Mining to destroy walls

[Pureon]

Unlike other civs, the Celts only have 1 siege weapon, so we could think about an alternative option. Caesar noted the Celts were good at mining - During the Roman siege of Avaricum in 52 BC, the Celts dug tunnels under Roman siege ramps which they then set fire to causing them to collapse.

So we could give the Celts a cheap 'Siege Miner' infantry unit with low armor, but with good crush damage. The standard infantry mining animation could be used until a new one is created. The unit walks up to a wall, and starts hitting it with the pickaxe

[Mythos_Ruler]

Hmm... Ideally we'd come up with a mining feature like we discussed before, but it may be too much for the programmers to implement?

[zoot]

Hmm... Ideally we'd come up with a mining feature like we discussed before, but it may be too much for the programmers to implement?

What does it entail? If it's just using the mining animation when a specific unit attacks a specific structure, it can't be too hard.

[Pureon]

What does it entail? If it's just using the mining animation when a specific unit attacks a specific structure, it can't be too hard.

That's what I was proposing, and it can be done easily. But I can't remember what the old discussion involved, perhaps a siege tunnel structure?

[Mythos_Ruler]

Yeah, I'm talking about an "undermine" or "siege mine" or "sap point." Basically, my idea is thus:

Citizen-Soldiers have access to build a structure called a "Sap Point" which just looks like a shed. Like drag-clicking walls, one would then drag-click the length of the desired mine to its terminus. Garrisoned infantry units inside the shed would then start to "dig" the mine tunnel. You would see a dirt texture creep across the ground, kind of like how

, from the shed toward the end point. Walls that the tunnel burrows under are then undermined and collapse. The units then eventually emerge at the end point. If the shed is destroyed before the units emerge, then all the units inside the tunnel die. Like all Siege Weapons, the shed is particularly vulnerable to melee cavalry and other siege weapons.

Anyway, that was my general idea.

[howlingflute]

Yeah, I'm talking about an "undermine" or "siege mine" or "sap point." Basically, my idea is thus:

Citizen-Soldiers have access to build a structure called a "Sap Point" which just looks like a shed. Like drag-clicking walls, one would then drag-click the length of the desired mine to its terminus. Garrisoned infantry units inside the shed would then start to "dig" the mine tunnel. You would see a dirt texture creep across the ground, kind of like how

, from the shed toward the end point. Walls that the tunnel burrows under are then undermined and collapse. The units then eventually emerge at the end point. If the shed is destroyed before the units emerge, then all the units inside the tunnel die. Like all Siege Weapons, the shed is particularly vulnerable to melee cavalry and other siege weapons.

Anyway, that was my general idea.

I really like this idea. Would help make walls better balanced. (A way to counter the turtles). Also doesn't sound overpowered since the shed is weak to attack allowing the attacked player to sally forth from their walls to destroy the mine. Awesome idea. I really hope this is implemented.

[Mythos_Ruler]

I really hope this is implemented.

Doubtful.

[zoot]

Don't think it would be that hard for someone who wants to do it. The trickiest stuff can probably be reused from the wall implementation. The main remaining piece of logic is then the one for making the "creeping" texture.

[Mythos_Ruler]

Don't think it would be that hard for someone who wants to do it. The trickiest stuff can probably be reused from the wall implementation. The main remaining piece of logic is then the one for making the "creeping" texture.

I don't think it would be hard to implement, it's just that everyone's plates are already quite full. It feels like a "let's just move this feature to Part 2" kinda thing. Though, if someone wants to make a demo, then that would be awesome.

[zoot]

IMO, there is an unfortunate tendency to think that if no one on the team has time, it can't be done. That is not an effective utilization of open source "mojo".

May I suggest creating a "development blog" on the new website, whose purpose would be to present problems like this in an enticing way to potential contributors in the blogosphere? I might volunteer to write for such a thing and aggregators like this one can help propagate it. I can't guarantee it will work, but it seems it would be worth a shot.

[historic_bruno]

I suspect for the art team it's based on reality and past experience, as the programming team has typically lagged in terms of progress However - I would say create a Trac ticket for these ideas anyway (with the correct priority), so the idea is not totally forgotten or buried in forum posts and IRC logs. You might be surprised that someone digs it up, finds it interesting and works on it. I definitely would suggest avoiding a "can't do" attitude because the odds are someone can do it, but at the same time we do need to maintain priorities.

[zoot]

I must admit I don't see how turning people away or not bothering reaching out to them makes priority items any more likely to be worked on, but it isn't my call.

[Mythos_Ruler]

My hesitation lies in the fact that we should not be creating Trac tickets for every single idea that comes down the pipeline. I make one post about an intricate siege feature and we're already making a Trac ticket for it? Do we do this just for my ideas or for everybody's ideas? No balance discussion first? Get me?

[Pureon]

Would the siege tunnel have a maximum distance from the target? The further away the tunnel is, the more expensive and time-consuming it becomes, right? Smoke could appear from the ground just before the building collapses - suggesting the tunnel below the structure is being burnt to cause a collapse (the standard way of undermining)?

I'm not sure about units appearing from an 'end point'. My suggestion would be they ungarrison from the siege tunnel entrance structure.

Would the darkened terrain remain after the tunnel structure is destroyed? Would it be the terrain texture changing, or a decal above the terrain? I suggest the latter.

I really like this idea, lets discuss it some more

[zoot]

My hesitation lies in the fact that we should not be creating Trac tickets for every single idea that comes down the pipeline. I make one post about an intricate siege feature and we're already making a Trac ticket for it? Do we do this just for my ideas or for everybody's ideas? No balance discussion first? Get me?

Yeah, that makes some sense. Still, there is something to be said for solving problems (such as formalizing an idea to the point where it's worth filing a ticket for) in a larger forum. The fact that I can't find any prior discussion on the public forum of "siege mines" or "sap points" tells me there is a lack of infrastructure/tradition for doing this.It's not a big deal for the individual idea, but if you imagine a team of people doing it consistently for a period of years, the gap in understanding grows so large that those on the "outside" are resigned to sit back and watch and expect that someone else have everything covered.

Would the darkened terrain remain after the tunnel structure is destroyed? Would it be the terrain texture changing, or a decal above the terrain? I suggest the latter.

Probably the easiest way to do it would be to place a decal every x meters (or whatever the in-game unit of distance is ) from the sap point as the construction of the tunnel progressed. In the interest of performance, I guess they should "fade away" after the tunnel has been destroyed.

Edited August 8, 2012 by zoot

[Mythos_Ruler]

Yeah, that makes some sense. Still, there is something to be said for solving problems (such as formalizing an idea to the point where it's worth filing a ticket for) in a larger forum. The fact that I can't find any prior discussion on the public forum of "siege mines" or "sap points" tells me there is a lack of infrastructure/tradition for doing this.It's not a big deal for the individual idea, but if you imagine a team of people doing it consistently for a period of years, the gap in understanding grows so large that those on the "outside" are resigned to sit back and watch and expect that someone else have everything covered.

We've actually discussed quite a few new game play features over the years in the private Staff Forums. Discussions usually go on at length before a new major feature is agreed upon.

Probably the easiest way to do it would be to place a decal every x meters (or whatever the in-game unit of distance is ) from the sap point as the construction of the tunnel progressed. In the interest of performance, I guess they should "fade away" after the tunnel has been destroyed.

Yep, a decal. And it would probably look like a long dirt track. It could probably "recede" as a visual indication of the units coming back out. I don't think the actual tunnel should cost resources, just time. Time units spend in the tunnel is time they aren't gathering resources, so it's essentially the same thing. The shack can cost some initial resources though. I'm thinking there would be a max distance (you can't build a tunnel from all the way across the map, for instance), probably close enough that the enemy can see the shack go up. You also cannot cross water with your tunnel (it would flood, duh).

[zoot]

We've actually discussed quite a few new game play features over the years in the private Staff Forums. Discussions usually go on at length before a new major feature is agreed upon.

That's my point, lol. Who knows where features like units on walls and triggers would have been now if everyone outside the team had not been precluded from those discussions?

[historic_bruno]

One thing that would help is splitting off-topic posts and discussions to a separate topic, since we are now talking about sap points in depth, instead of poor siege model variety (people will see the original topic name and not realize it had anything to do with sap points). I would do this except I have no mod powers

[Gen.Kenobi]

IHMO all staff should have mod powers

[feneur]

IHMO all staff should have mod powers

...

[quantumstate]

Yeah, I'm talking about an "undermine" or "siege mine" or "sap point." Basically, my idea is thus:

Citizen-Soldiers have access to build a structure called a "Sap Point" which just looks like a shed. Like drag-clicking walls, one would then drag-click the length of the desired mine to its terminus. Garrisoned infantry units inside the shed would then start to "dig" the mine tunnel. You would see a dirt texture creep across the ground, kind of like how

, from the shed toward the end point. Walls that the tunnel burrows under are then undermined and collapse. The units then eventually emerge at the end point. If the shed is destroyed before the units emerge, then all the units inside the tunnel die. Like all Siege Weapons, the shed is particularly vulnerable to melee cavalry and other siege weapons.

Anyway, that was my general idea.

I think it would be more fun not to have a visible path for the mine except for the player building it. So if you built one from far enough away then the enemy would not even see it coming. Of course this would be very time consuming and if they scouted they could destroy it. The build speed should definitely decrease with distance. There could also be a wood cost because pit props will be needed for a tunnel.

If we would include a feature if someone implemented it well enough then I think it should have a ticket. Low priority tickets shouldn't cause any problems apart from making the list of tickets longer.

Also split this into a new topic due to my awesome mod powers.

[Mythos_Ruler]

After other discussion, some modifications and clarifications:

• Units emerge back at the shed (not at the end point).
  
• The undermine costs wood, based on length.
  
• There is a maximum and minimum distance for the tunnel (you can't just tunnel all the way across the map).
  
• Cannot cross water (it would flood, duh!).
  
• Whether you can see the tunnel creeping across the ground or not is a matter open for discussion. Perhaps the digging player can see it so they can see the progress, while the enemy players cannot. The enemy players just see the shed and think "Oh no, a sap point... need to destroy it asap!"
  

[rjs23]

I think there shouldn't be a maximum distance for tunneling. You're already paying for it (since its based on length like you said.)

This could be used as a tactic to counter against people that are rushing civic centre near your civic centre. You can't train seige until phase 3, and you have poor defense against rushers that slowly invade your base overtime while you're also losing your soldiers trying to defend your base.

Whether you can see the tunnel creeping across the ground or not is a matter open for discussion. Perhaps the digging player can see it so they can see the progress, while the enemy players cannot. The enemy players just see the shed and think "Oh no, a sap point... need to destroy it asap!"

I think there could be a small chance (like 2-4% chance times the units weight standing above the tunnel ) that terrain would deform into tiny ravine shape and damage any affected units by some percentage.

[dvangennip]

I think there shouldn't be a maximum distance for tunneling. You're already paying for it (since its based on length like you said.)

I guess that would be very hard on the player who cannot see where any (silent) attack on its walls come from, plus this player cannot take action against it by sending out a bunch of units against the sap point. This point could theoretically then originate inside a fortified area owned by that player, which makes it very hard to counter. My point is that it would unbalance the game situation.

[eduh]

Another idea could be that citizens use walls as stone mines..