Print

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

[Urist McStoney]

One obvious thing to do to make setting up traps(and other things involving mechanisms) much harder would be to have each trap require different components.  Now, I don't know too much about mechanical engineering and traps and such, but wouldn't the mechanism required for a weapon trap look a lot different from that of a stonefall trap or cage trap?

[RAM]

Perhaps for crossbow traps, an ability, such as with walls, to extend the traps trigger area? It wouldn't make sense for a crossbow to only point-blank someone.

Or separate the trap from the trigger, then you could put it wherever you want, and explicitly not fire it at point-blank range...
If you could set pressure plates to turn other pressure plates on then you could save your ammo until the hallway is full but keep shooting until they escaped...
I see no mechanical reason that you wouldn't be able to hook a trap to a lever... And I see no reason why a dwarf wouldn't want to hook a dozen crossbows to a lever and start flipping it maniacally...
There may be some room for vertically facing traps, I could certainly see myself being glad I hooked up some crossbow traps on the roof and floor of my entrance hall when a dragon flies through one of the middle z-levels, not to mention the satisfaction of one lever pull going through several hundred bolts...

However, I would also like to be able to attach a lever to a trap so that I can turn it on and off, I am sick of all my traps jamming on attackers, when what I really want to kill are retreaters...

[G-Flex]

Hmm, X activations before jamming is a valid idea too


Constantly powered traps make no sense. This is mechanical power, the only way such a contraption would work is if the mechanisms constantly move in one direction, say an axe blade twirling around a swingset's top bar.

A constantly powered trap can make sense.

You have mechanical force supplied to the trap. Stepping on a pressure plate engages the gearbox or whatever, connecting the device to the power supply, starting the axe blade swinging. After the thing steps off the pressure plate, the thing resets (gear disengages).

Kind of a shoddy example, but my point is just that it's theoretically sound to hook up a weapon trap to something like a windmill and have it auto-activate. Might require a lot of power, though.

[Techhead]

Perhaps for crossbow traps, an ability, such as with walls, to extend the traps trigger area? It wouldn't make sense for a crossbow to only point-blank someone.

Or separate the trap from the trigger, then you could put it wherever you want, and explicitly not fire it at point-blank range...

I tried saying that, I just stated it badly and used typical examples of traps.

[Impaler[WrG]]

Pit Trap: Hatch/plate combo. Build above open space. Either one-shot or self-resetting, I'm not sure.

I would split this into two types 'Pit' and 'Trap Door', A pit trap is nothing more then a false floor built over a hole of some kind, the 'Pit cover' can be built out of any normal floor material and when ever ANY creature walks on it the Pit-cover instantly deconstructs sending the building material and the hapless creature down the hole.  The Pit-cover must be rebuilt from scratch (but you can use the fallen material if you recover it) but its is a simple process not requiring any mechanics or fancy skills.

A Trap Door is more sophisticated, it requires a real hatch-cover and a mechanism to create.  At that point you have essentially a self-resetting Pit-Trap, like the Pit-trap all creatures will fall through but the hatch will snap shut again and continue to be concealed for more enemies to fall into.  With the addition of a pressure plate to the Trap it can be set to trigger on different weights so your own dwarfs may pass freely over it.  It may optionally be linked with a lever to arm/disarm the trap, this is different then a normal hatch which would open/close with a lever, arming will allow the trap to trigger and dis-arming will prevent it.

[Sunken]

Though the suggestions for making traps more complicated to build and maintain and less reliable, and more realistic, are all good - they still don't make it any less possible to rely entirely on traps for your defense; you just have to build more traps.

The fundamental flaw has been pointed out already: traps are too *clever* and enemies are too *stupid*. Realistically - really, would even really stupid goblins keep stepping on that trigger when nine comrades have just done the same right in front of them? If the dwarfs can routinely avoid it, it must not require advanced acrobatics, merely awareness of its presence. So goblins should very quickly learn how to avoid your traps - even though it costs them their vanguard to do so.

Conversely, how realistic is it that your dwarfs run back and forth across your booby-trapped corridors with impunity, never making any mistakes with the triggers?
Make traps slice friendly dwarfs once every 1000 times and we'll see if traps are still a viable defensive mainstay...
Of course, you could leave the traps inactive until there's a sign of trouble, then switch them on - but that requires player and dwarf involvement and a little more thought when setting up, as well as early warning.
Another option would be the more realistic one of trapping some spaces, forbidding passage through them, and leaving others free for dwarfs to use. That again requires some forehead sweat and only thins the invader population out - making traps a complement, not a replacement, of guards (or more active mechanisms).

And, again, unless a trap is really really well made, it should be very predictable and easy to avoid for anyone who's seen it in operation - or been informed by a thief scout.

[SirHoneyBadger]

You make some very good arguments, Sunken.

I very much like the idea of making traps have "on/off switches", and of building trap-lined corridors that dwarfs simply know to avoid.

I already use that idea, myself, as a "roleplaying" thing.

My Fortresses tend to be guarded by very extensive labyrinths, with multiple tunnels and entrances/exits to any single destination.

Maybe some traps could be "pedestrian-friendly", with only a 1 in 1000 chance of accidentally setting them off (provided you know they're there, and how not to spring them), while others could be set off by anyone walking down that particular, rather dusty hall.

I'd also like to mention net traps. Nets may not seem too dangerous, they're just woven cloth, right? Gentle, peaceful cloth drifting down over you like sweet cherry blossoms.

Sure they are!

Until you start weighting them down with lead, weaving (poisoned) fishhooks and razor-blades into them, glueing crushed glass to the cords, filling them with vipers and scorpions, or even soaking them in lamp-oil or strong alchohol, and setting them on fire.

Net traps, especially ones woven from spider silk (nearly impossible to break), can be as innocuous as the cage traps we already have, or as lethal as a guillotine, and as tortuous as an iron maiden. They also have the advantage of size adjustment. A net trap can be set for one person only, or used to cover an entire corridor. All that's different are the size of the net (obviously) and the degree of power used to move it, and it's unfortunate occupants.

Nets would also be suitable for both outside and inside use, could be hidden fairly easily, and manufactured by even very low-tech civilizations.

[Neonivek]

Thinking (Can't delete so oh well)

[RAM]

I don't really have a problem with traps being an exclusive defence. If I want to populate my fortress with all the most ingenious mechanics the empire has to offer and build a nest of lethal surprises, each more cunning than the last, from which only rumours escape alive, then I would like to have that option. I just don't feel like traps are very challenging at the moment, a single line of single whip traps can turn back some sieges, there just isn't any way to be subtle with them...