Ok, so I an entry in the pedia for a battering ram. :mischief: Problem is, it doesn't say that it's attached to a specific tech (as every other unit [except the warrior, worker, and settler] do), and it doesn't seem buildable. :confused: Is it fully implemented yet?

Perhaps a member of the FfH team could answer this. :confused:

If I remember correctly, the battering ram can be created by (some?) Khazad units while in forest, so it's more like a summon spell than a buildable unit, though it is permanent. It also takes some time to create. I don't know offhand whether all of the dwarven units can do it, or just specific ones, since I've never really played around with it. Someone who knows more than I do will have to answer that part.

Battering Rams are only created by the SPELL_CREATE_BATTERING_RAM spell, which lets a Khazad dwarven unit cut down a forest to create the weapon on the spot.



<SpellInfo>
<Type>SPELL_CREATE_BATTERING_RAM</Type>
<Description>TXT_KEY_SPELL_CREATE_BATTERING_RAM</Description>
<Civilopedia>TXT_KEY_SPELL_PLACEHOLDER_PEDIA</Civilopedia>
<Strategy>NONE</Strategy>
<Help></Help>
<PromotionPrereq1>PROMOTION_DWARF</PromotionPrereq1>
<PromotionPrereq2>NONE</PromotionPrereq2>
<UnitPrereq>NONE</UnitPrereq>
<UnitClassPrereq>NONE</UnitClassPrereq>
<UnitCombatPrereq>UNITCOMBAT_MELEE</UnitCombatPrereq>
<UnitInStackPrereq>NONE</UnitInStackPrereq>
<CivilizationPrereq>CIVILIZATION_KHAZAD</CivilizationPrereq>
<ReligionPrereq>NONE</ReligionPrereq>
<StateReligionPrereq>NONE</StateReligionPrereq>
<TechPrereq>TECH_ENGINEERING</TechPrereq>
<bAllowAI>0</bAllowAI>
<bAdjacentToWaterOnly>0</bAdjacentToWaterOnly>
<bCausesWar>0</bCausesWar>
<bGlobal>0</bGlobal>
<bInBordersOnly>0</bInBordersOnly>
<bInCityOnly>0</bInCityOnly>
<iAIWeight>0</iAIWeight>
<bDisplayWhenDisabled>1</bDisplayWhenDisabled>
<bHasCasted>1</bHasCasted>
<bIgnoreHasCasted>0</bIgnoreHasCasted>
<bResistable>0</bResistable>
<iRange>0</iRange>
<iResistModify>0</iResistModify>
<iDamage>0</iDamage>
<iDamageLimit>0</iDamageLimit>
<DamageType>NONE</DamageType>
<AddPromotionType1>NONE</AddPromotionType1>
<AddPromotionType2>NONE</AddPromotionType2>
<AddPromotionType3>NONE</AddPromotionType3>
<RemovePromotionType1>NONE</RemovePromotionType1>
<RemovePromotionType2>NONE</RemovePromotionType2>
<RemovePromotionType3>NONE</RemovePromotionType3>
<bBuffCasterOnly>0</bBuffCasterOnly>
<ConvertUnitType>NONE</ConvertUnitType>
<CreateBuildingType>NONE</CreateBuildingType>
<CreateFeatureType></CreateFeatureType>
<CreateImprovementType>NONE</CreateImprovementType>
<SpreadReligion>NONE</SpreadReligion>
<CreateUnitType>UNIT_BATTERING_RAM</CreateUnitType>
<iCreateUnitNum>1</iCreateUnitNum>
<bPermanentUnitCreate>1</bPermanentUnitCreate>
<CreateUnitPromotion>NONE</CreateUnitPromotion>
<bImmuneTeam>0</bImmuneTeam>
<bImmuneNeutral>0</bImmuneNeutral>
<bImmuneEnemy>0</bImmuneEnemy>
<bImmuneFlying>0</bImmuneFlying>
<bImmuneNotAlive>0</bImmuneNotAlive>
<bDispel>0</bDispel>
<bPush>0</bPush>
<bRemoveHasCasted>0</bRemoveHasCasted>
<bSacrificeCaster>0</bSacrificeCaster>
<iChangePopulation>0</iChangePopulation>
<iCost>0</iCost>
<iDelay>5</iDelay>
<iImmobileTurns>0</iImmobileTurns>
<iMiscastChance>0</iMiscastChance>
<PyMiscast></PyMiscast>
<PyResult>spellCreateBatteringRam(pCaster)</PyResult>
<PyRequirement>reqCreateBatteringRam(pCaster)</PyRequirement>
<Effect>EFFECT_SPELL1</Effect>
<Sound>AS3D_SPELL_TRAIN</Sound>
<HotKey></HotKey>
<bAltDown>0</bAltDown>
<bShiftDown>0</bShiftDown>
<bCtrlDown>0</bCtrlDown>
<bGraphicalOnly>0</bGraphicalOnly>
<iHotKeyPriority>0</iHotKeyPriority>
<Button>Art/Interface/Buttons/Units/Battering Ram.dds</Button>
</SpellInfo>

I've never actually used this. It seems pretty worthless to me, since it is really weak, requires Engineering, and is only available to the civ with the best siege units.


I don't see why the most basic of siege weapons should require engineering. It seems more appropriate to the Doviello to me. Dwarves should be able to do so much better.


I may remove it entirely in my version. Or, I might move it down to construction and let any Axeman of any civ cast the spell.

Most siege weapons in my version will be switched to attacking with Air Combat and using Bombing instead of bombarding.That means they'll have range (1 for most, 2 for Khazad UUs. Precision might boost the range by 1), and will be able to destroy improvements.

I may remove it entirely in my version. Or, I might move it down to construction and let any Axeman of any civ cast the spell.

That'd be nice. Have everyone build it. But please make it like at least :strength: 3. It'd be cool to if it could carry a unit too, like rams in the old "Age of Empires II" game. Ya know, jus put an archer or axemen (or any other unit but priests/missionaries and no mages) in there and let it increase the movement by 1.
That way it demonstrates some RL value. After all, anythin that pushed from the outside takes longer to move, but you use its wheels to move from the inside...it goes faster. Or somethin like that. If nothin else, it gives a lil flavour, even if it turns out to be useless.

...I'd be tempted to make it a movement 0 unit UNLESS there was a unit attached to it. After all, historically these things were SLOW.

It comes with a presumptive team of Dwarves detached from the unit that built it to push it. It should be available before their trebs, for sure. And maybe take longer to cast. Instead of being difficult to create, it should give the building unit the weak promotion as well, to account for the units manning the ram. Or another negative promotion to defense.

Maybe it could be a graphical + 30% bombard damage -20% strength promotion which the spell grants to the caster in 3 turns in forest? Oh and plus it would come with its own dispel - no, it would be equipment so you could drop it for attack (but not the same turn as bombarding - to give defensive weakness and avoid a micromanage advantage) or give it to other units.

P.S. Why no graphical for the great commander?

...I'd be tempted to make it a movement 0 unit UNLESS there was a unit attached to it. After all, historically these things were SLOW.

Well, here's the thing. 0 doesn't move it at all. And historically, serfs or conscripted slaves (if you were the Saracens or any other Islamic civ, you used slaves to push it). So, it's assumed that serfs or slaves (or citizens, dependin on your civic choice) will be unwillinly pushin it. But if a unit pushes it, they do it better and faster due to their increased discipline. After all, serfs, slaves, and citizens have no military discipline, for obvious reasons.

I actually think this unit makes a lot of sense - after all, given how technically adept the dwarves are, to me it makes sense that they are the only race capable of building a siege engine on the spot in the field. I have used it several times for a couple of reasons:

1. Sometimes you can send a group of Dwarven melee units on their own without worrying about having to drag along siege engines with you (this is specially the case if those units have mobility or the raider promotions) and then, right outside a city you want to take you build rams to get rid of City defenses, and then storm the place all the while losing less of your army.

2. Why spend the time building a Trebuchet for taking down City defenses when you might want to use them all to bombard the garrison, while using your battering rams to take care of the defenses.

I think that engineering requrement is not right. What skills do you need to have to cut down tree and use it to bash the doors/gate?

For my own uses I made battering ram buildable for all civs from the start, lowered the bombard damage to 10%, also moved the spell to doviello as I think it fits them better.
Ram can then be attached to any melee unit giving it bombarding ability (by a promotion). I also use warlord attaching mechanics which makes the unit look nice ;) (screen below)
Also, battering ram is combat 0 and can be captured.

The problem is, I have not seen AI attaching it to units, just building some (or even too much - AI have certain fondness for siege units). Also, the look can't be changed even after removing ram via spell.

On the other hand dwarves can use more sophisticated ways of improving siege engines. And I mean real engines, like trebuchet or cannon. Maybe grant them special mobility promotion? Or just, as both are unique to khazad, make them faster.

How do you use the great general mechanic?

Well, here's the thing. 0 doesn't move it at all. And historically, serfs or conscripted slaves (if you were the Saracens or any other Islamic civ, you used slaves to push it). So, it's assumed that serfs or slaves (or citizens, dependin on your civic choice) will be unwillinly pushin it. But if a unit pushes it, they do it better and faster due to their increased discipline. After all, serfs, slaves, and citizens have no military discipline, for obvious reasons.

Just seems a little odd if you have a movement 1 unit create this, then suddenly the few soldiers taken from the main unit to crew it can suddenly run everywhere whilst pushing something weighing several tons? :crazyeye:

Thats FF, isn't it?

How do you use the great general mechanic?

The unit acting as attacheable leader must have specified LeaderPromotion. In this case I made a new promotion called ram. So in unitinfos it has to have following line:

<LeaderPromotion>PROMOTION_RAM</LeaderPromotion>

the promotion has to have following set to 1

<bLeader>1</bLeader>

that is all, the unit can now be attached to another unit, both as a promotion and a graphics.

Edit: I tested it and using leader promotion makes battering rams to be created from combat experience ;) (as in warlord and bts great general).
Looks like using spell to add and remove battering ram form a unit is a better idea. No graphics then.

Thats FF, isn't it?

Well, if you are asking about my screenshot, then the answer is both yes and no.
This picture is from my personal modmod I am thinking if to release, maybe later this week.
I have added some stuff, BtS-like corporations for example. I also tried to add more flavour to civs so that is why there are different unit and city styles. Some of them come from FF and that is probably why you thought it is FF.
In fact there are scraps from different places. On the picture the Amurite city is besieged by Elohim champion (use byzantine heavy swordsman art)

I wonder, would it better to just give a "battering ram" promo and/or treat it as an item that gives the bombard ability to a unit, or increases it by X amount if it already has some?

I think that engineering requrement is not right. What skills do you need to have to cut down tree and use it to bash the doors/gate?

For my own uses I made battering ram buildable for all civs from the start, lowered the bombard damage to 10%, also moved the spell to doviello as I think it fits them better.
Ram can then be attached to any melee unit giving it bombarding ability (by a promotion). I also use warlord attaching mechanics which makes the unit look nice ;) (screen below)
Also, battering ram is combat 0 and can be captured.

The problem is, I have not seen AI attaching it to units, just building some (or even too much - AI have certain fondness for siege units). Also, the look can't be changed even after removing ram via spell.

On the other hand dwarves can use more sophisticated ways of improving siege engines. And I mean real engines, like trebuchet or cannon. Maybe grant them special mobility promotion? Or just, as both are unique to khazad, make them faster.


Yeah, I was planning to make basically the same changes to Rams as you did. It does make better sense for the Doviello to knock down trees near enemy cities and use them as impromptu weapons. I think they should probably require at least Crafting though.

Hmm...I never realized that Leader Promotion would change the graphics like that. If It would change back I might want to use that, but since it doesn't I probably won't. Does it stay when the unit upgrades too?

I'll probably still go with letting certain units (Dwarven and RoK UUs) carry siege units as Cargo much like hunters carry birds (1, DOMAIN_LAND, SPECIALUNIT_SIEGE-which also includes golems). That way the siege unit won't lose all its promotions when you attach and detach it from another unit, but other units can still carry it around. Of course, you'd have to unload the siege cargo before loading the units carry the siege engines into a ship.

(Do you think that is to much, seeing how RoK and Dwarven units can also get promotions that let them move through impassible terrain in my version. It seems like it might be hard to carry catapults on peaks. Maybe that promotion should also decrease cargo capacity?)



I was also thinking that Rams would be the only siege units to use Bombard (Fireballs and Treants still would). All the ranges siege engines will probably lose all their strength, maybe be capturable, and gain AirCombat and Bombing abilities. That way you can target units or cities at a distance, and instead of just lowering city defenses you have a chance to destroy buildings and improvements. I'm thinking that most siege units will have a range of 1, but the Khazad UUs will have a range of 2. I may also add a unitcombat_siege promotion that boosts range by 1. (I don't think any archer will ever have a range greater than 1 though.)

I wonder, would it better to just give a "battering ram" promo and/or treat it as an item that gives the bombard ability to a unit, or increases it by X amount if it already has some?

I am not sure if I understand correctly, but the problem is how to get any bombarding unit to the field. If we already have one there it is ok and no changes needed. And I do not think catapult or cannon would not benefit much from getting battering ram attached... It is only true for hill giants and treants and I do not see many of them doing siege.
It would be also harder to code - so my ram promotion just gives low (10%, no improvements possible) bombardment for melee units that do not have one. It would improve innate bombard abilities, but no melee unit have one.


Hmm...I never realized that Leader Promotion would change the graphics like that. If It would change back I might want to use that, but since it doesn't I probably won't. Does it stay when the unit upgrades too?

Well, as for the leader promo I did not realized that it would do what it did, too. I just wanted to see what if... I stoped using it, too. For two reasons - retaining graphics after split(i think even if unit is upgraded) and creating rams from combat xp. It was suprising to see "Battering Ram was born in Bannor city of Torrelial" :eek:

As for the battering rams, it might be a good idea to require some tech, but I am not sure. I just want some cheap early easily movable siege equipment. Now it is easier to capture big city with walls than early one with only culture bonus - you can use catapults or fireballs later and nothing at the start.

As for the other siege engines, I gave them all ranged attack - range 1 for catapults, cannons and trebuchets and range 2 for dwarven cannon (do not really fit the graphics...). AI uses this option quite well, but it was long ago I was far enough in the game to check.
I thought about making them capturable (I liked that much in Civ III and I think it is realistic). But I also want siege engines to be able to get promotions. So I left them some attack & defence, just lower than ranged attack. Currently I am thinking about giving them low speed free xp, but I do not know if it would not be overpowered.

As for the dwarfs carring the equipment, I do not think carring it over mountains is a big problem. It does not change much and you can always say: "only the trebuchet crew is going over, they manufacture a new one on the spot...". Harder with the cannons, but I still think it does not matter.

Carring more advanced siege machines by melee units is a good idea. I do not think it should only be limited for dwarves.
Most of the medieval siege engines were transported in inactive form and unpacked only for siege/big battle. It was especially true for trebuchets. The only thing I am not sure of is if AI would know how to use it.

Thats FF, isn't it?

No, normal FfH. Check the pedia for it.

Why not give everyone the battering ram spell, then give the Dwarves an upgraded version? Mabye add one turn to the wait, and add some power and movement?

As for the other siege engines, I gave them all ranged attack - range 1 for catapults, cannons and trebuchets and range 2 for dwarven cannon (do not really fit the graphics...). AI uses this option quite well, but it was long ago I was far enough in the game to check.
I thought about making them capturable (I liked that much in Civ III and I think it is realistic). But I also want siege engines to be able to get promotions. So I left them some attack & defence, just lower than ranged attack. Currently I am thinking about giving them low speed free xp, but I do not know if it would not be overpowered.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought that you could get xp and thus promotions from AirCombat. Aircraft in BtS can get promotions. I haven't tested much yet, but I believe that they still get xp this way. Is normal combat strength needed for xp? Also, I'm pretty sure that (unlike in Civ III) you can cam make units have attack, defense, promotions, etc, and still be capturable. The promotions don't carry over when captured, but that makes sense if it is a new crew on the old machinery.





As for the dwarfs carring the equipment, I do not think carring it over mountains is a big problem. It does not change much and you can always say: "only the trebuchet crew is going over, they manufacture a new one on the spot...". Harder with the cannons, but I still think it does not matter.

Well, maybe. I still think that being able to have Dwarven cannons attack from a Peak, where it is essentially invulnerable, is a little much. Having the promotion that lets them move impassible also reduce cargo capacity by 1 would be a very simple fix.


Carring more advanced siege machines by melee units is a good idea. I do not think it should only be limited for dwarves.
Most of the medieval siege engines were transported in inactive form and unpacked only for siege/big battle. It was especially true for trebuchets. The only thing I am not sure of is if AI would know how to use it.
All Melee units you say? Hmm...I'll think about it. It seems a little odd to me for mere warriors to carry them, but oh well. I suppose we are just talking about one siege engine per group of melee units though. If I wasn't also giving archers ranged attacks I wouldn't consider it, since melee was already the stronger branch, but it might be ok this way. What if I made all melee units have DOMAIN_LAND, SPECIALUNIT_SIEGE cargo, but 0 capacity? Then they could have to get a special promotion to carry the siege units. And maybe Dwarven itself could boost the capacity by 1? (Although that might not be a good idea as it would also mean that Dwarven hunters, Druids, etc, could carry extra birds, and because some birds in my version can attack.) (Also, it wasn't limited to just the Dwarven civs before, as other players could use Soldiers of Kilmorph, Paramanders, Stonewardens, and Runeskeepers.)

Why not give everyone the battering ram spell, then give the Dwarves an upgraded version? Mabye add one turn to the wait, and add some power and movement?

That's a great idea. Why doesn't Kael consider this?

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought that you could get xp and thus promotions from AirCombat. Aircraft in BtS can get promotions.

Unfortunatelly, I do not think so. I just tested it with siege and archers and ranged combat do not give any xp, even if it kills a unit (which I made possible for dwarven cannon). That is because I use ranged combat, the one used by starbases in final frontier. Air combat provides xp, but it is not exactly what I need

Also, I'm pretty sure that (unlike in Civ III) you can cam make units have attack, defense, promotions, etc, and still be capturable. The promotions don't carry over when captured, but that makes sense if it is a new crew on the old machinery.

You are RIGHT!!! Forgot about capturing animals and such. I made all siege engines capturable :)

Well, maybe. I still think that being able to have Dwarven cannons attack from a Peak, where it is essentially invulnerable, is a little much. Having the promotion that lets them move impassible also reduce cargo capacity by 1 would be a very simple fix.

Yeah, you are right. It should not allow to carry siege engines up there. "Can enter impassable terrain" is hard to balance anyway...

I did some tests on carring siege machines and decided I do not want it. Some reasons:

1. Siege engine can attack/bombard while loaded.
2. While loaded it can't be counter - bombarded
3. While equiped it is immune to flank attacks
4. Destruction of the carrier also auto-destructs the engine

This makes siege engines almost indestructable if mounted on a strong unit. Also, it is almost the same as adding a promotion to the melee unit.
I think some kind of spell castable by melee units that speeds siege engines would be better.

As for limiting it to dwarves - why? They have better siege equipment already. Mere warrior can pull as good if not better than dwarven champion ;)

Also, it wasn't limited to just the Dwarven civs before, as other players could use Soldiers of Kilmorph, Paramanders, Stonewardens, and Runeskeepers.

If they have RoK as state religion. I do not think RoK should be better at siege than i.e. Order.

Unfortunatelly, I do not think so. I just tested it with siege and archers and ranged combat do not give any xp, even if it kills a unit (which I made possible for dwarven cannon). That is because I use ranged combat, the one used by starbases in final frontier. Air combat provides xp, but it is not exactly what I need:(
That's disappointing. I may have to look into the combat mechanism and see if I can edit the SDK to allow these unit to gain xp.

I was also thinking I should try to allow different damage types in AirCombat just like in normal combat, and allowing promotions to boost it. This is probably beyond my coding skill though. Maybe I'll just keep pestering Vehem until he adds it to Fall Further and I can steal his work. ;)



You are RIGHT!!! Forgot about capturing animals and such. I made all siege engines capturable :)
I think that capturing animals actually uses a different mechanism, one that preserves the unit's promotions. I believe that the <Capture> tag makes it create a new version of the unit, without promotions.



Yeah, you are right. It should not allow to carry siege engines up there. "Can enter impassable terrain" is hard to balance anyway...

I did some tests on carring siege machines and decided I do not want it. Some reasons:

1. Siege engine can attack/bombard while loaded.
2. While loaded it can't be counter - bombarded
3. While equiped it is immune to flank attacks
4. Destruction of the carrier also auto-destructs the engine

This makes siege engines almost indestructable if mounted on a strong unit. Also, it is almost the same as adding a promotion to the melee unit.
I think some kind of spell castable by melee units that speeds siege engines would be better.

Yeah, I was aware of those issues. I hadn't really thought about flank attacks though, since I don't think that it is used in FfH (I'll probably add it though). I liked it before I realized I could give Siege units AirCombat/Bombing, but it might not be necessary now. I'll have to think about it. (It is still a little better than using s promotion though, since the siege units can keep their promotions.) (Hmm...may we assume that Marksmen can't attack siege units inside of a Melee carrier? That might not be good.)

You could make siege units start with an equipment promotion that when captured becomes the siege unit instead of making the unit itself be captured. This is probably more much trouble than it is worth, but I'm pretty sure the equipment would be dropped when the siege unit is destroyed along with its carrier, and thus let you capture it.





As for limiting it to dwarves - why? They have better siege equipment already. Mere warrior can pull as good if not better than dwarven champion ;)


If they have RoK as state religion. I do not think RoK should be better at siege than i.e. Order.

Yeah, you're probably right. I don't think it would have made RoK overpowered (I'm boosting every religion, in different ways), but it would probably not be good for the Illians and Grigori.

:(
That's disappointing. I may have to look into the combat mechanism and see if I can edit the SDK to allow these unit to gain xp.

I was also thinking I should try to allow different damage types in AirCombat just like in normal combat, and allowing promotions to boost it.

After some tests I gave siege engines an innate promotion that grants them a little of free xp (on the same level that channeling 1). It also provides an ability to use enemy roads. This way siege engines can be transported quicker and will stick to the roads - exactly as it should be.
I also lowered they strength by half, so they will need protection - thus the promotion is not overpowered. I kept the old strength for ranged attacks. The normal strength is for surviving some flanking attacks only. I gave flanking attacks to all mounted units.
As normal promotions, like combat and flanking, are of no much use for siege units any more, I think of adding some promotions that boost strength, increase ranged damage or improve range. I need to check what can be done.

I think that capturing animals actually uses a different mechanism, one that preserves the unit's promotions. I believe that the <Capture> tag makes it create a new version of the unit, without promotions.

True. And it fits better capturing equipment. One thing worth noting is that you can't capture a unit if it was destroyed by flanking attack.
As for the attacking units carried by another unit, it is impossible. Thay are safe as long as the unit lives.