Bay 12 Games Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - marcusbjol

Pages: 1 ... 5 6 [7] 8
91
DF Suggestions / Re: Blunt weapons should ignore armour
« on: June 24, 2010, 04:43:53 am »
See the problem we are running into here is how the various weapons react to the various armors.  The best RPG for this I have ever seen was chartmaster... errr Rolemaster.  Combat was resolved with a d100+<characters offence bonuse>-<targets defence bonus>  and that number was cross referenced with the armor (20 different types of armor (4 types of cloth, 4 light leathers, 4 heavy leather, 4 mail, 4 plate)) and referering to a different chart for each weapon.  Each weapon had its own page/chart (short sword, longsword, dagger).  Arms Law was one of the core books that just had weapon tables in it.

92
DF Suggestions / Re: Effective weapons vs Plate should be piercing.
« on: June 24, 2010, 04:29:06 am »
Defection is more based on the angle of the swing in regards to the slope of the armor.  If the shot hits squarely, it wont deflect and the energy has to be absorbed.  Yes, lead musket balls will penetrate steel armor, sharpness does not apply. 

To be clear, the business end of a war hammer is a spike.  The other side is a tool not used to penetrate armor.

As far as taking a spear shot, once the spear has enough energy to travel thru someone, it is lethal.  Properly trained, a spearman can skewer apples mid-air.  Putting that spear point in an eyeslot is not all that hard.  One can strike with a spear in such a way that will put his ENTIRE body weight behind it(its actually a problem for inexperienced spearmen).  There is no point in striking that hard tho, because there is no point trying to damage 3 ft behind the guy just stabbed.

93
DF Suggestions / Re: Blunt weapons should ignore armour
« on: June 24, 2010, 03:56:34 am »
The cyclops would have no problem wielding that platinum warhammer... if it was sized for a human.  If it was proportionally sized, the cyclops would have the same problem (actually more of one, up-scaling size is not energy efficient).

About attacking the rock slug with casseritite skin with that platinum hammer - If the slug moves slowly and ya can attack it with out real worry, and its skin is made of stone, I would say use the tools that currently exist to attack the stone - Yes, copper picks.

A pick properly used should penetrate most armor.  Yes, ya can use a big mace to do it, but wouldnt the dwarfy thing to do would be to drop the picks and pick up the war mattocks?

94
DF Suggestions / Re: Easy and intuitive SAND physics suggestions
« on: June 23, 2010, 08:37:10 pm »
Not easy.

Liquids are currently implemented as an additional item in the spot and there is only 1 liquid per tile.  One could look into all the ways around it, but there is this simple fact:

Sand is not a liquid.

In a game mechanics sense, sand does not level out like other liquids.  Given time, water settle so the surface is flat.  Sand I think will remain with a 42 degree slope indefinitely.

So given how complex this problem (memory requirment for liquid management goes up 2-3x, computationally intensive) is compaired to the benifits to the end user (nifty, that is all), this probably should wait until proper fluid (air is a fluid) mechanics to be implemented.

95
DF Suggestions / Re: Silo/Warehouse
« on: June 23, 2010, 06:22:08 pm »
Fixing this problem would require defining volumes.  A dragon should not be the same size as a wheat seed.

Until this is done, everything is a hack and will be undone eventually.

96
DF Suggestions / Re: Effective weapons vs Plate should be piercing.
« on: June 23, 2010, 03:42:33 pm »
War Hammers are perfect actually.  Tho the knockback mechanic should be removed (the hammer would likely be stuck in the opponent when it flew away).




97
DF Suggestions / Re: Blunt weapons should ignore armour
« on: June 23, 2010, 03:39:18 pm »
Several problems here - Weapon Weight, Weapon Balance, and Fatigue

Weight only determines how much a weapon weighs.

Balance is where the weight is in the weapon.  Swords balance point is between the hilt and midblade usually.  Its similar to a baseball bat.  A weapon where the weight is at the business end (mace or a pick), even with equal weight, requires more energy to move than a sword.

Fatigue - We have 2 types of muscles, one made for short-bursts of heavy exertions, the other made for long exertions.  We could use the short-burst to fight with, but endurance of someone lifting weights at the gym.  Skilled fighting is done using the endurance muscles. 

Weapons have to be accelerated to be used.  Humans can use 5lb weapon effectively, not use an 80lb one.  An ineffective weapon is one that would take time to swing and could be completely planned for in advance.  If it takes my opponent 5 seconds to setup a swing with his 80lb plantinum hammer of doom, I just step backwards for every swing he does.  The opponent is also carrying that 80lb hammer, which is going to limit his ability to dodge.  My opponent's weapon is moving so slow I can attack the weapon (step on it).

98
DF Gameplay Questions / Re: How Do You Guys Build Your Fortresses?
« on: June 23, 2010, 02:48:41 pm »
I am kinda boring and have a template in quickfort for each level.  Basically its an open square (11x11) with 2x2 up/down stairs outside the corners of the square.  The open square is use for workshops and storerooms.  Outside the square I do a 5x5 dining hall (putting it at a differnt corner each level) and the 1x4 bedrooms.

99
DF Suggestions / Effective weapons vs Plate should be piercing.
« on: June 23, 2010, 02:29:49 pm »
The most effective way to penetrate anything is to focus all the energy into a single point.  Once the armor is penetrated, the energy stays focused and it should be piercing.

All weapons designed to counter plate armor have a major similarity:  The contact area is a spike of some type.  This is true for bullets (the real reason armor isnt used today), spears, or war hammers.

100
DF Suggestions / Re: Blunt weapons should ignore armour
« on: June 23, 2010, 02:14:08 pm »
Engraved gothic plate was decorative.  Most of the armor we still have from the middle ages is decorative in nature:  If it wasnt pretty, it got melted down and reused.  No one entered battle (except stupid nobility) wearing such armor.

If ya dont think armor that remains is not decroative, check out King Henry the VII's cod peice at http://www.hrp.org.uk/Assets/Cod-piece%20(mp%20asset).jpg.  FYI, the cod piece covers the groin and is designed to be removed so one can relieve themselves without removing all the armor. 

I too have done SCA combat.  Everything is effectively a club.  Being hit hard in the head, many times (the head is the open spot for new fighters, it takes abit for that to get trained out), I can tell you having a big solid metal thing over my head allows me to type this message today.  In the order of how I would precieve each blow:

No helm:  Unconsious.
Helm with no padding:  It would really hurt, be loud, but would not disable.
Helm with inadequate padding (my helm for a while):  As with normal padding, but the occasional blow would cause an edge to dig in and I would bleed.
Helm with adequate padding(1/2" closed cell foam, usually made from cheep blue camping pads):  Annoying to get hit in the head.

The worst hit I took with a club to the head was full speed from a guy who was known to hit hard.  The shot almost knocked me over (I am 6ft, he was 5'6") and my face just stung.

A big factor in how effective the helm perfromed, in respects to a club, is the weight of the armor.  DF has this wrong if the lightest stiffest armor is considered the best.  SCA combat helms min weight requirement is 12lbs.  Someone made an experimental aluminum helm that weighed 4lbs, he used it long enough to take 1 hit, and never used it again.  Almost broke his neck. 

Understanding that playing with fantastical platinum hammers is a nice fantasy, but DF does not take into account the energy it takes to swing a weapon of that mass.  An effective combat weapon for me weights all of 4 lbs.  I do not have the muscle mass to do much more.  The effective combat weapon for.. lets say the Rock... might be 15lbs.  Yes, I could swing the Rocks hammer a couple of times, but combat is more than just swinging the weapon.  All things being equal, If I were using a 4lb weapon and my opponent is using a 15lbs weapon, his swing frequency will be so slow I can ignore the weapon and just attack him.

Materials do not dictate outcomes either.  I retired my first helm after getting crease from an overhead wrap and the crease popping a weld seam.  The club was made of rattan (a wood) and the crease (you could place the club in the spot and it fit) was in the 12gague steel crown.  So, a piece of wood properly used, can break steel. 

The true defeat to plate armor are piercing weapons.  The piercing weapon focuses all its energy into a small area to do the damage.  This is true weather the source is a bullet, a sword thrust (a trained fencer can put the tip of his 4' long rapier in a 2" hole 6ft infront of him, an eye hole is a common target) or some spike attached to a pole (a war hammer).


101
Ok, I have never run into that problem. 

Whenever one of my dwarves wanders outside for something and dies, I pause the game and look a dwarf therapist.  Every time, its because I left some hauling option on.  Every time.

The other option is to not claim the stuff the gobs drop.  Dorfs will not pick up an item that is forbidden (which they are by default when the items drop).

PS - You did not specify they had no hauling turned on. 

102
DF Suggestions / Re: Make river/brook/stream banks ramps.
« on: June 17, 2010, 02:53:01 am »
Stop being pedantic.

Erosion may cause the river to be in a canyon that might have steep sides true.  But the majority of those rivers have banks at the bottom of the canyons, which might be hard to get down to (cliffs n such).  This is really dependent on the rate of flow, a fast flowing river will cut a deeper trench.  So a river in the mountains will have a steeper bank than one on a flatlands.  If we were to do a statistical evaluation of the worlds rivers(such as the amazon), most banks would show less than a 45% angle.  So, yes, you could stand farther out in the water than you were in the water.  Thats a ramp.

This is supposed to be a simulation, I dont see people making downramps to ponds and rivers IRL. 

103
DF Suggestions / Re: Redundant skills
« on: June 17, 2010, 02:35:55 am »
Any martial skill takes years of practice.  Yes, years.  It should take a long time to train any skill.  Funny enough, we get blackbelts in a year of game time.  How long does this take IRL?

Bows vs Crossbows and Training - Saying that crossbows required less training is partly true.  People by and large were not trained to shoot accurately, but on how fast they could load the crossbow and have everyone shoot en mass at an area.  So having a seperate "ranged combat"  vs a particular weapon skill makes sense.  The ranged combat skill check would verify you correctly plan the projectile's path to hit the target, weapon skill to execute said plan correctly.

More skills is not better.  I have a hard time understanding why having a cheesmaking skill when we have a cooking skill.  Processing of edible goods to other edible goods falls under cooking.  Or why there are dissection skills when the fish cleaning / butcher skills exsist as well.  Both dissection and butcher describe the same thing:  Disassemble an animal to its component parts.   If you make too many skills, you end up a skill set that might include Surfing, Hanggliding (Rolemaster did this and it was a mistake).

104
#4. Dwarves that claim things invaders drop are usually valuable dwarves with nothing to do at that moment... They claim it then go out and get themselves killed...


Umm... why are you allowing haulers out on the field of battle?

105
DF Suggestions / Re: Total Interface Overhaul (now with sparkles)
« on: June 14, 2010, 04:23:44 pm »
OK here it is.  Outsource it Toady.

Convert DF to an application to do what you really care about: running the simulation.  Keep the ASCII interface and add in a back end so other programs can talk to DF properly (mebby a IP Port on the localhost). 

DwarfTherapist could do queries based on a set of paramters and get the information back.  It would not break at every minor version.  The same for Stonesense. 

Allow the backend communcition allow for input as well as output. Stonesense could become the defacto graphical interface for the game.  Do not allow the back end to cheat.

This would take significant time once.  After that, new code would be designed with this inmind so it should not be a problem.  This would allow the end users, who really enjoy the game, do to the graphic coding for you.  If these were documented properly, the graphic coders would be albe to update for new features quickly.

Benefits for Toady -
1 - Point his finger to the guys doing the graphics engine when others complain about the UI.
2 - Obsolescence is coming (it always is).  How much effort would it take a group of people to remake dwarffortress in their own design?

Costs -
1 - Large upfront time cost coding the back end communicator.  It would have to be albe to communicate with DF completely.
2 - Small cost making future code work with the back end.



Pages: 1 ... 5 6 [7] 8