Print

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

[Fieari]

But it's not HP, becuase it's not cumulative.  The new combat system calculates whether the forces involved would cause a certain type of wound, and then apply the wound if the forces exceed the tensile/compressive/whatever strength of the material.  No HP applied, wounds are put on the material once the breaking point is reached.

But that's not cumulative.  A thousand nicks does nothing but cosmetic damage.  In the current system, 15 nicks will destroy the body part, whatever the source of the nicks.

For more reference, the current combat system can be found here.  It's complicated in how it determines how much damage to deal, but prior damage counts cumulativly.

[Granite26]

I still think that damage works cumulatively, it's just tracked as wounds (so each wound is tracked separately) and calculated across layers rather than body parts.  That is, you can hack away at a dragon bone and it'll eventually break, much like cutting a tree. 

[Dakk]

I'll have to disagree with you, i mean, how many times have we one-shot dragons using wooden arrows? If it did work that way, crazy one hit kills would be impossible, and they do happen often.
I do think there is, however, a cummulative system thing going on, i think it calculates the number of wounds x creature has, making it easier to get its head smashed into itself, but like actual HP.

You can hack away at a dragon with a copper axe all day and not get a single wound, yet you may one-hit-kill a bronze collossus with a single hammer stroke, with said collossus not having a single wound.

[Fieari]

Dakk: Currently, yes, it works that way.  I'm referring to the new version in development.

Granite: Specific wounds may have the effect of making later wounds more likely, but Toady expressly stated that each wound is treated seperately, and while each wound has an effect, the effect is not necessarily to make further wounding possible.  The effect is determined by what organ is struck, and the intensity of the effect is determined by the wound type, and the wound type is calculated by the physics of the strike, and all of this works independantly.

[Rowanas]

Ok, so we don't know how damage will work until the next version comes out. CAn we at least sum up the points that the majority agree on?

[Pilsu]

A reinforced door will not "die" even if you run through it with one blow

[tsen]

If we're going to have wound based door damage, there would probably need to be more sophisticated information tracked for doors. Is it reinforced with bands of metal?  How many hinges?  what type of hinge? Are the hinges decorative or reinforced?

Speaking of that, that would be a good way to make players not automatically choose the toughest option. Tough construction isn't usually very attractive, although dwarven pragmatism and craftsmanship would probably mitigate that issue considerably.

Anyway, I suppose it would be rather cool to be able to look at a door and see that it has a steel integral 'post' type hinge with anchors sunk into the stone around it and that the door itself is a metal-leather-stone sandwich designed to absorb huge amounts of damage. And how about giant, multi-tile gates with multiple remote levers that kept steel rods in place around the edges... No single traitorous dorfie or sneaky goblin can pull a lever--they have to hit 4 in separate parts of the fortress through guarded areas. Mwuahahaha. Whew. Overly complicated, but it was fun to think about.

[Rowanas]

Yep, the giant Minas Tirith door was suggested earlier. By me.

This would be awesome. Since bridges can span huge areas, why can't doors? I think the security of a simple door should just be based on the type and craftsmanship, but security vaults should be buildable objects capable of spanning many tiles and require vast quantities of materials and such.

A weak vault might be made with a mechanism, one block of material for the vault, and one block of material for the bolt.

An uber vault would require closer to 20 blocks of material, as many blocks for bolts as you like, and mechanisms equal to the size of the door.

[Granite26]

Has it occured to you that the 3 squares a wagon needs being exactly one square more than the widest door you can make is not coincidental?

[Rowanas]

It might be intentional, but that doesn't stop me wanting to spend vast amounts of worldly goods creating a freakishly large door with little or no purpose beyond keeping things on their respective sides of it. Locking yourself in could be very cool. The traders may come, but you will ignore them. The goblins might come but you will weather it. The zombies might gnaw, but you will sleep safely.

[Granite26]

Drawbridges create walls, no?  They function exactly like a door in my mind, just dwarves can't automatically open it (or pathfind through it)

[Felblood]

Has it occured to you that the 3 squares a wagon needs being exactly one square more than the widest door you can make is not coincidental?

I refuse to believe that Toady's vision, for the world's most complete fantasy world simulation, does not include cities with gates wide enough to drive a cart through.

That said, I'd very much like to see building destruction tie into the systems for items taking damage, that is currently seeing expansion. DF1.0 should be a wholly unified work, and redundant code should be eschewed when practical. Treating buildings as if they were creatures, with their various construction components as body parts seems like the most obvious choice, though doing so wouldn't be as simple a change as it might seem. Plus it saves memory, and forces players to replace/repair damaged components to keep their defenses reliable (some system for automating this would be nice though i.e. mechanics carry fresh hinges to damaged doors and swap the damaged components out).

Currently, dwarven buildings are held together with abstraction, hope and dwarven elbow grease. There's no material properties for the joints, seams, or hinges of a given door. Pegs, glue, nails and fitted constructions will react differently to impact stresses, and people are going to want to see that modeled. Ideally, one would tear a statue free from it's foundation, rather than smash it to powder. (This specific example also calls up specters of statues with individual body parts and the ability to wear armor. A thought as tantalizing as it is foreboding.)

I'd like to see doors (and possibly other buildings) with optional extra components to make them stronger. This allows the ease of the current system (a door is made from a door) combined with the fun customization of adding locks and bars and custom hinges, unto the limit of the player's resources and tolerance for complexity.

The most basic feature would probably be a bar or log used to bar the door. This doesn't demand any new items to be created, and makes decent logical sense.

Another change that doesn't require a lot of new items is sandwiching doors for composite strength and features. A lightweight, compressive, wooden door might be veneered in attractive and scratch resistant granite. This opens up such possibilities as nobles with temperamental pets needing doors that are steel on the outside and their favorite stone on the inside(Fun ensues). This does require the game to recognize which side of the door is which, unless you just want to have a core and a single sheath that covers both exterior surfaces of the door.

After that things get more complicated, like with the aforementioned hinges, glues and nails.

[Granite26]

It's a good playbalance for now though... Goblins can't really siege, but you can't really close yourself in.  I'll bet they get fixed at the same time