Print

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

[Tormy]

We are talking about underground fortresses. Most of the players ain't making above ground fortresses at all. So basically building destroyers are useless in this aspect. It would be unrealistic if they could destroy a 100feet wide outer, natural stone "wall".

[Neonivek]

We are talking about underground fortresses. Most of the players ain't making above ground fortresses at all. So basically building destroyers are useless in this aspect. It would be unrealistic if they could destroy a 100feet wide outer, natural stone "wall".

A lot more people make Wall surrounded entrances then you think.

[CobaltKobold]

*makes abo'eground forts often, wall-surrounded e'en when not*

Anyway, point is, if building destroyers target walls/supports at all, then it's rather easy to build a trap or three in the off season with some spare stone- or, if you managed to somehow get your obsidian factory to work outdoors, some natural stones to squash the enemies.

[Tormy]

We are talking about underground fortresses. Most of the players ain't making above ground fortresses at all. So basically building destroyers are useless in this aspect. It would be unrealistic if they could destroy a 100feet wide outer, natural stone "wall".

A lot more people make Wall surrounded entrances then you think.

Well, those are looking good, eh?  Hehe, I looked at the situation from a powergamer perspective. 

[Neonivek]

Even then... the Strategic Value of making a wall outside your Mountain is also great.

So even from a Power Gamer perspective are Object destroyers not completely useless.

[Rokiyo]

Would it be too evil to allow siegers that are capable of mining?

For example, if you were playing a non-dwarf racing and got sieged by dwarves? Or got attacked by underground monsters?

There could be limitations: Some monsters can only dig through sand, not rock. Etc etc.

[bjlong]

It's a hotly contested issue, tunneling units. Do a quick search for it, then post in another topic so not to clutter this one with already-stated arguments. (Hint: Look for a poll.)

[Rokiyo]

Oops, sorry.

[Vattic]

One thing to also consider is that unless resolved one possible way to get around a dumb wall destroyer AI would be to build something like this:

Code: [Select]

   #
   # ☺
G  ####
.......

# Wall
. Ground
☺ Safe Dwarf
G Goblin Destoryer

The inside of the fort is built on top a plateau of walls, a wall destroyer would have to dig though until the steps down into the fort are reached, could take some time.

What I am trying to do is highlight a problem that could occur unless we make the AI of wall destroyers better than current siege AI. Destroying walls is something that should only be used in special cases, but then how would a wall destroyer know what's behind a wall to judge if destroying it would be useful unless they are omniscient of course, which would work.

[Rokiyo]

What I am trying to do is highlight a problem that could occur unless we make the AI of wall destroyers better than current siege AI. Destroying walls is something that should only be used in special cases, but then how would a wall destroyer know what's behind a wall to judge if destroying it would be useful unless they are omniscient of course, which would work.

Not necessarily... Apparently human siegers can already disable traps spotted by their nobles that visited during peace time. A human wall destroying unit could by that same method know where some of your workshops/etc are. It could then generate a path to that structure that ignores constructed walls, and then destroy any walls it encounters while following that path.

Alternately, siegers could send in spies who would sneak around gathering this information. They could even have these spies piggy back in on legitimate trader wagons during peace time if you really wanted to make it difficult for players to keep their forts spy free.

[Pilsu]

Yes but how would that contribute to intelligent siege behavior? It's pretty hard to make an AI intelligently decide where to breach a wall that could have a thousand different setups. Building destroyer AI is already wonky with it's obsession of breaking every damn thing instead of just doors and blocking items

[Granite26]

Has anybody mentioned adjusting pathfinding costs?  Door costs the same as the 25 avoidance level, an walls cost 50 for building destroyers and 100 for nonbuilding destroyers (or someat).  If the path goes through the wall, attack the wall...

[Chthonic]

A human wall destroying unit could by that same method know where some of your workshops/etc are. It could then generate a path to that structure that ignores constructed walls, and then destroy any walls it encounters while following that path.

I think that this is really a sort of key to the problem of "intelligent" sieges--that is, a plan ahead of time.  The AI creates a plan ahead of time around a set of objectives.  It creates paths to its objectives ignoring dwarf-made obstacles, then checks for obstacles in the path and creates appropriate fixes, say assigning jobs to goblins.  Thus, goblin engineer A is assigned a "build staircase" next to a wall, while goblins B, C, and D are assigned some sort of "escort" job (have their battlestation set to move with goblin A).  As each set of jobs is completed, the AI checks its path again and moves its squads further along.  Any time there's no path to destination, the AI reassesses as well.

The AI could also take cues from what the player is doing.  When the player gives a squad of dwarves a static battlestation, he could automatically generate a "build catapult" job in the seige force (this assumes that any static battlestation is strategically valuable).  The catapult is then operated until the squad of dwarves is destroyed or the static station is moved out of the catapult's threatened area.  (This also assumes that catapults become slightly more threatening).

This is assuming that the AI is trying to break into the dwarf fortress . . . another strategy might be to control traffic through the region--intercept traders and diplomats and so forth.  The seige should just build a small town/outpost, defend it, and send raiders after caravans.  It doesn't have to be particularly smart in order to do so . . . give it some standard layouts for little fortresses and make the goblins/humans/elves work a little economy to build and man it.

Guess I ran off topic . . . should probably post this elsewhere . . .

[Neonivek]

Has anybody mentioned adjusting pathfinding costs?  Door costs the same as the 25 avoidance level, an walls cost 50 for building destroyers and 100 for nonbuilding destroyers (or someat).  If the path goes through the wall, attack the wall...

Well... Each layer of a wall should add to that Pathfinding cost if each layer adds to defense.

It should be rediculous for a 3 layer stone wall (or simply 2 layer) to be destroyed by non-superhuman attackers without proper tools and a lot of time.

[Granite26]

Has anybody mentioned adjusting pathfinding costs?  Door costs the same as the 25 avoidance level, an walls cost 50 for building destroyers and 100 for nonbuilding destroyers (or someat).  If the path goes through the wall, attack the wall...

Well... Each layer of a wall should add to that Pathfinding cost if each layer adds to defense.

It should be rediculous for a 3 layer stone wall (or simply 2 layer) to be destroyed by non-superhuman attackers without proper tools and a lot of time.

Well yeah, almost goes without saying... destroyable walls are just another step in the path.  a step that costs to get through