Print

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

[RavingManiac]

Why not just give invader squads varying levels of skill? I am quite sure that a band of elite bowgoblins would easily cut down a champion.

[Pilsu]

It's a bit more complex of an issue than that

• NPCs are <No Rank> fodder whereas dwarves progress all the way to Legendary via sparring alone. Increasing amount of notable kills and slow Master supervised elite training must be required for progression into the higher skill ranks. The beginning of elite status should be lowered somewhat as well. I'd tack it on Expert myself, allowing dwarves to train up to Adept with no trainer. Obviously, having a visiting or resident Weapons Master teaching should provide a dramatic boost in training speed. This would also facilitate basic training for civilians while avoiding the pitfall of being unable to undraft the dwarf trained in self-defense.
  These changes would obviously only affect your side so the goblins would steadily need to increase in skill as well. This progression should preferably be moddable. Of course, enemy troops becoming stronger with time is pretty video gamey so I think it's best all enemy troops start at Adept or so and later sieges that start taking you seriously bring entire cadres of elite troops supported by the "fodder". Raiders Ambushers should probably consist of the lower skilled troops

• Point 1 leads us to the second issue: stats. Dwarves have no real stat caps and thus every soldier will become Superdwarvenly Tough. Potential for this should be exceedingly rare, the average maxed out troop rarely exceeding Extremely Tough. Carpentry and other light labor shouldn't grant much in the way of stats and would contribute nothing towards the maximum achievable as to discourage people from cheating by making their recruits knit for a few months to get strength. Social skills granting physical stats should be fixed soon so you can tick that off This change is necessary because troops as is never get winded and can take on sieges alone which is fairly unrealistic. Not to mention extreme strength makes armor user skill worthless but then again, that skill makes little sense to begin with.

• Animals. Currently the pet system is broken and goblins fail to bring along their Beak Dog mounts and Troll siege weapons. All creatures should have some stats, otherwise these creatures will remain laughable compared to our dwarven strength gained from our knitting prowess. Creatures such as Trolls would probably have high natural strength and toughness while Beak Dogs would run quickly when on all fours

• Equipment. Currently all NPC equipment is complete garbage. They should be at the very least Well-crafted if not Finely-crafted and above, more so for elite troops and their leaders. After all, these goods were hand made. It is somewhat insulting to insinuate that medieval smiths produced the equivalent of tin pots worked together with glue. Of course, if civs are to have access to good stuff, they need the people to produce it so civilian skills should be vastly improved. In fact, I might suggest that a civ's aptitude for the crafts should be the defining factor what kind of gear they wear. For instance, dwarves might be set higher in aptitude than humans and thus their troops would consistently wear better armor, even in the lower ranks. Even the lowliest fodder would wear anything from Finely-crafted to Superior quality while the elite troops would wear a mix of exceptional and Masterful armor. Civ leaders might even have artifacts. Contrast humans whose fodder would make do with Well-crafted and whose Masterpieces would be limited to the officers. Kobolds on the other hand would wear rags and treasure a Well-crafted loincloth. Aptitude might be split into several categories to avoid making a civ great at arts and crafts automatically make great armor

[Byakugan01]

I think you're forgetting that eventually armies are going to be coming from the world itself. Armies should vary in their skill level based on their experience in world gen-you could have one world where everyone's a goddamn Spartan, and others where everyone's an elf-loving beard-shaving pushover. And then of course the vast majority of worlds will actually lie between these two extremes. If everyone is an adept warrior, than would all peasants also have to be adept warriors if they weren't from your fort? Wouldn't this also mean that all dwarves that aren't under your control also start as adept warriors, including the king pre-arrival? What happens when we can start moving armies around the map, or powergoals such as armies the size or region tiles or greater get implemented? I think that then Toady would have to work all this out, and have to undo and rewrite all the code that would have gone into the "fix". And don't forget diplomacy is eventually going to be used to decide wars and treaties as well. If you can manipulate events to keep two nations at war and propsperous long enough, then you can train up two or more civs to be frightening fortress mode opponents-sometimes just about everyone in a civ ends up legendary already.

 A better solution would be simple, and involve a AI rework that will have to go in eventually anyway: make the elite of the enemy better able to make decisions. For example, if outnumbered by the opponent, they should make a decision of whether to flee based on equipment strength, skill level, and just how badly they are outnumbered. Second, they should be able to perform pincer attacks, flanking maneuvers, and set up proper ambushes (i.e, two squads of archers perched on top of cliffs overlooking the path your army appears to be taking). Third, and most importantly, they should first *feel* the strength of the fort using advance soldiers, and then send forces in number and skill based on the results of these forays, instead of using wealth alone to determine the size of invading forces. And of course, eventually besieging armies will be able to poison your water supply...and that could eventually mean being unable to brew or do an other task which ATM doesn't involve water but should.


 By the way, there are people who are considered to by masters at archery, kendo, martial arts etc, even though they have never once applied this knowledge to actual combat. Does this mean that they would be incapable of applying this knowledge if they found themselves in fight? No, it simply means that they have not been tested in that setting. This is a key difference. Rather than restricting their skill level, dwarves should require training to get used to what combat is like psychologically. Sparring in a non lethal manner with someone you know and might laugh and have a drink with later is one thing. It is an entirely different thing when you're in a chaotic battlefield, and your enemy is charging at you screaming for your blood. It's pretty easy to hold up in the first situation-but even if you can keep your cool in the first, you might completely break down in the second. Being shellshocked by combat could significantly lower a dwarf's effective skill level, showing the true difference between a veteran and someone who only has the know-how, but no actual experience. This could create situations where a untrained member of the miltia (with combat experience) is more able to cope with combat stress than green recruits.

 Another note: If/when artifact weapons ever become able to choose their wielders, then any limitations on progression to legendary rank should be removed for that dwarf/human/gobbo/elf/etc.

[Granite26]

Pilsu:  You're preaching your solution, and solving a broader problem.  Not that I think you're wrong

Byakugan01:  This

[Porpoisepower]

Also creatures will should start burrowing soon...  having a small hoard of Goblins pop through a wall in a surprise attack should be able to kill off a few civilians before the army is able to respond.

[Shaostoul]

I think goblins are all fine and dandy. I like the idea of a few weak races that try and over come your fort with sheer numbers.

Then there is always... oh I don't know... Modding more races and... Like there is already. Civ Forge and Orcs ftw.

I still think there needs to be a wider variety. Guess I'll get cracking on new races when the next version comes out.

[kenken244]

I think that if the only reason goblins are remotely challenging is the fact that you cannot rely on your soldiers, then something was wrong to begin with. I would prefer it if the game did not make goblins inferior to other species in strength, even when they are the most combat-focused race.

[Shaostoul]

I think that if the only reason goblins are remotely challenging is the fact that you cannot rely on your soldiers, then something was wrong to begin with. I would prefer it if the game did not make goblins inferior to other species in strength, even when they are the most combat-focused race.

The almighty catch all... Mod them to be tough as hell then.

That's why this game is so amazing, you see a problem with something, you can almost certainly fix it.

[irmo]

(this was not constructive and I shouldn't have said it)

[LordDemon]

Goblins don't really need to be stronger, they just need to come in larger numbers. That is IMO what goblins are about: Numbers.

Of course, it could be cool that all the enemies who manage to retreat (run of the map), would get some experience, and come in next attack. This way some of the goblins might be very experienced, if they manage to flee from many battles (I assume the goblins are trained between sieges, so the survivors would get another round of training).

[Pilsu]

I think you're forgetting that eventually armies are going to be coming from the world itself. Armies should vary in their skill level based on their experience in world gen-you could have one world where everyone's a goddamn Spartan, and others where everyone's an elf-loving beard-shaving pushover. And then of course the vast majority of worlds will actually lie between these two extremes

Tell me, why exactly wouldn't said armies have any damn training experience? It's like you plan on pitting civilians against each other. You don't just hand a dude a sword and let nature take it's course when making an army. This isn't a peasant revolt, this is a more or less organized invading army. You can expect some competence

Then there's the question of how this "Spartan" equilibrium would maintain itself. I don't think you thought it through

If everyone is an adept warrior, than would all peasants also have to be adept warriors if they weren't from your fort? Wouldn't this also mean that all dwarves that aren't under your control also start as adept warriors, including the king pre-arrival? What happens when we can start moving armies around the map, or powergoals such as armies the size or region tiles or greater get implemented? I think that then Toady would have to work all this out, and have to undo and rewrite all the code that would have gone into the "fix".

I really don't have a clue what the hell you're talking about. Civilians having military skills? Why? What?

And don't forget diplomacy is eventually going to be used to decide wars and treaties as well. If you can manipulate events to keep two nations at war and propsperous long enough, then you can train up two or more civs to be frightening fortress mode opponents-sometimes just about everyone in a civ ends up legendary already.

What the hell does have to do with anything? Besides, if you know anything about history, you'd know two prosperous nations fighting for extended periods of time amounts to exactly one thing: financial ruin for both. Their elite troops would be quite dead from the extended warfare and their population taxed, they wouldn't pose you any threat. The diplomacy to talk about is a method of weakening your opponents, not strengthening them!

A better solution would be simple, and involve a AI rework that will have to go in eventually anyway: make the elite of the enemy better able to make decisions. For example, if outnumbered by the opponent, they should make a decision of whether to flee based on equipment strength, skill level, and just how badly they are outnumbered. Second, they should be able to perform pincer attacks, flanking maneuvers, and set up proper ambushes (i.e, two squads of archers perched on top of cliffs overlooking the path your army appears to be taking). Third, and most importantly, they should first *feel* the strength of the fort using advance soldiers, and then send forces in number and skill based on the results of these forays, instead of using wealth alone to determine the size of invading forces. And of course, eventually besieging armies will be able to poison your water supply...and that could eventually mean being unable to brew or do an other task which ATM doesn't involve water but should.

You do realize that AI of that caliber is far beyond the capability of commercial million dollar projects right? You're suggesting that one dude in his basement shows Relic how it's done instead of opting for something more plausible? Now, siege AI can certainly be somewhat upgraded but it'll never be sophisticated enough to make the current fodder troops pose any danger. Higher quality troops will be needed either way

Good luck poisoning an underground river or a closed cistern. It'll take more than tricks and strategy to pose a threat to the player

By the way, there are people who are considered to by masters at archery, kendo, martial arts etc, even though they have never once applied this knowledge to actual combat. Does this mean that they would be incapable of applying this knowledge if they found themselves in fight? No, it simply means that they have not been tested in that setting. This is a key difference. Rather than restricting their skill level, dwarves should require training to get used to what combat is like psychologically. Sparring in a non lethal manner with someone you know and might laugh and have a drink with later is one thing. It is an entirely different thing when you're in a chaotic battlefield, and your enemy is charging at you screaming for your blood. It's pretty easy to hold up in the first situation-but even if you can keep your cool in the first, you might completely break down in the second. Being shellshocked by combat could significantly lower a dwarf's effective skill level, showing the true difference between a veteran and someone who only has the know-how, but no actual experience. This could create situations where a untrained member of the miltia (with combat experience) is more able to cope with combat stress than green recruits.

That's all well and good but the crap you listed consists of fucking sports. These "masters" are laughable chumps compared to people with field experience. Allowing the current practice of sparring until Legendary and padding it with a requirement to kill a few deer or stripped goblins to "graduate" would do absolutely fucking nothing to fix the issue. Not that my suggestion is a lot better in that regard but at least you have to kill some dudes to continue instead of just training until you're perfect and then killing some hapless fodder to grind morale. Yeah it's totally fucked either way, let's throw this entire thing in the bin. I do still want actual trainers though

We could just strip sparring ability past a certain point entirely or something. Or a more likely solution, stop XP gains. After all, skills and muscle needs to be maintained

Let's see, how about this:
You can reach Competent without any trainer, after that you need training to reach all the way to Expert. To get past that, you need pure battle experience vs named opponents. Reaching Professional would denote Elite status and relieve them from civilian duties
Allows for poorly trained militias but doesn't restrict civilians into being incompetent if the player decides he wants more talented reserves at the expense of time. Requirement for trainers encourages diplomacy and battle experience requirement prevents the player from grinding his troops to Legendary on deer. While it restricts Hunter skills, they needn't be Legendary to begin with

Pilsu:  You're preaching your solution, and solving a broader problem.  Not that I think you're wrong

As I said, it IS a broad problem. Not just a matter of goblins being too small or some other catch-all solution

[Granite26]

In all fairness, modern armies train with human like targets rather than just bull's eyes because it makes them more likely to shoot another person when it comes to it.

It's one of the (few reasonable) arguments against violence in video games.  It doesn't make you more violent, just removes that last second 'holy shit! I'm about to shoot another person, FUCK' reflex.  Not that that's a good thing when the murdering rapist thug is charging you in your own home.

[Neonivek]

Civilians having military skills? Why? What?

It makes perfect sense. In all cultures there are civilians with military skills such as combat. Just ask any Gun Club or Organised Crime Syndicate.

In some a Civilian is always trained to be capable of military service and can be called upon it at anytime. (This isn't Sparta... I believe that every male was either a soldier or in training to be one... Excluding Slaves)

It really should be a cultural aspect if a civilian would really know combat out of a hobby or nessecity.

Goblins due to their culture should almost always have a high level of competence out of their general population when it comes to combat.

[Granite26]

a well regulated militia, and all that?

[Jimmy]

There's only one reason currently that dwarves are tougher than goblins.

Stat gains from social skills.

Your average peasant Urist McSockhauler gets several levels of toughness, agility and strength from buggering around in the meeting hall working out his social skills. This makes him superior to a goblin wrestler in everything but actual wrestling skill.

Those who remember the 2D version will know that prior to these social skill stat gains, getting even an average toughness was a real achievement, and it made goblins a real threat.

So I expect that with the reformatting of the social skills the toughness level will increase. I also predict that the orcs will need to be nerfed to make them survivable in the next version.