New Siege Implementation: Siege Chess

Thoughts on the further development of Haven & Hearth? Feel free to opine!
User avatar
loftar
Posts: 9096
Joined: Fri Apr 03, 2009 7:05 am
Location: Your character database

Re: New Siege Implementation: Siege Chess

Post by loftar »

bmjclark wrote:Would rolling the ram then repairing or w/e cause the "charge" to reset?
Absolutely not. Keeping the charge when rolling is half the point.
DDDsDD999 wrote:Pretty much every siege I've been a part of has had to relocate at some point, because RNG with defensive catapults just ends up destroying the attackers eventually.
I would imagine that the effects of catapult RNG would be more equal between offenders and defenders given that catapults "can't" be kept indefinitely.
"Object-oriented design is the roman numerals of computing." -- Rob Pike
User avatar
boshaw
Posts: 1612
Joined: Tue Jun 01, 2010 10:22 pm

Re: New Siege Implementation: Siege Chess

Post by boshaw »

loftar wrote:
bmjclark wrote:Would rolling the ram then repairing or w/e cause the "charge" to reset?
Absolutely not. Keeping the charge when rolling is half the point.
How far away will a deployed ram alert a claim when deployed? How many tiles can I move it per hour?
User avatar
loftar
Posts: 9096
Joined: Fri Apr 03, 2009 7:05 am
Location: Your character database

Re: New Siege Implementation: Siege Chess

Post by loftar »

boshaw wrote:How far away will a deployed ram alert a claim when deployed? How many tiles can I move it per hour?
Certainly up for debate. My suggestion might be that a ram can move 7.5 tiles per (RL) hour, which is 180 tiles per day. I imagine the alert would reach as far as the ram can move in 24 hours. I would imagine a catapult would be slower, perhaps 4-5 tiles per hour, or so.
"Object-oriented design is the roman numerals of computing." -- Rob Pike
User avatar
Amanda44
Posts: 6485
Joined: Wed Sep 28, 2011 12:13 pm

Re: New Siege Implementation: Siege Chess

Post by Amanda44 »

I think this sounds good on paper, seems fair and engaging to both attackers and defenders ... ofc those that actually do sieging will be able to give a better critique in terms of whether it would actually work that way, just wanted to say it sounds good. :)
Koru wrote:
It is like in Lord of the Flies, nobody controlls what is going on in the hearthlands, those weaker and with conscience are just fucked.
Avatar made by Jordan.
Animal lovers - Show us your pets! - viewtopic.php?f=40&t=44444#p577254
User avatar
rye130
Posts: 2557
Joined: Mon Feb 01, 2010 9:41 pm

Re: New Siege Implementation: Siege Chess

Post by rye130 »

I guess it seems better than anything we've seen since the actual siege portion is a little more engaging. I don't think siege can really ever be fun and good though until its not so punishing for the loser.
User avatar
rye130
Posts: 2557
Joined: Mon Feb 01, 2010 9:41 pm

Re: New Siege Implementation: Siege Chess

Post by rye130 »

jorb wrote:Archery Towers have some minimum distance enforced between them, and do not require brimstone to construct
Can I as the attacker just build an archery tower against the defenders base to prevent them from being able to use archery towers because of that minimum distance?

Or is that minimum distance very small and meaningless?
User avatar
loftar
Posts: 9096
Joined: Fri Apr 03, 2009 7:05 am
Location: Your character database

Re: New Siege Implementation: Siege Chess

Post by loftar »

rye130 wrote:Can I as the attacker just build an archery tower against the defenders base to prevent them from being able to use archery towers because of that minimum distance?

Or is that minimum distance very small and meaningless?
It's a good question, but for sure it's not meant to be a big distance. Perhaps 5 tiles or so. It's mainly just meant to deter utter spamming of them, and building walls of them. We've also considered if archery towers, like walls, should be outright impossible to build on foreign claims.
"Object-oriented design is the roman numerals of computing." -- Rob Pike
User avatar
Kaios
Posts: 9268
Joined: Fri Jul 30, 2010 2:14 am

Re: New Siege Implementation: Siege Chess

Post by Kaios »

Can't figure out what there is to complain about yet so that's a pretty good sign. :lol:

I also like the idea of archery towers too.
jock
Posts: 733
Joined: Thu Mar 08, 2012 7:27 am

Re: New Siege Implementation: Siege Chess

Post by jock »

MrVuleXX wrote:Why not? The game has a big hammer. If you have enough strength, why not be able to break the walls? Say, with a force of about 500? Slowly, but possible.
This used to be a thing but it killed the player numbers SOOO Hard
User avatar
DDDsDD999
Posts: 5766
Joined: Fri Jul 02, 2010 12:31 am

Re: New Siege Implementation: Siege Chess

Post by DDDsDD999 »

How would sieging an island vault work? The rams would be forced right up next to the walls, and I assume they would basically eat as many archery tower shots as the defenders build.
Image
Image
Image
Image
Image

Return to “Critique & Ideas”