Bay 12 Games Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

Poll

Are you for or against units that can dig to your fortress ?

For !
Against !

Pages: 1 ... 13 14 [15] 16 17 ... 35

Author Topic: [For or Against] Tunnelers units  (Read 63347 times)

Neonivek

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: [For or Against] Tunnelers units
« Reply #210 on: March 19, 2009, 03:03:11 pm »

My idea is that Digging is an alternate strategy for siegers to impliment against you.

If they can't get to your base for some reason they don't HAVE to tunnel to you, they can use Siege machines and wall destroyers or simply Encamp and prevent you from receiving trade or emmigrants.
Logged

praguepride

  • Bay Watcher
  • DF is serious business!
    • View Profile
Re: [For or Against] Tunnelers units
« Reply #211 on: March 19, 2009, 03:18:18 pm »

That works. What do you think of the "digging = quasi-teleportation" idea as opposed to the logic behind digging itself.
Logged
Man, dwarves are such a**holes!

Even automatic genocide would be a better approach

Rysith

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: [For or Against] Tunnelers units
« Reply #212 on: March 19, 2009, 03:22:20 pm »

Any intelligent, agressive soldier should beable to topple structures like a building destroyer does now, but they should just be more selective about what they topple. They should avoid knocking down random floodgates. They should kick down your doors and pull down your statues and wreck your shit in general, just like invading soldiers do in real life.

I'd also add to this that soldiers should effectively gain the [ITEMTHIEF] tag, so they loot the parts of your fortress that they can. They would need to grab something and continue attacking, though, rather than fleeing for the edge of the map with their newly-acquired mudstone earring. Add in the ability for siegers to build ramps and floors (potentially bringing material along for that purpose) and you can defeat walls and moats. Sappers could also be given the ability to deconstruct walls, but probably only if the wall lay on a path that they wanted to take, so they wouldn't tear down all of your walls for the fun of it.

For tunneling, I don't think that tunneling itself would cause the game to grind to a halt, especially if it was limited to short tunnels (10 tiles, or something like that). I'd want a way to fill any tunnels in afterwards to be identical to their pre-dug state, but I don't think I'd want them to magically fill themselves in, nor do I like the idea of enemies teleporting in.
Logged
Lanternwebs: a community fort
Try my orc mod!
The OP deserves the violent Dwarven equivalent of the Nobel Peace Prize.

LegacyCWAL

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: [For or Against] Tunnelers units
« Reply #213 on: March 19, 2009, 03:47:08 pm »

I'd also add to this that soldiers should effectively gain the [ITEMTHIEF] tag, so they loot the parts of your fortress that they can.

That gives me an idea* that is tangentially related:  have enemies who are not in danger (i.e. they and their unit not engaged or fleeing) swap out gear if they find something better on the battlefield that they can use.  Like a goblin axeman might drop his (iron battle axe) if he comes across a fallen dwarf's ☼steel battle axe☼.



*It's probably been said before, but I haven't seen it ;)
Logged
HIDE THE WOMEN AND DROWN THE CHILDREN, THE BARON HAS ARRIVED.

ToonyMan

  • Bay Watcher
  • Danger Magnet
    • View Profile
Re: [For or Against] Tunnelers units
« Reply #214 on: March 19, 2009, 03:53:39 pm »

200th VOTE!!!   WOOPWOPWOWPOWPWOWP!!!




4!!!
Logged

Footkerchief

  • Bay Watcher
  • The Juffo-Wup is strong in this place.
    • View Profile
Re: [For or Against] Tunnelers units
« Reply #215 on: March 19, 2009, 03:54:59 pm »

I'd also add to this that soldiers should effectively gain the [ITEMTHIEF] tag, so they loot the parts of your fortress that they can.

That gives me an idea* that is tangentially related:  have enemies who are not in danger (i.e. they and their unit not engaged or fleeing) swap out gear if they find something better on the battlefield that they can use.  Like a goblin axeman might drop his (iron battle axe) if he comes across a fallen dwarf's ☼steel battle axe☼.



*It's probably been said before, but I haven't seen it ;)

Haha.  This reminded me of a part in the Iliad where some guy darts into the middle of a melee to loot some high-quality armor off a corpse.  Needless to say, he gets speared.  So I guess the upshot for DF is that 1) yes, dwarves should try to swap out gear and 2) for once their bizarre priorities (grab that sock!) might be valid.

The Iliad probably has a lot that applies to DF now that I think about it.  It's mostly just a crapton of dudes killing each other in extremely graphic, gory ways in front of a huge fortress.
« Last Edit: March 19, 2009, 03:57:03 pm by Footkerchief »
Logged

tsen

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: [For or Against] Tunnelers units
« Reply #216 on: March 19, 2009, 07:25:37 pm »

As a sidenote, dwarves who walked near a tunneler should be able to hear them AND it could give another use for mechanisms, to build tremor detectors and link them to a central alarm system. Yay for more intricate forts!
Logged
...Unless your message is "drvn 2 hsptl 4 snak bite" or something, you seriously DO have the time to spell it out.

wallie79r

  • Bay Watcher
  • Ravenous Seal
    • View Profile
Re: [For or Against] Tunnelers units
« Reply #217 on: March 19, 2009, 11:20:07 pm »

I'm intrigued that everyone is assuming that tunnelers would be extremely easy to hear. The histories are filled with references to devices designed for the sole purpose of detecting enemy miners, which would hardly be necessary if they were easily audible. Of course, dwarves would probably be better than humans at hearing this stuff, and sappers trying to enter the fort rather than just dig beneath it would be more audible, but still. I support sapping, simply because it would be realistic. Presented with a fortress located entirely underground, built by a race with a natural predilection for excessive traps, it makes perfect sense than an intelligent commander would at least attempt to attack from an unexpected direction.
Logged
This world will burn and with it end the reign of man, a mercy stroke!

Guy Montag

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: [For or Against] Tunnelers units
« Reply #218 on: March 19, 2009, 11:43:48 pm »

I like the idea that seigers should loot and pillage your stuff, a pick up nicer weapons as they go along. I can see this being a realistic and providing a lot of "GODDAMN IT!" moments at the same time.

I'd agree to tunneling units, so long as it was abstracted and has no significant permanant effects on the terrian and the player has a reasonable way to defend against it.

A scripted event like "The enemy is breaching the underground! Drive them back!" and perhaps a, "sapper breach" object appears on a solid, external natural wall that borders unexplored space, or something like that, and seigers "teleport" there after a delay.

The tunnel entrace would collapse or be sealed after the siege is over, with a message like "Your miners have sealed the enemy's breach point"

I dunno, maybe thats a little gamey and a half-assed attempt at it, but it would be much better then actual units tearing holes through the landscape.

I also like the idea of a maybe a permanant, baddie-spawning object or terrain that randomly spews out enemies, much like the 2d chasm. Like the pits in the HFS chamber. I always assumed more baddies would come out from the abyss to check up on their homies unless you sealed it over or emptied a magma pipe into it. I can picture an event where antmen (seems to be a favorite creature in these discussions) come from a newly opened chasm type thing on the bottom Z-level, or even from a tunnel that opens on the very far ends of the map screen, or something to that effect would be a nice change of pace from your typical clockwork ambushes, goblins, and trade caravans.

Basically, seiges/ attacks/ threats that come from the underground? Yes. AI units that dig their own tunnels everywhere? No. Abstract it.
Logged

Tormy

  • Bay Watcher
  • I shall not pass?
    • View Profile
Re: [For or Against] Tunnelers units
« Reply #219 on: March 20, 2009, 08:32:56 am »

Basically, seiges/ attacks/ threats that come from the underground? Yes. AI units that dig their own tunnels everywhere? No. Abstract it.

I suppose that it's not impossible to code in a decent tunneling AI. IE: The AI shouldn't create countless number of tunnels in every direction, only 1-2 "main" tunnels towards the enemy's fortress, and that's it.
Logged

RAM

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: [For or Against] Tunnelers units
« Reply #220 on: March 21, 2009, 12:11:59 pm »

Forum McGoer, Mason cancels go-on-living: Trapped behind text wall.
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Logged
Vote (1) for the Urist scale!
I shall be eternally happy. I shall be able to construct elf hunting giant mecha. Which can pour magma.
Urist has been forced to use a friend as fertilizer lately.
Read the First Post!

guyinthecrowd

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: [For or Against] Tunnelers units
« Reply #221 on: March 21, 2009, 10:30:24 pm »

I would like it only if the tunnelers could only breach non smoothed walls. That way you could possibly stop your fortress from being breached but only if it is:

A) Built into the rock, not the soil
B) Smoothed out completly

This would allow you to possibly let the enemies into a specific area of your fort, possibly one riddled with traps or marksdwarves or even a tamed mega beast.
Logged
Kill the babys. DO IT FOR SCIENCE

inaluct

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: [For or Against] Tunnelers units
« Reply #222 on: March 21, 2009, 11:26:49 pm »

Yeah, but that wouldn't make sense. I mean, how would a wall being smooth stop tunnelers?
Logged

Neonivek

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: [For or Against] Tunnelers units
« Reply #223 on: March 21, 2009, 11:58:33 pm »

Yeah, but that wouldn't make sense. I mean, how would a wall being smooth stop tunnelers?

Their immutable sense of interior decorating?
Logged

Jadael

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: [For or Against] Tunnelers units
« Reply #224 on: March 21, 2009, 11:59:40 pm »

Yeah, but that wouldn't make sense. I mean, how would a wall being smooth stop tunnelers?

Their immutable sense of interior decorating?

Maybe change it to "finished wall" and assume that's when they reinforce it.
Logged
~ T
Pages: 1 ... 13 14 [15] 16 17 ... 35