|  | 
| 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
    
    
 |  | 
 
 
	
		|  |  |  
	
	
		
	
	
	| 
			
			 
			
				April 30th, 2008, 06:23 AM
			
			
			
		 |  
	| 
		
			
			| 
 Corporal |  | 
					Join Date: Jan 2008 
						Posts: 163
					 Thanks: 0 
		
			Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
		
	      |  |  
    
	| 
				 Re: Siege weapons 
 What about a unit like Hydras with Secondshapes (and thirds...) based on the number of operators left. First operators are killed afterwards engine is damaged. If no Operator is left unit has no defense/attack/movement, only HP and being inanimated (destroyed if no commander left on battlefield)  and each operator killed (each different shape) has different attack/defence damage based on the reduced efectiveness.
 We can add also the "only repair in lab" tag because operator have to be trained.
 
 Size problem shouldn't be so big, size 6 is huge (dragons) a siege machine much bigger than a big dragon? Possible but not mandatory. (We can asume that engineering needed to build those is uknown yet). Mobility is a problem, just give them movement one and high resources to imply use of horses, poles and such to move them.
 |  
	
		
	
	
	| 
			
			 
			
				April 30th, 2008, 07:35 AM
			
			
			
		 |  
	| 
		
			|  | 
 Second Lieutenant |  | 
					Join Date: Dec 2003 
						Posts: 475
					 Thanks: 0 
		
			Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
		
	      |  |  
    
	| 
				 Re: Siege weapons 
 I used the #shapechange command, with no #firstshape or #secondshape, to simulate a catapult type unit that needed to be assembled before being usable.
 Assembled shape -> immobile, with powerful multiboulder attack
 Disassembled shape -> mobile, but low hp and weaponless.
 
 This meant that it could not be used as an offensive weapon since couldn't fight in the shape that allowed it to move. The multiboulder attack also caused massive friendly fire. It was great at siege battles though, both on the offense and the defense.
 
 I scrapped the unit though since the AI couldn't use it.
 
 I agree with Karlem that a series of secondshapes is a good simulation of a successively more damaged siegeweapon, or similar construct. I think Sombre made something like this already in his Ogre Nation mod.
 
 All in all I don't think it would be hard to implement warmachines at all, considering how powerful mod tools have become. Heck, the Ulm Arbelestier is a sort of mini siege weapon. Makes sense that Ulm would have a "Big Bertha" type unit that's derived of the arbalest.
 
			
			
			
			
				  |  
	
		
	
	
	| 
			
			 
			
				April 30th, 2008, 07:45 AM
			
			
			
		 |  
	| 
		
			
			| 
 BANNED USER |  | 
					Join Date: Feb 2007 
						Posts: 5,463
					 Thanks: 165 
		
			
				Thanked 324 Times in 190 Posts
			
		
	      |  |  
    
	| 
				 Re: Siege weapons 
 It's true it isn't hard to mod up battlefield artillery. You can get almost anything working in that respect.
 If anyone needs help they can ask me. I'm not planning on making them though, for the most part. Ogre Kingdoms got the scraplauncher because it filled a role in their unit lineup and because it isn't just a warmachine, it's also a big pissed off monster.
 |  
	
		
	
	
	| 
			
			 
			
				April 30th, 2008, 10:27 AM
			
			
			
		 |  
	| 
		
			|  | 
 Lieutenant Colonel |  | 
					Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: Lund, Sweden 
						Posts: 1,377
					 Thanks: 72 
		
			
				Thanked 25 Times in 20 Posts
			
		
	      |  |  
    
	| 
				 Re: Siege weapons 
 It would be cool if there was implemented (not very likely) a system that let you, as the sieging army, build siege engines that then could be used when attacking the fortress. You would have to invest manpower every month from your sieging army to construct them. Engineers would of course give a huge bonus to this task. |  
	
		
	
	
	| 
			
			 
			
				April 30th, 2008, 01:36 PM
			
			
			
		 |  
	| 
		
			|  | 
 Major |  | 
					Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Moscow, Russia 
						Posts: 1,045
					 Thanks: 177 
		
			
				Thanked 23 Times in 21 Posts
			
		
	      |  |  
    
	| 
				 Re: Siege weapons 
 Well, it's one of the main tasks of the sieging army to construct them! So you can just assume that they are doing so offstage.    
To Sombre: 
Unfortunately, while thinking on the future Warhammer project I found no equivalent to Warhammer cannons with their non-circular area of effect. Did you think on these? |  
	
		
	
	
	| 
			
			 
			
				April 30th, 2008, 01:52 PM
			
			
			
		 |  
	| 
		
			|  | 
 Lieutenant Colonel |  | 
					Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: Lund, Sweden 
						Posts: 1,377
					 Thanks: 72 
		
			
				Thanked 25 Times in 20 Posts
			
		
	      |  |  
    
	| 
				 Re: Siege weapons 
 I mean you can use those siege engines in combat after they've been constructed. |  
	
		
	
	
	| 
			
			 
			
				April 30th, 2008, 02:05 PM
			
			
			
		 |  
	| 
		
			
			| 
 General |  | 
					Join Date: May 2004 Location: Seattle, WA 
						Posts: 3,011
					 Thanks: 0 
		
			
				Thanked 45 Times in 35 Posts
			
		
	      |  |  
    
	| 
				 Re: Siege weapons 
 On the topic of battlefield artillery, as opposed to a pure seige weapon - mages are effectively the battlefield artillery of Dominions |  
	
		
	
	
	| 
			
			 
			
				April 30th, 2008, 04:48 PM
			
			
			
		 |  
	| 
		
			|  | 
 Major |  | 
					Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Moscow, Russia 
						Posts: 1,045
					 Thanks: 177 
		
			
				Thanked 23 Times in 21 Posts
			
		
	      |  |  
    
	| 
				 Re: Siege weapons 
 Well, the above-mentioned Warhammer Fantasy Battle has both, though its magic is somewhat weaker than that in the Dominions, and SC are exception there... |  
	
		
	
	
	
	
	
	
	| 
	|  Posting Rules |  
	| 
		
		You may not post new threads You may not post replies You may not post attachments You may not edit your posts 
 HTML code is On 
 |  |  |  |  |