Building rot - DUPE persevered for discussion

[Schme]

I feel this would make it much less fun.

[DylPickle]

Battering Rams: These would be vehicles, but would take three men to operate. On normal doors they would be twice as efficient as crowbars, but on gates they would be a certain project. This would be a mix between dragging and crowbarring, in that it would take a minimum strength to be used, say 4 strong men, and then afterwards, like a crowbar, it would take half a day to use, but only have a percentage chance of breaking down the door.

I was thinking about battering ram-type things recently....

I don't think they should be twice as effective or anything.. That's too much of an advantage.
Secondly, apparently there's no real way to implement the "minimum workers needed" thing, so you can scratch the 3 people needed factor.

The true advantage of a "battering ram" vehicle is that you'd be able to stand and work on breaking a lock, without the fear of being dragged off.

Then again, it's a vehicle, so they could just drive off down the road if they needed to flee, right? Nope.

A battering ram, in my opinion, would have to be equal to, or slower than, a person travelling on foot.


.... I love battering rams.

[/list]

[deadboy]

Secondly, apparently there's no real way to implement the "minimum workers needed" thing, so you can scratch the 3 people needed factor.

The true advantage of a "battering ram" vehicle is that you'd be able to stand and work on breaking a lock, without the fear of being dragged off.

Then again, it's a vehicle, so they could just drive off down the road if they needed to flee, right? Nope.

A battering ram, in my opinion, would have to be equal to, or slower than, a person travelling on foot.


.... I love battering rams.

Actually, wrong about the minimum people thing, as that is something that has been discussed for awile now and they think they could implement them, but yes, obviously on the whole vehicle thing

[Zanthos]

well, theoretically (i dont know too much about programming language) couldn't they just do something like this?

for example, gathering food could work like this
n=0 (no workers, no progress)
n=1 (1 worker, normal progress)

this could be extended to battering rams such that
n=0, no progress
n=1, no progress
n=2, progress!

it would allow you to join the project, but won't register any progress until there are enough people involved. it would kind of be like how it is when you dont have the right tools on you. you can work on a project, you'll just get nothing done.

[sem]

One way might be to borrow some of the dragging code. That way the effectiveness of the ram becomes dependent on total strength applied rather than just the number of people. Set a suitably large weight for the ram (180K or so?), and it would take several people to get it going. It would also make swinging a ram tiring.

[deadboy]

Battering Rams: These would be vehicles, but would take three men to operate. On normal doors they would be twice as efficient as crowbars, but on gates they would be a certain project. This would be a mix between dragging and crowbarring, in that it would take a minimum strength to be used, say 4 strong men, and then afterwards, like a crowbar, it would take half a day to use, but only have a percentage chance of breaking down the door.

Lol, that's exactly what my idea was, but they would have to mix the dragging code with the coding for a normal project to make it progress with time so that you could not break the door instantly. This could be done along the lines of:

Turn 1

man 1: 32%
man 2: 46%
man 3: 54%
Parameter(strength) = sum(m1:m2:m3) = 132%
If strength is over 100%
Yes =
Parameter(project) + 50% = 50%

No = Display "There are not enough people on the project"

If project is over 100%
Yes = 50% chance of breaking lock, display message etc
No = Project ends unfinished

[Redbeard]

This is just an opinion but I HATE the battering ram idea.

Cantr II isn't a wargame and there is already too many places where hitting and attacking and breaking things appear.

I like the roleplaying part and would not want to see the ProgD spend time trying to change code to make it into a wargame.

Just my opinion.

[Schme]

I agree. If you want to play a game like that, play one of them. They'd be better anyways.

[DylPickle]

Damn right it's a roleplaying game.
But it's a society simulator, too.

Therefore, the whole point is to roleplay characters that are more or less realistic.

Not to start a debate on human nature, but people, for the most part, are aggressive. Therefore, there can be wars, conflicts, etc.. But adding in a certain combat feature won't turn cantr into Diablo 2.

Personaly, I like small portions of the overall suggestion.. it'd add a little something to the combat aspect of the game... but the -entire- thing is definatly not a necesity in cantr.

[Nakranoth]

Cantr does need a war system... without war there's no way to settle conflict... without being able to settle conflice players become frustrated... players are lost.

[Schme]

The more "realistic" Cantr gets, the worse it gets. In real life you can't keep building a house while your sleeping. Should we make people stop working when they log off too?

Cantr cannot be realistic and still be any good.

[DylPickle]

Two very different cases of realism, Schme. One would make the game more interesting. The other one would make it sleepy. I think it's obvious which one is which.

[CantrFreak]

I think this is a good idea, and to those who think this is a bad idea:

Cantr is a RP sim, mainly the goals are to build a community.

Comminities will have conflicts, how to settle them, war. And right now, war isn't very dramatic and fun.

This won't turn Cantr into a war game, as if somebody did (with no reason) started attacking everybody, it would easily die as everybody could come together and stop it, thus teaching everybody still attacking relentlessly will not work.

[deadboy]

I think this is a good idea, and to those who think this is a bad idea:

Cantr is a RP sim, mainly the goals are to build a community.

Comminities will have conflicts, how to settle them, war. And right now, war isn't very dramatic and fun.

This won't turn Cantr into a war game, as if somebody did (with no reason) started attacking everybody, it would easily die as everybody could come together and stop it, thus teaching everybody still attacking relentlessly will not work.

Precisely. We have means to wage war at the moment, so it's stupid to say that this would turn cantr into a war game, but the wars we can have are rubbish

[Gran]

I think that's a very good idea but its too early to implement...
but i thimk that you're making some mistakes.I know a lot about medieval wars, conflicts, medieval warmachines to say that you're kinda making the things general.First, I think that castles aren't the same thing.They don't are made from the same material or have the same size, that should be considerated, creating wall upgrades, that will make walls better. and variable number of towers.And, if you like details could be diferent types of walls, that are diferent about: material, size and shape.And, for the people that don't like this idea, i think that's a good new:If you really wanna make these war-like things close to reality, greater stone fortifications would take 20 or 80 years to be complete.And about warmachines:they would be dismountable and could be carried by horses or cars and trucks.
However, this idea is too complex, not only because its hard to pragraming, but it is naturaly complex this thing about Forts, Castles, WarMachines....