Bay 12 Games Forum
Dwarf Fortress => DF Suggestions => Topic started by: StagnantSoul on November 29, 2014, 08:45:00 pm
-
So, dwarves have two arms. Dwarves strike with one weapon at a time. This is because the majority of dwarves are left or right handed. But couldn't we train them in some form duel wielding? Korea used dual wielding extensively, Japanese samurai were taught to dual wield, the Mamluk had duel wielding, and Shikendo contains duel wielding a pair of full sized swords. Yes, it's normally played for looks in anime and gaming industries. Yes, Korea eventually phased it out after a few hundred years. Yes, Samurai normally fought with one sword. But it was used historically. My proposition is a skill and physical trait to go with dual wielding. An ambidextrous dwarf would have something mentioning it in his description. Only a dwarf who's ambidextrous would be able to get the dual wielding skill, and would, in combat, use both hands' weapons. Slash with the sword, then bash with his shield, in the same move. Quite like how you can lineup your adventurer to kick and punch twice, bite, and strike with whatever is in each hand all in one turn, but less overkill. Only 3% of the world is ambidextrous. Out of a 200 dwarf fort, that's 0-6, maybe more, dwarves who are ambidextrous. A dwarf who reaches legendary dual wielding will be just like a legendary fighter who's a novice swordsman, just a swordsman. A legendary dual wielding swordsman would be a legendary swordsman. Train him to legendary in two different weapons, and he'll be a weapon master. Still, get an ambidextrous dwarf, give him a hammer and pick, and let him loose on the enemy. What do you think of the idea?
-
That's actually pretty nice, only the dual wielders wouldn't last very long, they would be a scarce resource (that's good).
Other problem is that dwarves aren't right handed or left handed, everyone is ambidextrous as of now, so we would need to have that implemented before adding that...
-
(Le facepalm) Forgot that bit.
-
Yeah I like this idea.
A dual wielding axedarf sounds right to me.
-
A hammerer with two addy hammers sounds like a fun prospect...
-
A hammerer with two addy hammers sounds like a fun prospect...
Is this a joke about how adamantine hammers are horrible?
-
Other problem is that dwarves aren't right handed or left handed, everyone is ambidextrous as of now, so we would need to have that implemented before adding that...
Nope, there's a number in the unit body structure that represents a given unit's dominant hand. I don't think it actually has any effect, though.
-
The hammer lord srikes the goblin spearman in the head with his dual wielding ☼adamantine war hammer☼ and +adamantine war hammer+, lightly tapping the target.
-
I did some tests in arena mode, and using the one-strike-a-turn AI dual wielding, axe and hammer combo came out heavily on top in a 5 squad of 10, every squad for themselves, fight. 1st place: axe and hammer. 2nd place: dual shielding. 3rd place: whip and pick. 4th place: dual swords, one long, one short. 5th place: hammer and spear.
-
Nope, there's a number in the unit body structure that represents a given unit's dominant hand. I don't think it actually has any effect, though.
Yes, but it doesn't make any (visible) effect so, "technically" everyone is ambidextrous.
-
Why did all your examples have to be non European? Dual wielding rapier and dagger was common in street fights in early modern Europe, with the rapier used for striking and the dagger for defending.
Dual wielding is fine in single combat or street fights, but it suffers in battle because of the lack of a shield to block arrows and blows from other, adjacent combatants. No shield walls can be formed with no shields, and no 2 handed weapons can be used for extra reach either. Overall it's just not as good for 1 army facing another. Of course, given the individual nature of dwarves, they may do it anyway, but there are good reasons why shields or 2 hand weapons are just better in battle.
-
Well they can't equip two handed weapons because of a glitch. And combat in Dwarf Fortress is like parking lot gang wars, really.
-
Well they can't equip two handed weapons because of a glitch. And combat in Dwarf Fortress is like parking lot gang wars, really.
It currently is but there is no reason why it should be for all races civs...
Its just that formations haven't been implemented
-
I don't really see the point in adding formations, until we get to the point where multiple creatures can't fit in a tile, orientation is super important, armies get larger, and tons of other things. Until then, we're stuck with gang wars. I like this combat more than if we had formations, really.
-
Combat in Dwarf Fortress is like parking lot gang wars, really.
I just wanna say, that's the most hilariously appropriate way of describing battles in fort mode I've seen yet.
-
I would like to see dwarven shield/pike walls personally. No players have to use them, it should just be an option, along with the current individual gang wars combat. Increased ability for many creatures to dogpile and overwhelm an individual enemy with numbers would make formations much more viable. Players still have the option of fighting the current way if they want to.
-
Unless combat gets 100% rewritten, it'd just make your dwarves easier targets for fire and arrows.
-
Before going further into dual-wielding it might be better to first implement dominant hands like being right-handed and so forth. After this was done then there could perhaps be a system where those who were not ambidextrous could increase there dexterity with there non-dominant hand after practicing.
For those who are ambidextrous it could also improve shield usage as there would be no lesser capability for dexterous maneuvers with that hand as there would be for someone who wasn't ambidextrous who used the shield in the non-dominant hand
Another thing to consider is that skills with weapons could partially dependent on using the correct hand i.e. a right handed person was skilled with a sword but only in there right hand, with shields being easier then weapons to use in a non dominant hand
-
Nope, there's a number in the unit body structure that represents a given unit's dominant hand. I don't think it actually has any effect, though.
Yes, but it doesn't make any (visible) effect so, "technically" everyone is ambidextrous.
Left-handed dwarves will visibly always right-hand their shields and left-hand their weapons and vice-versa for right-handed dwarves.
-
Unless combat gets 100% rewritten, it'd just make your dwarves easier targets for fire and arrows.
Which is fairly accurate, really. Often when dual wielding one of the blades was mainly used to parry, as in rapier and dagger fencing. It was rare for both to be used attacking, since fighting consists of defence and attack, and the enemy will be trying to do the same - just attacking will result in both parties killing each other at once! Dual wielding is just not as good as a shield in situations with many arrows or fire flying around. Remembering that since a powerful strike needs the whole body behind the blow, it would not be much quicker than striking with 1 weapon, either.
-
I was saying, with current combat mechanics, a formation is asking to die. A rather common Korean tactic was giving soldiers two swords, where they'd strike with a shorter sword, then attack with the longer one. It worked well.
Edit: One reason I believe this would work quite well is how far into a goblin army my dual wielding hammer and spear adventurer got. Goblins do shoot often, but with range combat being so nerfed, arrows don't make it past the breastplate. Which is accurate.
-
I was saying, with current combat mechanics, a formation is asking to die.
How so? Formations should actually be rather effective...
-
Instead of having a wide open gap between each dwarf, where one could dodge and no one else will get hurt, but in a formation, all arrows will be aimed in a small area, and no matter how much they dodge or block, they'll be getting hit for sure.
And against a dragon, dragonfire gets blocked by their shields, the ground under every dwarf goes alight, every single dwarf dies in one blast.
With the current mechanics, a formation is a death sentence.
-
I was saying, with current combat mechanics, a formation is asking to die.
How so? Formations should actually be rather effective...
Most of the benefits of a formation (being able to support the man to your left and right, either in a shield wall, mixed specialized weapons or just distributing veterans evenly throughout the force) aren't currently feasible by current combat mechanics. For them to work, combat mechanics have to allow a soldier to consider adjacent soldiers when selecting targets - blocking attacks aimed at their friends and striking at menacing enemies.
Of course, formations aren't currently possible in DF so there's no point at poking fun at an obviously unfinished feature.
-
I was saying, with current combat mechanics, a formation is asking to die.
How so? Formations should actually be rather effective...
Most of the benefits of a formation (being able to support the man to your left and right, either in a shield wall, mixed specialized weapons or just distributing veterans evenly throughout the force) aren't currently feasible by current combat mechanics. For them to work, combat mechanics have to allow a soldier to consider adjacent soldiers when selecting targets - blocking attacks aimed at their friends and striking at menacing enemies.
Of course, formations aren't currently possible in DF so there's no point at poking fun at an obviously unfinished feature.
I would quite like to see cooperative combat of this kind. It could be linked to the discipline skill, since though dwarves are naturally individual they can learn the value of teamwork to reduce casualties.
-
You'd like to see your dwarves being slaughtered by arrows before they got to the enemy? K den
-
Arrows would just get blocked by shields and armour. Shield walls would have to be implemented properly. Arrow lethality has already been reduced to sensible levels.
Formations make little sense at the moment, but if dwarves could contribute to each other's defence they could be very useful.
-
That's why I say most of the stuff with formations would only work with a 100% rewrite.
-
I doubt it would have to be 100%. Cooperative combat mechanics would be a welcome addition to DF2016.