to program, considering the variety of fort (totaly burrowed fort with just one stair to reach the surface, fort on the side of a mountain, above-ground fort, fort with towers / castles, underwater fort, etc..