v50 Steam/Premium information for editors
- v50 information can now be added to pages in the main namespace. v0.47 information can still be found in the DF2014 namespace. See here for more details on the new versioning policy.
- Use this page to report any issues related to the migration.
This notice may be cached—the current version can be found here.
Editing 40d Talk:Ambush
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Warning: You are not logged in.
Your IP address will be recorded in this page's edit history.
You are editing a page for an older version of Dwarf Fortress ("Main" is the current version, not "40d"). Please make sure you intend to do this. If you are here by mistake, see the current page instead.
The edit can be undone. Please check the comparison below to verify that this is what you want to do, and then save the changes below to finish undoing the edit.
Latest revision | Your text | ||
Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
:::38a was the first time that caravans caused direct attacks. Previously the only worry was theives which could be easily defeated by recruits.--[[User:Kingzilla|Kingzilla]] 14:07, 10 March 2008 (EDT) | :::38a was the first time that caravans caused direct attacks. Previously the only worry was theives which could be easily defeated by recruits.--[[User:Kingzilla|Kingzilla]] 14:07, 10 March 2008 (EDT) | ||
==Ambush messages== | ==Ambush messages== | ||
− | In my experience with last version (38a) it showed 'Ambush, curse them' on kobold thieves, and ' | + | In my experience with last version (38a) it showed 'Ambush, curse them' on kobold thieves, and 'Amush!' on beforementioned goblins. This surely needs verification--[[User:Dorten|Dorten]] 01:10, 7 February 2008 (EST) |
:I have:<br> | :I have:<br> | ||
Line 20: | Line 20: | ||
Toady stated that the "Ambush!" message appearing for kobold thieves was a bug, and it has now been fixed. [[User:Furiousfish|Furiousfish]] 21:26, 6 March 2008 (EST) | Toady stated that the "Ambush!" message appearing for kobold thieves was a bug, and it has now been fixed. [[User:Furiousfish|Furiousfish]] 21:26, 6 March 2008 (EST) | ||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
== Enemy squad supposedly fleeing after the commander's death == | == Enemy squad supposedly fleeing after the commander's death == | ||
Line 34: | Line 30: | ||
:::yep, just had an ambush too: leader dead, 1 unconscious, rest dead, and the last bowman was still charging.--[[User:Koltom|Koltom]] 11:49, 1 March 2008 (EST) | :::yep, just had an ambush too: leader dead, 1 unconscious, rest dead, and the last bowman was still charging.--[[User:Koltom|Koltom]] 11:49, 1 March 2008 (EST) | ||
− | |||
− | |||
== weapon trap did not cause warning == | == weapon trap did not cause warning == | ||
Line 58: | Line 52: | ||
:I can verify the part about "to a dwarf" as I've played several isolationist games where migrants are just left outside beyond a channel-trench or what not to fend for themselves, and often get ambushers and/or siegers that slaughter them and then have nothing else to do (until sappers are created by Toady anyways;) ) --[[User:N9103|Edward]] 16:10, 18 April 2008 (EDT) | :I can verify the part about "to a dwarf" as I've played several isolationist games where migrants are just left outside beyond a channel-trench or what not to fend for themselves, and often get ambushers and/or siegers that slaughter them and then have nothing else to do (until sappers are created by Toady anyways;) ) --[[User:N9103|Edward]] 16:10, 18 April 2008 (EDT) | ||
− | Ambushes do NOT have to be an enemy force; it's anybody using the ambusher skill. After abandoning a propserous fortress and reclaiming it, I had several dwarves still there. Periodically I'd get the ambush message; it was almost always a hunter stalking game. --[[User:Propatriamori|Propatriamori]] 00:23, 22 April 2008 (EDT | + | Ambushes do NOT have to be an enemy force; it's anybody using the ambusher skill. After abandoning a propserous fortress and reclaiming it, I had several dwarves still there. Periodically I'd get the ambush message; it was almost always a hunter stalking game. --[[User:Propatriamori|Propatriamori]] 00:23, 22 April 2008 (EDT) |
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
== Updated "Tips" == | == Updated "Tips" == | ||
Line 70: | Line 60: | ||
::This is the sort of thing I meant by "still needs plenty of work"...namely clarifications in this case. | ::This is the sort of thing I meant by "still needs plenty of work"...namely clarifications in this case. | ||
+ | |||
::With War Dogs, I didn't mean that they were useless per se, and I actually do mention using them to detect ambushes earlier than normal. However, in order to ''fight'', they have to get to the fight in the first place. But if you're trying to cover something over a large area (such as a road you're building or a caravan route that goes to the far end of the map), you start to need a LOT of packs of dogs in various places to make sure that one is close enough. So while you can use them just fine for spotting and for their usual base-defense duties, you need an insane number of dogs to include them in your anti-ambush reaction plans as ''combatants''. | ::With War Dogs, I didn't mean that they were useless per se, and I actually do mention using them to detect ambushes earlier than normal. However, in order to ''fight'', they have to get to the fight in the first place. But if you're trying to cover something over a large area (such as a road you're building or a caravan route that goes to the far end of the map), you start to need a LOT of packs of dogs in various places to make sure that one is close enough. So while you can use them just fine for spotting and for their usual base-defense duties, you need an insane number of dogs to include them in your anti-ambush reaction plans as ''combatants''. | ||
+ | |||
::As for moats, yes, cutting off an area entirely will break the pathfinding AI, but that goes for ''any'' situation a moat is used. What I meant by cutting off an area with moats is to use moats to cut off all access routes ''except the ones that go through your fortress''. There's still a path to the area, but the only path involves going through your Main Entrance, and thus your Main Entrance's defenses. In turn, the enemy can't use the access route as a "back door" because the moat is in the way. --[[User:LegacyCWAL|LegacyCWAL]] 21:34, 10 June 2008 (EDT) | ::As for moats, yes, cutting off an area entirely will break the pathfinding AI, but that goes for ''any'' situation a moat is used. What I meant by cutting off an area with moats is to use moats to cut off all access routes ''except the ones that go through your fortress''. There's still a path to the area, but the only path involves going through your Main Entrance, and thus your Main Entrance's defenses. In turn, the enemy can't use the access route as a "back door" because the moat is in the way. --[[User:LegacyCWAL|LegacyCWAL]] 21:34, 10 June 2008 (EDT) | ||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− |