Print

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

[irmo]

It was just a possibility and example of a mechanism for producing that effect with minimal framerate issues. The calculation for seeing if a dwarf cannot reach the edge of the map is the same one that the trade depot uses. If a dwarf cannot reach the edge of the map, goblins cannot reach said dwarf. Thus, a penalty for having a retractable bridge over a 1 tile wide channel and relying on that for defense. And limiting the checks to every time they go on break would be to save CPU cycles.

I get that, but it doesn't consider whether goblins can't reach a dwarf because there are a million billion weapon traps in the way. And it's even less CPU-intensive to just check a flag that says "yes, we are still under siege".

Ehh, that would only work if the fortress is filled with miasma or hateful vermin.

You've just named two of the things goblins should do to fortresses under siege: stuff rotting corpses into the air vents (once we have air vents) and introduce vermin.

In a decently designed fortress, even with no positive thoughts at all, it would take a very long time for anything really bad to happen due to unhappy thoughts. Probably too long for it to be really urgent.

Sieges aren't really supposed to be urgent. The point of this mechanic is that you can't reach an equilibrium with the siege--even if everyone is well-fed, clean, and properly housed, you get occasional shocks (some dwarf pokes his head out the wrong door and gets a couple of arrows to the face; goblin sappers breach a wall that has a masterwork engraving on the other side), and with no way to recover from them, each shock increases the chance that the next one will wipe you out.

Speaking of which, badly demoralized dwarves under siege should be able to surrender, especially if they lose their leader.

[RAM]

Yeah, I would like to see sieges go on for years... If they can't get in then they can't get in, I think dwarves would like that idea, it means they have built an impervious fortress. My forts usually have respectable supplies. Even if farming was turned off it shouldn't even need rationing in order to outlast the current sieges. If your fort isn't actually under any pressure than it shouldn't really be under any pressure...

At this point in the game's development there are holes in the game, the impervious 1x1 channel is one of them. I don't think it is currently practical to start trying to balance sealing your fortress. If you don't like it then don't use it. I think that this is a perfectly reasonable attitude to take towards an unfinished game.

The idea of an invulnerable fortress is not all that bad. Maybe not in the literal sense, but I could easily imagine a siege not wishing to attack the dwarves on their own ground, and actually choosing to sit outside and fortify their position. It would be like an off switch on the outside world, no above-ground trading, lumber, water, fishing, hunting... Maybe with occasional attempts to break the siege coming from your allies, of course, by that time the siege is dug in and it becomes goblin fortress...

How bad do you want this to be, between sieges the negative impact would probably have dissipated, so should this be pretty much fatal to anyone who closes the door upon the words 'siege' and keeps it closed until the siege ends?

I could envisage a fortress being concerned about their reputation, which would be negatively impacted by traders never returning and envoys being fed to the fluffy wamblers... Unless they are isolationists, which is an option I would like...

[Aquillion]

I dislike this suggestion because it artificially limits what the player can create.

I like the idea of creating entirely self-contained, utterly cut-off underground empires with no surface contact at all.  It's interesting.  Using 'your dwarves suddenly go insane if you close the floodgate that they have never, ever, ever walked over at any point in the past ten years' to prevent that strikes me as heavyhanded.

The game isn't complete yet, not by a long way.  There will be additional things to do and challenges to meet beyond angry groups of goblins halfheartedly milling about outside and wandering through your traps.  Don't think of ways to make the existing challenges harder or more unavoidable; focus on the entire new types of challenges and dangers that will be added in the future.

[RAM]

*cheers*

[irmo]

I dislike this suggestion because it artificially limits what the player can create.

That's the point of having game mechanics. If you don't want any restrictions, there's always Graph Paper Fortress.

I like the idea of creating entirely self-contained, utterly cut-off underground empires with no surface contact at all.  It's interesting.  Using 'your dwarves suddenly go insane if you close the floodgate that they have never, ever, ever walked over at any point in the past ten years' to prevent that strikes me as heavyhanded.

I don't think anyone was proposing they suddenly go insane within seconds of closing off the last path. I agree that it's sort of cheesy to have adverse effects from closing off a hypothetical but completely unused path to the edge of the map, which is why I suggested adverse effects from being under siege as such.

The game isn't complete yet, not by a long way.  There will be additional things to do and challenges to meet beyond angry groups of goblins halfheartedly milling about outside and wandering through your traps.  Don't think of ways to make the existing challenges harder or more unavoidable; focus on the entire new types of challenges and dangers that will be added in the future.

That's exactly what this is: a new type of challenge.

Old challenge: Goblins come and try to kill dwarves. Easily avoided by digging a one-inch gopher moat.

New challenge: Dwarves start to get twitchy and paranoid from being surrounded by a hostile army for too long. Now you actually have to do something!

[zchris13]

The problem is is that sometimes, you can't do anything. Because everybody is partying. And you do not have enough weapons.

[Aspgren]

Um ...

If you want dwarves to crack under siege pressure, why just not give those who can't handle pressure unhappy thoughts from the siege?

[irmo]

Um ...

If you want dwarves to crack under siege pressure, why just not give those who can't handle pressure unhappy thoughts from the siege?

Because unhappy thoughts get canceled out by happy thoughts, which are stupidly easy to generate. So either the siege-related unhappy thoughts are weak enough that they have no effect next to the Prozac Dining Room, or they're strong enough to overwhelm everything and you're just doomed. Realistically, the tolerability of a siege depends on how badly it's interfering with everyday life, and it makes gameplay sense to try to simulate that.

[profit]

Of course... it also makes sense that the dwarves might not even notice the siege and the goblins would get bored at staring at the rock face and go elsewhere.

I really dont know where I stand on sieges... On one hand they are really easy and provide little challenge once the fort has dug into the mountain side... on the other hand...

I just cannot see a dwarf bothered by the fact their are goblins outside the walls...  Even if they are there for years...   Kinda like I am not really scared by the warlords in Kenya at this moment because it is impossible for them to get me here. (As a side note if I was in Kenya I would be scared...)

Dwarves know they are safe from the attack... Why would they even care?

[Onlyhestands]

Dwarves know they are safe from the attack... Why would they even care?

Exactly. If your Dwarves are sitting inside their fort inside totally safe from Goblins, what do they care if some Goblins (which they wouldn't know were there anyways) are sitting around outside the fort?

[SirHoneyBadger]

I wonder what I'd think about, if I were buried alive...hmmm...

I like the idea that there always has to be atleast one "entrance" (or shaft, or skylight, or whatever) leading to the surface. On a big enough map/in a big enough Fortress, more than one.

If only for an air supply. 

[Derakon]

Dwarves know they are safe from the attack... Why would they even care?

Exactly. If your Dwarves are sitting inside their fort inside totally safe from Goblins, what do they care if some Goblins (which they wouldn't know were there anyways) are sitting around outside the fort?

Because they know they can't contact their family back at the Mountainhomes any more. Because that +green glass corkscrew+ they'd ordered from the traders won't arrive as long as the goblins are there. Because they can't strike out with six chosen buddies to make a new start. Because the goblins are the enemy, and they should be fighting instead of hiding, no matter the odds. Because refusing to deal with problems is fundamentally un-dwarven.

[PTTG??]

Because they know they can't contact their family back at the Mountainhomes any more. Because that +green glass corkscrew+ they'd ordered from the traders won't arrive as long as the goblins are there. Because they can't strike out with six chosen buddies to make a new start. Because the goblins are the enemy, and they should be fighting instead of hiding, no matter the odds. Because refusing to deal with problems is fundamentally un-dwarven.

Inspiring!

[Footkerchief]

Dwarves know they are safe from the attack... Why would they even care?

Exactly. If your Dwarves are sitting inside their fort inside totally safe from Goblins, what do they care if some Goblins (which they wouldn't know were there anyways) are sitting around outside the fort?

Fear isn't supposed to be strictly rational, and as Derakon mentioned there are plenty of rational reasons anyway.

[RAM]

Yeah, but going insane is something that you reserve for real horrors, like running out of booze. A few measly goblins out the back who can't even get past a crummy little pit are just an irritation, maybe if you are miserable to begin with it could be a disaster, but making it so that trying to avoid contact between dwarves and sieges isn't viable just seems, to me, to be limiting the game in a bad way...

I would rather it if collapsing the only tunnel to my fort, so that, literally, the only way out of my fort is by digging, was preferable to charging a siege with outnumbered peasants...