[color=limegreen]making questions green[/color]
· Moving fortress sections (lifts, crushing traps, etc.)I cannot wait to see the insane things that people will build with this one.
Vein Auto-miningOoh, yes, as a dedicated coal-based industry fan, when I find some lignite or bituminous I'd love to be able to say "Just dig that out" rather than the constant dig-designation that you have to do at the moment.
# Extend adv mode starvation/dehydration times to appropriate number of days
Regarding the two of the top ten ESV items not specifically addressed on the new page, sped-up pathfinding and graphics support, the idea with the first is an upcoming date with the linux profiler now that we've got DF running over there to address the low-hanging fruit on the main grievance behind the suggestion (large, slow forts).This one line is the feature I'm most interested about. Significant increases in FPS over time mean community forts wouldn't need to be abandoned after a few years, and megaprojects would be much more fun to create. Hopefully improved pathfinding will provide these increases. Very exciting announcement.
I assume that the healing magic done by Travelling has been a stand-in for being able to hunt for food yourself, so it'll probably go away. (I can't imagine it's not intentional.)Quote# Extend adv mode starvation/dehydration times to appropriate number of days
Does this mean that travelling will no longer cure hunger, thirst and sleepiness? And in what sense appropriate, real world or fortress mode appropriate?
Does taking a look at restacking is still in the scope of the "Hauling Improvements" nano-arc ?Since hauling multiple separate items at once is in, perhaps stacks are going away entirely? To me, the entire "stack" concept seems like a bit of a hack to be able to treat multiple items as a single.
Stacks will still be important for cutting down FPS. Sure you could haul many items at once but the game still needs to check each item for degradation over time. I suppose there could be virtual stacks in the future where that's hidden behind the scenes but it's still a pain compared to just grouping everything together.Does taking a look at restacking is still in the scope of the "Hauling Improvements" nano-arc ?Since hauling multiple separate items at once is in, perhaps stacks are going away entirely? To me, the entire "stack" concept seems like a bit of a hack to be able to treat multiple items as a single.
Me neither. Finally I can build a transforming fortress.Quote from: New dev page· Moving fortress sections (lifts, crushing traps, etc.)I cannot wait to see the insane things that people will build with this one.
Ability to use grappling hooks/ladders/climbgrappling hooks caught me by surprise, and are also awesome.
Improved sieges : Ability to dig (optionally, default on)
Magmawiki has the old dev page archived HERE (http://df.magmawiki.com/index.php/Consolidated_Development:_Arcs,_core-items,_bloats,_Reqs_and_Powergoals) if anyone wants to see it.Ah, that's the old old dev pages. I was hoping for the previous dev page for comparison, but it seems that about everything is on the new ones as well. That said, I'm curious what the official status of reqs, bloats, and power goals is. Are they "gone" for good and only exist as guidelines now, or just did only their tracking in the version number stop? I mean, power goals seem to be too far off for the most part to be useful, after all.
Lands and beastiaryDo you envision the initial bestiary implementation to be adventurer mode only, or also a feature of legends/fortress mode? As more randomized objects come into play, a first look at what exists becomes more and more important, after all.
Randomized critters in other categories (vermin, roaming creatures, soil critters, plants, etc.), naming them
Being able to look at a list of all known creatures you've seen and where
Valuables and mansionsAre there any short-term plans to export sites and site structures into the raws?
...
Adventure sites
And I must know whether I can use a grappling-hook-loaded-crossbow in adventure mode.
What will be the purpose of the crushed rock?
Will i be able to define my guilds? Because i'd honestly like those to match up with my generalized dwarf labor plans, and not have infighting among, for instance, Crafters because they share different guilds and happened to get into a brawl.
Quote from: New dev pageMoving fortress sections (lifts, crushing traps, etc.)I cannot wait to see the insane things that people will build with this one.
Are you planning on making certain 'wilderness' areas a bit more defined? Currently there is hardly any difference between a hill and a forest. Having, for example, denser bushes that, maybe, obscure vision, or multi-tile trees would make the denser forests much more foresty.
I'm just hoping things can be implemented in smaller releases that can then receive a bit of polish, before the next couple of features are dumped on top. I don't think anyone want to experience another dev cycle similar to what led to 0.31.
With the digging part, does that involve digging up through the ground and popping up in the storage room? That's what i'm guessing. Also, is their a possibility that the digging could also be used to take out defensive walls?
By the way... minecarts sure sound fun but I can't imagine what would they be good for ::) It sounds that the shear amount of workforce required to make tracks and minecarts would be larger than having dwarves haul all the rocks from a vein individually. I guess minecarts would work for large quarries or situations where there's a huge concentration of ore in one place (which would require changing the way how veins spawn now - in almost regular distances).
Quote from: HummingbirdWill adventurers be able to dig as freely as miners can in Fort mode? If so, how much easier would that ability make cave exploration?Quote from: Osmosis JonesYou mention digging out soil tiles in adventure mode, but don't say anything about digging into rock. Is that a deliberate omission?
I'd like it to be configurable though - at the moment I like to dig out veins with a 1-tile buffer around them, because a) it creates nicer looking exhausted mines, and b) it means a slightly increased chance of finding something else exciting!
Does this mean that travelling will no longer cure hunger, thirst and sleepiness? And in what sense appropriate, real world or fortress mode appropriate?
Are there any plans to clean up and reorganize the current user interface?
Maybe this is a stupid question, but how do you see the stickied bugs in the bug tracker?
This one line is the feature I'm most interested about. Significant increases in FPS over time mean community forts wouldn't need to be abandoned after a few years, and megaprojects would be much more fun to create. Hopefully improved pathfinding will provide these increases. Very exciting announcement.
Does taking a look at restacking is still in the scope of the "Hauling Improvements" nano-arc ?
Quote from: HeavenfallWhat I am curious about is if the plan is to release a big update with adventure upgrades, or a smaller one before that with some of the bug fixes for fortress mode?Quote from: RubeAll that adventurer stuff looks amazing, but I have to wonder how long it'll be till we see all of that? Hopefully only a year or two, it'll certainly be worth it regardless.
I noticed "branding" says it will be dependent on tracking art objects in the wounds system. Does this mean tattooing or body painting could be in?
And I must know whether I can use a grappling-hook-loaded-crossbow in adventure mode.
I'm curious what the official status of reqs, bloats, and power goals is. Are they "gone" for good and only exist as guidelines now, or just did only their tracking in the version number stop? I mean, power goals seem to be too far off for the most part to be useful, after all.
Do you envision the initial bestiary implementation to be adventurer mode only, or also a feature of legends/fortress mode? As more randomized objects come into play, a first look at what exists becomes more and more important, after all.
Are there any short-term plans to export sites and site structures into the raws?
I noticed you mentioned rock crushers. What will be the purpose of the crushed rock?
Watch out Toady, Bethesda might start sending hitmen when they get wind of this.
# Stones should be able to roll (perhaps if they are started from or land on a ramp tile)
Waterproof axles through some mechanism
Quote from: New dev pageMoving fortress sections (lifts, crushing traps, etc.)I cannot wait to see the insane things that people will build with this one.
This is definitely one where you guys are going to provide me with more entertainment than I get from either playing with them or programming them, he he he.
Adventurer Role: Slayer of Night CreaturesWhat exactly is a Night Creature? At first, I believed it to be any Undead/Skeleton, but then you say:
Night creatures and the undeadwhich makes it seem like it isn't Undead. Also:
The slaves of night creatures could have extreme effects from proximity that also affect you if you make a business of hunting themWhich also confuses me on what they are, as it says "slaves of the night creatures", unless the first of the undead are considered the night creature while any who they convert to their cursed form are considered their slaves. So, are they a new creature, or:
[words]
I immediately thought of Vampires when he said night creatures, because they're the only creature I could think of that would work predominantly at night, keep slaves, and generally be individually powerful enough to warrant special attention. Also, they aren't in the game yet.
Vampires are interesting for Dwarf Fortress because they're so random in myth. Some can turn into various animals, some melt in daylight, some drink blood whereas others steal souls, random weaknesses to stuff like vegetables and water, etc. They're perfect fodder for random generation scripts.
I immediately thought of Vampires when he said night creatures, because they're the only creature I could think of that would work predominantly at night, keep slaves, and generally be individually powerful enough to warrant special attention. Also, they aren't in the game yet.
Vampires are interesting for Dwarf Fortress because they're so random in myth. Some can turn into various animals, some melt in daylight, some drink blood whereas others steal souls, random weaknesses to stuff like vegetables and water, etc. They're perfect fodder for random generation scripts.
Some also sparkle and attract millions of fangirls. I think this possibility should be included as well.
The first priority will probably just be dealing with walled-off hallways and stuff like that though -- things that are really easy to do that kill off entire sieges. I guess it's entirely possible that they wouldn't be able to find you if you hid behind 10 meter thick walls hidden off in random places, but then it should be possible for them to live in your upper levels for years while you work away tradeless on mushrooms down below (although there are major obstacles to that that make it non-practical for the dev page). They'd probably just leave after looting all your exposed items and slaughtering anybody left outside (including any entity pop infrastructure you've got out there). Although once they can get through a single wall, they can just dig ambitious tunnels for you at random I suppose. As long as walling yourself in has reasonable results, I'll be happy with however they handle it. Right now it's too much of an exploit (of course, the whole "digging invaders" is enough of a touchy subject that it's explictly stated as optional on the dev page, and how you handle exploits is up to you at that point).I would propose 2 systems to distinguish normal invaders from game ending HFS. It's realistic that if you hole up behind really really thick walls and never trade, then normal invaders don't have a way to realise there's dwarves hiding so they should leave you alone. At the same time, HFS shouldn't be stopped by walling it off no matter how thick the walls are.
anyone else notice the last item on the list was boats and moving FORTRESSES!!! Bloody want my fortress to be able to stand up and walk away now...I just know someone somewhere will design a fortress that can transform into a giant robot once some of these dev list items are implemented...
Quote from: ggeezzMaybe this is a stupid question, but how do you see the stickied bugs in the bug tracker?
When I click View Issues, the top two or more browser scroll pages are set apart by a line. There are many stickied issues.
Just read the new dev page. Oh god, yes! I really like Capturing people alive and interrogations. That part really interested me.
Just read the new dev page. Oh god, yes! I really like Capturing people alive and interrogations. That part really interested me.
That, plus the new tissue system that was implemented! >: D
On another note, I was a little disappointed with the new dev notes... Hopefully he starts at the bottom of the huge list he made. I love adventure mode for looking through old community forts, but I think improved sieges for fortress mode should be of slightly higher priority than enabling your adventurer mode guy to make a fucking quern.What!? It's like he didn't even read the list, or take time to comprehend it, because the very last thing on that list is:
Siege engine improvements depend on state of boats, lifts/moving fortress sections, since these should all use the same framework
As someone who really cares about the aesthetics of my forts, I really do have my concerns for digging invaders. I don't mind the challenge of it, but my enthusiasm for fort building will diminish if every fort is destined to look a mountain of swiss cheese within 10 game years.
Seeing evidence of a digging invasion or two is fine, that just adds to the story of the fort, but I don't want to completely lose control of how the fort looks. If digging invasions are needed, it might be good to wait until we can prevent such invasions by sending armies to meet such forces in the field or in the underworld. Either that or give us the ability to repair lost natural stone. The black fog of war that exists in unmined areas really contrasts well with forts. I would hate to lose that.
As someone who really cares about the aesthetics of my forts, I really do have my concerns for digging invaders. I don't mind the challenge of it, but my enthusiasm for fort building will diminish if every fort is destined to look a mountain of swiss cheese within 10 game years.
Seeing evidence of a digging invasion or two is fine, that just adds to the story of the fort, but I don't want to completely lose control of how the fort looks. If digging invasions are needed, it might be good to wait until we can prevent such invasions by sending armies to meet such forces in the field or in the underworld. Either that or give us the ability to repair lost natural stone. The black fog of war that exists in unmined areas really contrasts well with forts. I would hate to lose that.
Agreed - I will be happy if 'digging creatures' becomes an option in d_init rather than a like-it-or-not change, though.
[Sappers and swiss cheese, restoring natural stone]Being able to make a perfect, natural stone wall WITHOUT magma casting obsidian would be a glorious addition however unrealistic it may be. Even when you can have several mechanical solutions to stop sappers from undermining your efforts, being able to fix something important when they DO tunnel in would be wonderful... Hmm.
The list is quite impressive to me and I'm looking forward to how things develop. I do have a fun question based on another forum where I brought this up so hopfully you can answer this:I would think the answer is yes, since the idea of a rolling boulder trap was basically invented by the Indiana Jones movies.
Since we are talking about making stone be able to roll when come off of a ramp,could it be possible to say make a really long path ramp that the stone can roll down into a long hallway and then roll down that hallway crushing whatever is in it's way? Ala Indiana Jones style?
[Sappers and swiss cheese, restoring natural stone]Being able to make a perfect, natural stone wall WITHOUT magma casting obsidian would be a glorious addition however unrealistic it may be. Even when you can have several mechanical solutions to stop sappers from undermining your efforts, being able to fix something important when they DO tunnel in would be wonderful... Hmm.
Will enemies with picks and mining skill intentionally deface engravings (they dislike/hate) to try to depress/anger the dwarves?
Didn't the dev page say it will be a init option?Not explicitely, but since Toady stresses that digging invaders (and digging animals once implemented?) will be optional, it's pretty much implied to be an init option. Might become a world gen option, though, as well.
Ohh! A new thread! I can start following this again!Thinking of it, the wandering fortress ideas could lead to some ... fun.
WILL it be theoretically possible to make a for that actually inches it's entire bulk acro0s the map?
(Yeah, I know, such a mobile fortress would be restricted to on-map movement. :P )
It should be possible to optionally hide sections of the map during world generationSeems to me that the easiest way to do this would be to just hide all terrain not claimed as part of a nation. This would also be the most extreme possibility within logical reason, which I consider to be positive, as long as it's a worldgen option.
Various benefits to having a well developed guild or sect are under considerationSeems to me that the simplest and most logical benefits would be a small happiness bonus for members of a well-treated group, and, more importantly, an increase in migrants with skills appropriate to established guilds or worshipping a deity with an established sect.
What's the deal with "entity populations"? How much will this be abstracted?Entity populations are set to be very abstracted from a distance, but gain detail when the player interacts with them. As soon as you start talking with a member of an entity population, they will gain a name and a history, though not one connected with any important figures. Hopefully, the implementation of entity populations will allow worlds to be more populous, and historical figures to be more interesting, now that they don't have to fill mundane roles. Entity populations will also provide a source for the armies that siege your fortress, and will populate the outlying settlements around your it.
What's the deal with "entity populations"? How much will this be abstracted?
Fortress mode and anything that touches fortress mode (armies) are the main problems, because fortress mode can't accommodate large numbers and so will continue to make less and less sense. There won't ever be 1000+ dwarves wandering around your fort, at least with processors the way they are. So it'll be dealt with through various cheats and nonsense, such as your fortress only eventually containing elite/important/lucky people and only being attacked directly by the best squads of the larger enemy armies or at least by small numbers at a time. Outside the fortress, you can have larger armies and fight larger forces, which kind of ties in with the notion of a broad spectrum of settlements arising around your fort itself (so the fort becomes more keep-like in a way, though not to the point of providing shelter to everybody in surrounding areas, though you could use external walls on the mid-level map near your fort for that purpose). As long as you aren't zoomed in on it in fortress mode, it can be handled. Army battles can occur in either the mid/world-level maps with the full forces, or zoomed in for specific interesting aspects of the conflict, with the number of troops loaded locally being metered, in frozen world time. I think it can work, but your fortress will always be sort of an anomaly in time and space, in terms of how fast time passes (or how it stops passing suddenly) and how only a certain amount of critters can be stuffed in there. The alternative is sort of a small-scale tribal warfare, which isn't satisfying for a general fantasy setting and doesn't give the world much longevity, or abstraction in the fort itself with units representing larger numbers of units, which I think kills a lot of what I've been attempting to do with unit differentiation, but mileage will vary there.
Adventure mode can make more sense since you have only a local picture that passes time in a more reasonable way (ie walking across the local map doesn't take 3 days or whatever).
Yeah, the genesis of this conversation in the previous posts was part of the last interview I did, in which I talked quite a bit about how abstract populations might be used to convey a proper sense of scale for a typical fantasy world while at the same time maintaining much of the historical data and individuality of the people you meet, so it's not so much a processor issue, and these critters don't all get saved or stored individually, though obviously it comes up a little bit since there's stuff to be handled.
[...]
This is all the central problem with fort mode really. It's similar to the difficulty with retiring a fort and expecting it to be going on as you want it to continue on. Jumping back and forth between levels of abstraction is a hard problem when there are things like the state of fluids and so on to consider, and so without a solution present I've been leaning toward having one main active area, at least for any reasonable period of time, with sub-areas available for relatively simple acts like army fights.
There's a bloat somewhere about "deep sites" which relates to the question of fortress sprawl. I think at least having a main section that you are looking at in detail and other sections that you aren't looking at in detail (at worst, ever) is a tractable problem, where you could think of your fortress as the keep in the center of a giant capital, and you could have your dwarves off doing all sorts of projects all over while still maintaining a "realistic" sense of scope, without your dwarves being important enough in the workings of things so as not to become drowned in mediocrity. You'd still have complete access top to bottom in one map column, so bad things could still happen locally, which is good, and it could give you all sorts of reports and various control over non-visible sections, and they could be realized for you in either (a) adventure mode, (b) in a non-controllable fortress mode based on the adventure mode representation. This is easier since fluids don't come into play (since they can be controlled in general when you don't go all nuts with them). I don't mean to harp on fluids though -- there are all sorts of problems.
[...]
Regarding China, which I had been reading about for some months intermittently due to my ROTK/Water Margin read, from the Battle of Red Cliffs (~200 AD) to the battle at the end of the Song dynasty (~1300 AD), it looks like the larger armies in the area were always around 200,000 troops (which is why I used this figure in a previous post), but there were lots of battles in the intervening time, so it could have been even higher. That said, I'm not sure a large-sized DF map could be considered China-sized (especially in the sense of arable land, since we'd prefer a huge amount of biome diversity), though we don't actually have a scale, and abstracted populations would change the potential of it.
I think it's important to be able to have something like a riot in a city without necessarily having an important historical figure instigate the event, and in that way groups and whatever segments of populations it is keeping track of should be able to react based on entity ethics/history/whatever -- the main thing they'd be missing is the personality variables. At the same time, I think it's important to use historical figures when we've got them, because those kinds of legends are generally more compelling.
Imagine when we get citys in the size of a pocketworld. Including 3d-ness from mixed cultures ala Giant trees above and dungeon below. I can see loading and unloading of people as well as structures happen as a adventurer walks through a place.
Quote from: RCIXWill i be able to define my guilds? Because i'd honestly like those to match up with my generalized dwarf labor plans, and not have infighting among, for instance, Crafters because they share different guilds and happened to get into a brawl.
One of the ideas was to give dwarves some freedom to associate as they like and to make more use of their friends, families and grudges so there is some push and pull. Turning off infighting would be a possibility, although hopefully it won't need to come to that. I'm not quite sure what your situation is (things like lots of miner-craftsdwarf dwarves? or just different craft combinations?), but it'll be good to go into some specific examples and see what sorts of situations will arise. We're sure the guild/religion/etc subgroup mechanism will add a lot to the game, but we haven't charted the exact path yet, and we'll be proceeding cautiously when we get there. The idea certainly isn't to add a strictly annoying burden (like a new shell mandate), but to provide emerging challenges, more atmosphere and more things to do.er because they hate rocks and would prefer the powder either never exist or just gets dispersed as with the dust in a cave-in, but I'm not sure.
Ability to till tile (faster with tool)will other jobs in fortress mode requires or benefit from tools? like smithing require a hammer, carpenting require a saw, farming requiring...the farming thingie, etc?
farming requiring...the farming thingie, etc?
Does this entity population center thing mean that our fortresses will have suburbs? Because I am cool with that.The word is that you'll be able to have outlaying settlements to pull soldiers and resources from for your armies, and have your fortress serve as a central government and, well, fortress. It will allow bigger armies without dealing with FPS death.
yeah, thatPlows I could see. They're large enough and you'll need relatively few of them. Could probably fall into the siege engine system.
also this (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plough)
I think with digging invaders we should use the material system to keep things in check.
With soil and rocks having different hardness, you could require invaders to be armed with hard-enough tools to be able to actually dig through it. So, kobolds with copper tools might only be able to dig through soil, but bronze-armed goblins can take on softer stone (like sandstone). Humans with their iron picks can manage hard rock, like granite. Elves will have to stand there and and look pansy, unless they descend below the kobold level and dig away with wooden training picks :P Creatures will have similar abilities, based on the material hardness of their claws. Groundhogs could maybe manage soil, but you'd need a forgotten beast at least to tackle obsidian.
Constructions could either add or take away from the strength of a natural stone, I'm still undecided on that. Smoothing might also make a difference, potentially.
is super hardcore.
- Ability to offer quick deaths to mortally wounded people to get them to talk
I think with digging invaders we should use the material system to keep things in check.
With soil and rocks having different hardness, you could require invaders to be armed with hard-enough tools to be able to actually dig through it. So, kobolds with copper tools might only be able to dig through soil, but bronze-armed goblins can take on softer stone (like sandstone). Humans with their iron picks can manage hard rock, like granite. Elves will have to stand there and and look pansy, unless they descend below the kobold level and dig away with wooden training picks :P Creatures will have similar abilities, based on the material hardness of their claws. Groundhogs could maybe manage soil, but you'd need a forgotten beast at least to tackle obsidian.
Constructions could either add or take away from the strength of a natural stone, I'm still undecided on that. Smoothing might also make a difference, potentially.
Ability to perform decisive attacks on unsuspecting or heavily injured opponent (a cow being slaughtered, for instance)While that's designed for livestock, if it's handled right it should make finishing up fights less like tenderizing meat with a sword.
I think with digging invaders we should use the material system to keep things in check.
With soil and rocks having different hardness, you could require invaders to be armed with hard-enough tools to be able to actually dig through it. So, kobolds with copper tools might only be able to dig through soil, but bronze-armed goblins can take on softer stone (like sandstone). Humans with their iron picks can manage hard rock, like granite. Elves will have to stand there and and look pansy, unless they descend below the kobold level and dig away with wooden training picks :P Creatures will have similar abilities, based on the material hardness of their claws. Groundhogs could maybe manage soil, but you'd need a forgotten beast at least to tackle obsidian.
Constructions could either add or take away from the strength of a natural stone, I'm still undecided on that. Smoothing might also make a difference, potentially.
I dont think this makes much sense since our dwarves can dig through fun metal with copper picks
Also, this itemQuoteis super hardcore.
- Ability to offer quick deaths to mortally wounded people to get them to talk
Responding properly to personal fire issues
Imagine when we get citys in the size of a pocketworld. Including 3d-ness from mixed cultures ala Giant trees above and dungeon below. I can see loading and unloading of people as well as structures happen as a adventurer walks through a place.
I don't picture that happening. That would be extremely massive. I am not even sure Rome was that large.
It would certainly be a huge city.
Not because it's historical, but because if you simulate things like farming and economy, there's no other way.
Yeah, or there's the fact that most dwarves only eat six times a year.Not because it's historical, but because if you simulate things like farming and economy, there's no other way.
That's really dependant on how accurately the game simulates farming. With the current model a single skilled farmer can produce enough crops to feed a hundred, and his produce will never spoil if placed in a barrel. From there it doesn't matter how long it takes to deliver the food. It could take a year to deliver, but the unspoiled food from the previous year will be arriving in the meanwhile.
That model will change at some point, I guess, but I imagine it'll always be using a somewhat simplified and forgiving model because the game's focus isn't farming.
Dunno about the actual metric *size*, but ancient rome actually got up to about one million people. Historically, the only economy that could enable town population that large (apart from industrial revolution of course) was large tributes coming from outside and slave labor.Thanks for elaborating, I forgot about this history lesson ;) Then when the Roman Empire collapsed, Rome and most cities quickly depopulated, as the people were running to the countryside for food, leaving all the former great population centres eerily empty with only a handful of people remaining (most notably the nobility fled to their country villas), all the buildings unmaintained and slowly crumbling. IIRC, Rome remained heavily underpopulated up to the early modern age.
bronze-armed goblins can take on softer stone (like sandstone). Humans with their iron picks can manage hard rock, like granite.
you guys still don't get it? bronze is harder than iron.
bronze-armed goblins can take on softer stone (like sandstone). Humans with their iron picks can manage hard rock, like granite.
Yeah, steel is usually defined by a small amount of carbon in the mixture. No one uses pure iron, because it's extremely soft. Adding bits of glass called slag to the mixture creates a metal called wrought iron, which is stronger, has a noticeable grain to it, and is what people usually mean when they say "iron". However, bronze is still a stronger metal than wrought iron. The iron age came after the bronze age, because improvements in metallurgy made the production of iron and steel -- which is stronger than bronze -- more cost effective, and because of a rather sizable tin shortage which drove the price of bronze up to an unmanageable height.
civilization colapsing?
I'm thinking Archaeologist myself; going to ancient, half buried ruins, and excavating them, reading their engravings, and slaying the ancient horrors that slumber beneath them. Then taking the choicest trinkets back to a museum built on the outskirts of a friendly town, to display them for the rest of the world to see.after moding in fedora hats, ofcourse
I think I'd like to play AS a villian/night creature. You know, roaming from town to town, converting the population into horrific creatures at my command? Eventually I'd have a "Children Golem" division for extended psychological sieges.That could be doable, given these bits:
- Curses and exposure
- Can be cursed by night creatures when you put them down
- The slaves of night creatures could have extreme effects from proximity that also affect you if you make a business of hunting them
I'm thinking Archaeologist myself; going to ancient, half buried ruins, and excavating them, reading their engravings, and slaying the ancient horrors that slumber beneath them. Then taking the choicest trinkets back to a museum built on the outskirts of a friendly town, to display them for the rest of the world to see.after moding in fedora hats, ofcourse
I'm curious to see how mine carts will be implemented. I hope there will be some entertaining bugs with them, like atomsmashing whatever's pulling it whenever it moves or something.
Let's start guessing what bugs will show up with each new feature!
I think I'd like to play AS a villian/night creature. You know, roaming from town to town, converting the population into horrific creatures at my command? Eventually I'd have a "Children Golem" division for extended psychological sieges.That could be doable, given these bits:Quote from: Adventurer Role: Slayer of Night Creatures
- Curses and exposure
- Can be cursed by night creatures when you put them down
- The slaves of night creatures could have extreme effects from proximity that also affect you if you make a business of hunting them
So, what kind of roles would you guys like to play as an adventurer? Obviously, we'll play all of them as they get implemented, but what features are you looking forward to most? I'm quite excited about the stuff under "Villians" and "Adventurer Role: Treasure Hunter". Actual challenges are going to be a blast.Adventurer Roles: Hero sounds delightfully Homeric. That, plus the some of the stuff from Adventurer Skills, will allow creation of a fortress stocked with brave lackeys, and wars and other such endeavors wherein we lead an army as the greatest hero-king to ever walk the earth.
I'm liking the sound of most of it, but there are a few things that look bad. For one, I've never been a big fan of having guilds, it seems like they take some of the control away from the player. And even MORE demands to put up with? I'm not fond of digging enemies either, but thankfully it will be optional.A little bit of editing the raws and BAM!
A little bit of editing the raws and BAM!Assuming that guilds enter the raws, that is. The dev page doesn't exactly say whether we should except new things in the raws.
They are gone... :P
I'm liking the sound of most of it, but there are a few things that look bad. For one, I've never been a big fan of having guilds, it seems like they take some of the control away from the player. And even MORE demands to put up with? I'm not fond of digging enemies either, but thankfully it will be optional.
Regarding the two of the top ten ESV items not specifically addressed on the new page, sped-up pathfinding and graphics support, the idea with the first is an upcoming date with the linux profiler now that we've got DF running over there to address the low-hanging fruit on the main grievance behind the suggestion (large, slow forts).This one line is the feature I'm most interested about. Significant increases in FPS over time mean community forts wouldn't need to be abandoned after a few years, and megaprojects would be much more fun to create. Hopefully improved pathfinding will provide these increases. Very exciting announcement.
This is the feature I understand the least- I'm not a programmer at all. How will Linux help pathfinding to be better? Does it apply to other platforms as well?
The profiler is most likely a very competent programmer who knows how good pathing has to work. That (s)he does help with the Linux version seems to me just like a additional plus.
G-flex i know that difference very well. The term "Date" toady uses just indicates (to me) that he could mean a Person instead of a profiling program. The word "profiler" is a bit Ambiguous (again to me) since it could mean a basic profiling software or a person that is a specialist for optimisation.
Toady, what degree of finesse are you planning on giving orders to followers? I.e. would it be possible to order a group of followers to dig *this* location or collect fruit from *that* specific tree? Also, any plans on being able to force loyalty beyond acting as a guide? Oooh, and can we get other people to enforce said loyalty for us?
I want to be able to order a slave gang to excavate those ruins, while I lounge about with a platter of fresh, slave-picked, strawberries, and if anyone thinks about shirking off or running away, having my well paid slave drivers chase them down.
07/03/2010: The pristine dev pages were bugging me, so I did sharpening stones, the hunger/thirst extension, butchery, and a prepared elf brain in my backpack so that I could color a few of them the "in next release" color. You can make a sharpened version of any stone right now -- we'll restrict the candidate minerals a bit once surface rocks are a little less homogenous in most places. During the course of adding basic knapping, I put in support for custom (buildingless) adventure mode "reactions", so some modding should be possible there for people that want to add their own production chains. The syntax for reagents/products is the same as dwarf mode, with the same capabilities and restrictions. Now I'll be back to combat/archery bugs for a bit, then we'll do a release.
It's light blue. Kinda reminds me of microline.
On the night creatures topic...what are the plans for infectious lycanthropy/vampirism/etc?
I don't think it should be like a zombie-outbreak scenario, but having some way of catching monstrosity could be a lot of fun in both modes. I'm especially thinking of getting a werewolf curse in adventure mode and trying to keep it secret from the townsfolk while hunting for a cure. Or just eating everybody and attracting the attention of monster hunters. :P
# PowerGoal60, HUNGRY LIKE THE WOLF, (Future): You put on a talisman, turn into a werewolf, and your buddy screams, "take it off!", but you can't understand him with your beast mind and soon fill with rage and kill him.
# PowerGoal78, WEREWOLF HUNTER, (Future): Dolnar the hunter teaches you how to track the werewolf by its sign and by its call. She recommends a special breed of hunting dog, known for its ability to track down and contest the elusive beasts.
I thinking on that problem from now and then but i didnt find a good solution yet since you have to transfer wounds etc. I mean its fairly easy to turn one humanoid into a another but a dragon into a Human and back is rather tricky - heck even turning 2 part legs into 3 part legs (Human <-> lycantroph) has some tricky-ness . Like how do you communicate the damage on the wings onto the Human?You could do a lot with some simple serial identifiers. A wound on one part would transfer to the part on the new form with the same identifier. If no identifier match is found, either discard the wounds (no equivalent location) or transfer some degree of injury [1] to the next part up the chain till you find a match.
You could do a lot with some simple serial identifiers. A wound on one part would transfer to the part on the new form with the same identifier. If no identifier match is found, either discard the wounds (no equivalent location) or transfer some degree of injury [1] to the next part up the chain till you find a match.
# Ability to set fires and select supplies to haul back when sacking a site
I should be able to make a Full Metal Alchemist mod with those changes. Add buildingless reactions that consume one "alchemy circle"(made from another reaction with a piece of chalk, which can be bought en mass) and create stone/weapons/etc. Too bad there's no way to make it produce things made from the material of the floor...Possibly creating reactions using nearby rocks, if possible right now.
I'm not sure what kickstarted Toady back into a regular schedule, but I am extremely excited and hopeful to see new features and bug fixes happening on a very regular basis. Feels like the old Toady again.
Regardless of your opinion on Toady, his business model, his public life, his private life, his cat or even his cat's business model...he's slowing down, and it's been to the detriment of the game and its players.
~2 weeks separated 40a from 40d, with 40b (coming out 3 days later) having more bugs fixed than 31.02 and 31.03 combined.
~3 weeks separated 39a from 39f, with 39a being the infamous "sleep forever" bugged released. In that time he (obviously) released 39b, c, d, e, and f, all of which not only contained bug fixes, but actually added even more content to the game. The site finder, being able to increase grid size, and a huge list of bugs. All fixed in 3 weeks.
It's been ~6 weeks since 31 was released. In that time we've had 2 releases whose crowning accomplishment has been the fixing of half a dozen crashes.
Many of those are duplicates, though, or extremely minor issues.
[...]QuoteRegardless of your opinion on Toady, his business model, his public life, his private life, his cat or even his cat's business model...he's slowing down, and it's been to the detriment of the game and its players.
~2 weeks separated 40a from 40d, with 40b (coming out 3 days later) having more bugs fixed than 31.02 and 31.03 combined.
~3 weeks separated 39a from 39f, with 39a being the infamous "sleep forever" bugged released. In that time he (obviously) released 39b, c, d, e, and f, all of which not only contained bug fixes, but actually added even more content to the game. The site finder, being able to increase grid size, and a huge list of bugs. All fixed in 3 weeks.
It's been ~6 weeks since 31 was released. In that time we've had 2 releases whose crowning accomplishment has been the fixing of half a dozen crashes.
This release single handedly killed any community it once had among many gaming forums I frequent. Poor Toady has been attacked pretty much non-stop as people bitch about his programming and jump ship to other games like Minecraft and Goblin Camp. No one is actually playing the game anymore.
Ability to set fires and select supplies to haul back when sacking a siteWill this include creatures as well? I really want to rescue my kidnapped children and enslave any goblins not fortunate enough to die in battle.
I should be able to make a Full Metal Alchemist mod with those changes. Add buildingless reactions that consume one "alchemy circle"(made from another reaction with a piece of chalk, which can be bought en mass) and create stone/weapons/etc. Too bad there's no way to make it produce things made from the material of the floor...Possibly creating reactions using nearby rocks, if possible right now.
Will the adventurer reactions be able to include reagents not normally seen in fortress mode, such as those random pebbles and loam?
I saw your post about the "pendulum" on SA, (http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3293395&userid=0&perpage=40&pagenumber=101#post379177546) and honestly I think that's more projection (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_projection) than observation. You're jumping at devlog shadows (no offense).
Seems like you're trying to reason my arguments away with some rather silly conclusions - I mean honestly, projection? I'm glad you didn't take anything past General Psychology, else I'd really be in trouble! I can assure you I'm not nearly as invested in this game as to have to rationalize anything I feel about it.
I hate to use what clearly feels like a "GameFAQs" argument, but it's fact that Toady has been slower than ever in fixing this release. Here we are, 3 months later, and I can make a very long list of problems that prevent me from playing the game. Compare that to how quickly he was able to fix up prior releases, especially in the last 3 years, and I'm sure you'll understand what I mean.
Anyways, all I'm saying is that I'm excited that the game seemingly will be playable soon.
I hate to use what clearly feels like a "GameFAQs" argument, but it's fact that Toady has been slower than ever in fixing this release. Here we are, 3 months later, and I can make a very long list of problems that prevent me from playing the game. Compare that to how quickly he was able to fix up prior releases, especially in the last 3 years, and I'm sure you'll understand what I mean.
It was an 18-month release cycle that revamped many of the game's fundamental systems. Of course it's taking longer than ever to fix all the problems. That doesn't mean he's working more slowly.Anyways, all I'm saying is that I'm excited that the game seemingly will be playable soon.
I can agree with that.
[..Offtopic ranting..]
Maybe you could take your offtopic thoughts somewhere where else. Getting a new post notification is much sadder when I find it is your material.
With the faster release cycle, is it possible to notify us if we can re-use our init files?
What will happen in a world where one man rises up to realize he can enjoy Dwarf Fortress and Goblin Camp simultaneously for different, or even similar reasons.
Can love blossom on the battlefield?
EDIT: Hopefully I'll be able to mod in Tactical Espionage Action
Basic Adventure Mode SkillsThis would be a really novel feature in an adventure game, I'm looking forward to it.
- Hunting/tracking animals
- Everybody leaving trails of information that can be tracked with the appropriate skill
They're not exactly livestock, but I'd love to raise dragons or giant eagles from their eggs :) . I suppose raiding the nest and facing the angry female would be a nice challenge. Or just buy the eggs from the elves or some smugglers.
- Raising livestock
- Eggs, chickens and associated objects
Adventurer Role: HeroAll the combat stuff is good, but this is excellent, especially the fact it can happen to you. I can imagine a small gnome jumping around on your shoulders and head and stabbing you all over with a tiny dagger while you flail your arms around helplessly.
- Combat flow
- Ability to jump up on and ride opponents if they are large enough (can happen to you too of course)
Adventurer Role: ThiefThis is the thieving/crime system I've always dreamed of, I don't know of any game that even came close. Pushing this just a step further, setting up evidence so that someone else gets accused in your place (dropping the bloody dagger in his garbage, money under his bed, or whatever), then fearing as the legendary investigator tracks one by one the clues that lead to you, would just be an amazing experience.
- Bounties and being hunted
- No automatic recognition that you have stolen an item
- People should notice when items are missing and raise an alert
- Strangers found around town when crime is suspected should be stopped and searched
- Your identity/appearance should be remembered for a time if you are seen in an area
- If your identity/appearance is associated to an alert over a crime, somebody responsible in the entity should put a bounty on you if appropriate for the entity
- You should leave tracking information and it should keep track of the last many people you have talked to
- Entity warriors and other adventurers should following your tracking information
Having to observe and copy people's behavior so the disguise works would be interesting. For instance, if you infiltrate a temple but don't notice that people never walk on the engraved sacred floor in front of a particular statue, and walk there while being seen, you should immediately look suspicious.
- Concealing your identity
- Being able to assume a different name
- Changing your clothes should affect the appearance tracking
- Covering your face/hair with hoods, masks, etc. should affect appearance tracking
- Skills for changing voice and mannerisms convincingly
- If you screw up, you can be regarded as a suspicious stranger, which is worse than being a regular stranger
Any plans in the close future for randomly granting rare special effects to some artifacts ? Since the eventual magic framework is not even in sight, it would be nice to have some effects that tie to the current game mechanics : attracting undead, spawning a demon, horrifying the elves for some reason or scaring some types of enemies, and so on.
- Artifacts
Adventurer Role: ExplorerWill you keep improving the underground in the short term, and add incentives to dig down and face the dangers to find useful stuff? I'd love if you could bring back cave rivers, and get them to repopulate (and have creatures not get stuck or suicide in waterfalls), together with surface rivers. Some rivers could disappear underground and resurface elsewhere, as happens in real life.
- Lands and beastiary
- More overland map features and local variations
And associate them with artifacts from time to time (i.e. The artifact is a mobile influence sphere) for amusing effects ;) .
- Scrap good/evil lands for lands with more variety
Hauling ImprovementsBeing able to make slopes of various grades would be interesting, both to build rails on them (so that in one direction, the cart doesn't need to be pulled), and to get objects or creatures to slide down them at various speeds depending on the grade and the amount of soap you put on it. A trap that sends goblins on a slippery spiral all the way down to the magma would definitely be fun, but the same mechanism would make for a nice garbage dump, etc.
- Minecarts
- Wooden, stone-carved and metal tracks
- Can be filled like stockpiles and moved between destinations
Workshop Material Use and Specific Object ConstructionOn this topic, it would be nice if the current lists for object/material selection allowed for sorting by quality and remembered those settings, so we can easily build 20 beds without wasting the masterwork ones on peasants. Filtering by typing as on the job manager screen would also be welcome...
- Ability to order the construction of a specific item or decoration of item in complete detail
Improved MechanicsLooking forward to this.
- Better traps
Job PrioritiesThe day this is implemented is gonna be a great day. This should also extend to designations, maybe with a similar interface as that for delimiting trafic zones : i.e. « this zone should be mined out asap !!! ».
- Rework dwarf AI to support job priorities
- Rework job assignment process to support priorities set on dwarves or for specific important jobs
MilitaryVery much looking forward to all this. If your fortress is famous, the invaders might be well informed by travelers' tales of the fortress' general layout. Another way for a fortress to fall (very common in history) would be a traitor inside : either in disguise (nice tie-in with the thieving theme), or a beggar that you welcomed at the fortress, or a dwarf that cooperate with the enemy because of money, hate/misery/madness, ideology, or because they hold a loved one hostage. The traitor could do anything from giving info about the fortress layout and location of artifacts and secret documents, opening the door(s), pulling various levers, starting a fight for dubious pretexts to start a tantrum spiral, poisoning the water supply, digging at the wrong place, and so forth and so on.
- Improved sieges
- Coming up with a plan to overcome pathing obstacles to reach fortress innards
- Ability to dig (optionally, default on)
- Ability to build bridges/ramps
- Ability to use grappling hooks/ladders/climb
- Learning from mistakes if first attempted assault plan fails badly
- For instance, if many siegers are killed, caged, etc. in a given hallway, they shouldn't generally go that way again, even if that means building/climbing/digging
The new dev page is indeed an awesome read. Here's my spontaneous and rather long review of it (rather of some parts of it), with the suggestions that come to mind.Don't green things that aren't questions. That just causes a hitch in the system for Toady.
[omitted due to fuckhuge post]
[MOLAR_MASS:64000]
[IMPACT_YIELD:1080000]
[IMPACT_FRACTURE:1080000]
[IMPACT_ELASTICITY:600]
[COMPRESSIVE_YIELD:1080000]
[COMPRESSIVE_FRACTURE:1080000]
[COMPRESSIVE_ELASTICITY:600]
[TENSILE_YIELD:200000]
[TENSILE_FRACTURE:550000]
[TENSILE_ELASTICITY:124] 110
[TORSION_YIELD:200000]
[TORSION_FRACTURE:550000]
[TORSION_ELASTICITY:200]
[SHEAR_YIELD:200000]
[SHEAR_FRACTURE:550000]
[SHEAR_ELASTICITY:200]
[BENDING_YIELD:200000]
[BENDING_FRACTURE:550000]
[BENDING_ELASTICITY:124]
[MAX_EDGE:10000]
people have been researching that over in the modding subforum so ask for a summary there if the wiki doesn't already have it.
2) More generally, I'm seeing a worrying increase in the sort of complexity that, instead of making the game cooler and more fun, makes it more confusing and unfriendly. Item properties are a particular beef of mine. I have no clue how to do anything with the following numbers, understand what they affect in game, or determine what values will accomplish which result.
Okay this is pretty non-important, but I'm curious...
Toady, re: the development page, inferring from one of your blog entries, it seems light blue is the "to be in the next update" color. Will there be other colors to tell us what you're working on, and possibly a key of some sort to say what the colors mean? You know, something that looks somewhat similar to the old dev page...
I would definitely prefer a darker color for finished.
It's called "limited time availability". Researchers would never get any new results out if they didn't refer to each others published results so they don't have to do that work themselves. Having said that, I see far too many people who don't have a basic experimentalist's mindset asking simple questions they could have found out within the time it took to ask the question but materials parameter plotting is a long experiment.people have been researching that over in the modding subforum so ask for a summary there if the wiki doesn't already have it.
Or change the values yourself, plot a graph of combat effectiveness vs. value based on weapon type / armor type etc., and publish the results yourself!
Really, with the Arena, there is no excuse. ;)
I would definitely prefer a darker color for finished.
I meant more in what the colors meant.
but nowhere on the dev page does it actually say light blue denotes stuff that will be in the next release...
The pristine dev pages were bugging me, so I did sharpening stones, the hunger/thirst extension, butchery, and a prepared elf brain in my backpack so that I could color a few of them the "in next release" color.
This can be done with the bugs/issues tracker.Okay this is pretty non-important, but I'm curious...
Toady, re: the development page, inferring from one of your blog entries, it seems light blue is the "to be in the next update" color. Will there be other colors to tell us what you're working on, and possibly a key of some sort to say what the colors mean? You know, something that looks somewhat similar to the old dev page...
In last development thread (for development of 31.x) it was something like this:
-Doing
-Doing
And between those two are several shades of blue, deepening as thing gets completed.
-Done
-Maybe not doing in this release
-Definately not doing in this release
I read all of the posts in this thread, but if you want a reply to a specific point, then I guess that's what should be green. I worked through more than half of the new questions this morning, and I just went with one of your actual question mark questions, but if you've got a few things you want me to focus on, you can highlight those. It'll be difficult to get to everything. I should be able to post my next giant reply tomorrow or the next day, depending on how everything else is going.
There are a lot of ideas in the new list about adventurers doing things, but very few about them getting compensated for their efforts, or requiring money in any way. Can we expect this to come into play as the bounty system is implemented? Will the typical heroic option of turning down a reward for a reputation bonus be available?
Y'know, with the the features of the "thief" adventurer role, the petty warlords presented under the "villians", and the (presumably poor) farming settlements under these warlords, a Robin-Hood type adventurer sounds quite doable. Are there any plans for giving money to impoverished peasants?
Are there plans to get constructed (wooden, Bituminous coal, Platinum) balls for rolling traps?
Though I do have one question. In an adventurer made structure (or site or whathaveyou) will items inside still be scattered around to the hills? Or will that be removed for adventure made sites? Removed entirely? Removed only in locations where it doesn't make sense?(Fully sealed underground rooms, etc)
Anyways, as for the quickly passing time thing, would it be possible to set the number of hours (between 1 and 12 sounds reasonable) you want to have pass by rather than the always 8 hours for sleep? Until something interrupts you anyway.
(waterproof axles)
Could you explain this? Do you mean a way where you could have a rubber gasket or something around an axle someplace or at the attachment point to power compartmentalized mechanisms? Or maybe have a mechanism which is compartmentalized, but has am extension through a waterproof barrier which the axle is attatched to? Those ideas may be beyond the era that you want DF to be in, but hey. I certainly wouldn't doubt Dwarven ingenuity and if they can create a water based computer, then I'm sure they can create waterproof axles/mechanisms.
Quote from: OrgWhat exactly is a Night Creature?Quote from: DeKaFuwhat are the plans for infectious lycanthropy/vampirism/etc?
I don't think it should be like a zombie-outbreak scenario, but having some way of catching monstrosity could be a lot of fun in both modes. I'm especially thinking of getting a werewolf curse in adventure mode and trying to keep it secret from the townsfolk while hunting for a cure. Or just eating everybody and attracting the attention of monster hunters.
Black Annis, also known as Black Agnes, is a bogeyman figure in English folklore. She is imagined as a blue-faced crone or witch with iron claws and a taste for human (especially child) flesh. She is said to haunt the countryside of Leicestershire, living in a cave in the Dane Hills, with an oak tree at its entrance.
She supposedly goes out onto the glens at night looking for unsuspecting children and lambs to eat, then tanning their skins by hanging them on a tree, before wearing them around her waist. She would reach inside houses to snatch people. Legend has it that she used her iron claws to dig into the side of a sandstone cliff, making herself a home there which is known as Black Annis's Bower. The legend led to parents warning their children that Black Annis would catch them if they did not behave.
When stone fall traps are going to actually be stones falling from a level above, will catapults at the same time also be changed to they actually fire stones in arches and can hit multiple Z-levels? Also on the topic of siege weapons, are there plans for aimed/diagonal shots?
Will enemies with picks and mining skill intentionally deface engravings (they dislike/hate) to try to depress/anger the dwarves?
Since we are talking about making stone be able to roll when come off of a ramp,could it be possible to say make a really long path ramp that the stone can roll down into a long hallway and then roll down that hallway crushing whatever is in it's way? Ala Indiana Jones style?
Quote from: ArmokWILL it be theoretically possible to make a for that actually inches it's entire bulk acro0s the map?Quote from: chaturgaNear the end of the log, you make a reference to "Moving Fortress Sections" do you have any brief ideas what this will entail for a player and to what extent they will be able to use it? i.e will we be able to have multi-level lifts and other such things available to aid with hauling large amounts of goods?Quote from: John KeelWill moving fortress parts require anchors? (Essentially, will walking fortresses be possible, or will they require long piston chains and a single support to work?)Quote from: Urist McOverlordOn the subject of moving fortress parts:
Will we be able to put workshops/stockpiles/etc. on them?
Will this effect how constructions are currently supported and what happens to them?
Example: can I link bridges together to form a path that extends slowly in the shape of a spiral towards the inner sanctum.
Can we control the time it takes to do these?
What kinds of transformations will be possible? Piston-dropping platforms? Winched systems? Gear-rotations?
Will there be new methods to get power? Or will we still be limited to the previous?
Can power be acquired by moving constructions?
Example: Can I create a dwarf-powered generator powered by my main hallways rocking back and forth as dwarves walk through it?Quote from: DakkOn moving fortress parts, would things like walls like the ones in indiana movies be possible? Such as rotating and moving walls that you can build, select and link to some mechanism and asign a function to them, as to create crushing wall traps, rotating secret doors, and whatnot, or the moving parts will all be predefined like the contructions on the uild mode?
What's the deal with "entity populations"? How much will this be abstracted?
Will the Trade Menu, in Adventurer mode, be fixed in the not too distant future? At least to the extent that you no longer need to do guess work on the prices of objects? (or a lot of calculations if you happen to have the price list on hand).
When we do butchering and stuff, will it still not require a tool, like in fortress mode? Or will we need a knife to butcher prey?
Can we get the ability to fill in/build a natural un-mined wall if we're going to have invaders digging up our fortress? I would not want half my fort blinking as a construction everytime I'm in the designation menu because of invaders. It's about the only way I can see giving them the ability to dig wiout annoying us too much.
What about using medical skills in adventure mode?
Will plant-gathering from wild shrubs go in fairly early? I can't find it specifically mentioned on the list, but it seems like something that's fairly simple, both survival-wise and programming-wise.
Quote from: Askot Bokbondelerwill other jobs in fortress mode requires or benefit from tools? like smithing require a hammer, carpenting require a saw, farming requiring...the farming thingie, etc?I think, if I remember correctly.
That Fortress mode will still be extrapolated when it comes to tools, while Adventurer mode will still require them.
I notice that form the Dev pages, that Squad Formations weren't listed. Has that been pushed backed even further?
Yay for soil to being more interesting. So, what about more stuff like this? Fossils, burried bones, very rare occurences like very old coin, tool, armor piece or weapon?
Toady, I'd be very interested to hear your musings on fighting skill progression in adventure mode.
Specifically your ideas on balancing early game and end game challenge with tangible character progression and any thoughts regarding the current methods of training skills. Will any of it be involved more than coincidentally in your upcoming work?
How much will personality and/or personal capability play into a historical figure's desire to obtain or keep power, whether legitimately or as a Villain-type character? Might other factors come into play as well? Currently, even a powerful creature with maximum ambition will not necessarily obtain entity positions if they are open, possibly even taking up farming. I guess this might tie into leaders abdicating without fail if a POWER rolls into town and claims divinity.
Toady, what degree of finesse are you planning on giving orders to followers? I.e. would it be possible to order a group of followers to dig *this* location or collect fruit from *that* specific tree? Also, any plans on being able to force loyalty beyond acting as a guide? Oooh, and can we get other people to enforce said loyalty for us?
I want to be able to order a slave gang to excavate those ruins, while I lounge about with a platter of fresh, slave-picked, strawberries, and if anyone thinks about shirking off or running away, having my well paid slave drivers chase them down.
I know sound/music is a low priority, but is there any chance for new music to be added to the game in the near future? I mean, I absolutely love THE dwarf fortress music, but I can only listen to it for so long. In my opinion, I believe music adds alot to the atmosphere of games. Everybody knows the great feelings of nostalgia when they hear video game music of days past.
(looting sites)Quote from: DwarfuWill this include slaves or prisoners to ransom?
entity_default
[ETHIC:SLAVERY:PUNISH_CAPITAL]
How will ethics be further fleshed out to cover these situations?Quote from: rex mortisWill this include creatures as well? I really want to rescue my kidnapped children and enslave any goblins not fortunate enough to die in battle.
Will the adventurer reactions be able to include reagents not normally seen in fortress mode, such as those random pebbles and loam?
Pushing this just a step further, setting up evidence so that someone else gets accused in your place (dropping the bloody dagger in his garbage, money under his bed, or whatever), then fearing as the legendary investigator tracks one by one the clues that lead to you, would just be an amazing experience.
Having to observe and copy people's behavior so the disguise works would be interesting.
Will you keep improving the underground in the short term, and add incentives to dig down and face the dangers to find useful stuff? I'd love if you could bring back cave rivers
Another way for a fortress to fall (very common in history) would be a traitor inside
Along with the in-game encyclopedia for new creatures, would it be possible (and useful vs above comments) to procedurally generate descriptions of what the various metals are good at?
Toady, re: the development page, inferring from one of your blog entries, it seems light blue is the "to be in the next update" color. Will there be other colors to tell us what you're working on, and possibly a key of some sort to say what the colors mean? You know, something that looks somewhat similar to the old dev page...
Hey, Toady, will adventurers ever be able to use workshops, or will we be restricted to the 'buildingless' reactions?
Quote from: Osmosis JonesToady, what degree of finesse are you planning on giving orders to followers? I.e. would it be possible to order a group of followers to dig *this* location or collect fruit from *that* specific tree? Also, any plans on being able to force loyalty beyond acting as a guide? Oooh, and can we get other people to enforce said loyalty for us?
I want to be able to order a slave gang to excavate those ruins, while I lounge about with a platter of fresh, slave-picked, strawberries, and if anyone thinks about shirking off or running away, having my well paid slave drivers chase them down.
I wanted to stay away from getting into having the adv mode stuff be just like dwarf mode, and ease more slowly into the group/job abilities there, to keep things varied for myself as much as anything. I don't understand the forcing loyalty part -- for the people you've interrogated? Ideally, though, you'd be able to give more and more orders, so that they'd be able to guard or work or build up your place for you, even if they end up being kind of dumb about it. It would be cool to have one of your followers be able to run their own villain-style network somewhere, so that you can be a kind of criminal overlord. Once the villains are in and working, that should actually be well within range.
You could do a lot with some simple serial identifiers. A wound on one part would transfer to the part on the new form with the same identifier. If no identifier match is found, either discard the wounds (no equivalent location) or transfer some degree of injury [1] to the next part up the chain till you find a match.
One problem here: What if it's ambiguous? For instance, a creature with two wings transforming into a creature with four arms. I suppose you could spread the wound over each equivalent arm, or... something.
That sounds like it could be balanced by a "crime rate" variable for the region/locale you built your site in. If a player builds his site within walking distance of a thieves den, that's just asking to be robbed just so the player can track them down. Though I suppose there's also the question of non-sentient thieves, like Rhesus Macaques.Quote from: GreigerThough I do have one question. In an adventurer made structure (or site or whathaveyou) will items inside still be scattered around to the hills? Or will that be removed for adventure made sites? Removed entirely? Removed only in locations where it doesn't make sense?(Fully sealed underground rooms, etc)
It'll probably start with the removal of the scattering mechanic for the adv sites. We have to be a little careful with your things. After that though, there should be some reemergence of theft/scattering depending on the qualities of the site. There's a balance to be struck, because it would be fun in a sense to use the villain hunting process to have a chance to track down the guy that took your stuff, but it would be incredibly annoying to have to do that very often (or even a few times).
We don't have a lot of specifics here yet. The idea has simply been judged feasible and fun and something we want to do, especially since it relates to boats and siege engines as well. It'll certainly involve the ability to move a section of fortress complete with items, units, buildings, stockpiles etc., because a boat or siege tower would also want to do that. The work in adventure mode has mostly prepared the game for those kinds of coordinate shifts, though there are probably some weird exceptions. If there are rolling siege towers, there will probably be absurd wind-powered self-contained fortresses with levers that can be set to change the wheels and get them going in any of the four directions. For walking ones, I'm not sure. If you have a dual lift that can alternately anchor on each leg, and there were something set up to get the lifted leg sliding forward, and a way to get the slider slid forward contained in both or one of the legs, it might work, but I'm not mechanically-minded and really have no idea what exactly is going to pop out of this stuff.
Rotating etc. walls should be possible, and we'd like to move beyond specific predefined constructions to allow you a bit of creative freedom (so that you'd be building your wall crushing traps from a few pieces and somewhere in that process you define the direction, etc). Having the dwarves understand how triggers open their way for them is still beyond what I can do, but things that act like the current lever-operated doors are fine.
Improved disembowelment brought to you by the phrase "repeated thrusts can kind of forge a gut-path to freedom". (http://www.bay12games.com/dwarves/mantisbt/view.php?id=721#c9679)
QuoteQuote from: smjjames
(waterproof axles)
Could you explain this? Do you mean a way where you could have a rubber gasket or something around an axle someplace or at the attachment point to power compartmentalized mechanisms? Or maybe have a mechanism which is compartmentalized, but has am extension through a waterproof barrier which the axle is attatched to? Those ideas may be beyond the era that you want DF to be in, but hey. I certainly wouldn't doubt Dwarven ingenuity and if they can create a water based computer, then I'm sure they can create waterproof axles/mechanisms.
If I understand the problem, it's that the current axles are prone to flooding because water can flow through them, and people want to have a tile that has both an axle and through which fluid cannot pass. Like many of the mechnical things, I don't really have solid specific implementation ideas right now, but it seemed like a reasonably easy and good target, especially because it has been requested in the past. If the basic scenario just isn't feasible, I won't do it, probably, but it seems like a problem that should have a solution that isn't too modern, at least at some rough level of efficiency and in water shallow enough for high pressure not to be an issue.
Surely a catchall "other" category would be superior to leaving stuff off the list?Quote from: MrWigglesI notice that form the Dev pages, that Squad Formations weren't listed. Has that been pushed backed even further?
Yeah, within the larger military goals, we weren't sure what the best spot is, so we're just letting them float. It's something we want to do, but they don't have a home yet.
For training, especially with people throwing rocks for 5000 turns and so on, that kind of thing might as well be part of the pass-a-season mechanic, so that if you want to meditate on your left hook under a waterfall for 20 days, you can go ahead and do that. The tradeoffs would be your character's age, possible reputation fade, leaving whatever sites you've raised going fallow if you aren't working out from them, etc., so it shouldn't be an utterly unreasonable/spoily mechanic.I reckon it would be best to make the gain from this significantly affected by your current skill. It would be kind of wonky if somebody could just play with a sword, starting from no knowledge, and get up to a professional level just like that. But we'd want the amount of gain to still be at least somewhat noticeable even at higher levels. And this reduces the possibility of someone, for example, starting out as an elf and just meditating for a thousand years.
There would then need to be some manner of assuring that the framed party lacks an alibi. If he can't supply one (was all alone) or possibly wouldn't (say, was alone except for his friend's wife. And the situation was... untoward.) Seems to me that the easiest way to figure it out would be to check who's alone at the time of the crime, and hang onto that information until such time as somebody gets punished. But I don't know how big a deal that would be on the technical end.Quote from: isitanosPushing this just a step further, setting up evidence so that someone else gets accused in your place (dropping the bloody dagger in his garbage, money under his bed, or whatever), then fearing as the legendary investigator tracks one by one the clues that lead to you, would just be an amazing experience.
Yeah, it'll be interesting to see how the tracking/suspicion/paranoia stuff plays out. Framing people might end up being the norm rather than the exception early on. That would lead to alibis and so on, and we'd just have to take care not to get carried away with information tracking, but it might be able to wing it respectably (it knows the random peasant didn't kill the guy, after all, so whatever possibly-generated alibi he's got is fine). The computer has the advantage of knowing you are the guilty party in advance, so getting that to work out fairly is just a matter of balancing things out, and then adding in the details that make it fun.
You could just make the traitor a valid target for kill orders. If you do that, and provide that his friends would want to protect him, there's a possibility for a lot of fun there, working of a fairly simple base mechanic.Quote from: isitanosAnother way for a fortress to fall (very common in history) would be a traitor inside
Getting a dwarf to betray the fortress from the inside would require them to have contact -- which would make your broker or mayor/leader the best candidates among the important dwarves (any migrant or entity pop dwarf would do once you are established though). I imagine that would be fairly traumatic for players though, if you've got no way to handle the situation.
QuoteFor training, especially with people throwing rocks for 5000 turns and so on, that kind of thing might as well be part of the pass-a-season mechanic, so that if you want to meditate on your left hook under a waterfall for 20 days, you can go ahead and do that. The tradeoffs would be your character's age, possible reputation fade, leaving whatever sites you've raised going fallow if you aren't working out from them, etc., so it shouldn't be an utterly unreasonable/spoily mechanic.I reckon it would be best to make the gain from this significantly affected by your current skill. It would be kind of wonky if somebody could just play with a sword, starting from no knowledge, and get up to a professional level just like that. But we'd want the amount of gain to still be at least somewhat noticeable even at higher levels. And this reduces the possibility of someone, for example, starting out as an elf and just meditating for a thousand years.
Is there any possibility that bruising damage can be made to cause a small amount of blood loss?
With the ability to create and buy sites now in the works, will an adventurer be able to become a landlord and rent out land to the local peasants.
With the ability to create and buy sites now in the works, will an adventurer be able to become a landlord and rent out land to the local peasants.
And with the new suspicion system and building system, would it possible to discreetly murder your tenants, hide their bodies in a hidden room and then blame an adventurer wandering into town?
He he, yeah, that's the idea, anyway. For each downward ramp the boulder should probably get several extra tiles in straight rolling distance (via its overall velocity which is diminishing as it rolls on level ground). If you gave the boulder a giant 5 level ramp, I guess it should be able to shoot out of the side of your fortress and you could make a kind of catapult that way. Hopefully whatever velocity mechanic that goes in will allow better transitions between those kinds of movement, and it would also be able to support having you kick somebody's sword along the ground and off a cliff and have it all work out.
The principle problem is basically that luxuries aren't nearly as satisfying in the game as they are in real life. People still tend to enjoy things (as players, not characters) like collecting stuff or gambling in a computer game, since it doesn't deviate too far from the real world equivalents, but a lot of luxuries would be meaningless (consider eating "fine foods", say, though if you are really into the roleplaying it works I suppose)One thing that Gearhead (another roguelike whose themes tended to hit into this) used was tracking the player character's "mood" in terms of a vague mixture of happiness and exhaustion, and displaying it with a series of green + marks or red - marks on the screen. When your mood is high, you get a benefit to your social / mental / manual dexterity stats and a bonus to any actions that require concentration; when it's low, you get penalties to those things.
Toady has said in the past that he doesn't want to dictate to players how they feel, in any way that could contradict their own roleplaying idea of their character's state of mind. This was in relation to named weapons, but I'd imagine the sentiment applies here too.The principle problem is basically that luxuries aren't nearly as satisfying in the game as they are in real life. People still tend to enjoy things (as players, not characters) like collecting stuff or gambling in a computer game, since it doesn't deviate too far from the real world equivalents, but a lot of luxuries would be meaningless (consider eating "fine foods", say, though if you are really into the roleplaying it works I suppose)One thing that Gearhead (another roguelike whose themes tended to hit into this) used was tracking the player character's "mood" in terms of a vague mixture of happiness and exhaustion, and displaying it with a series of green + marks or red - marks on the screen. When your mood is high, you get a benefit to your social / mental / manual dexterity stats and a bonus to any actions that require concentration; when it's low, you get penalties to those things.
Things like tracking through a sewer, failing at tasks, eating charred monster corpses and so on would lower your mood, while success, good food, soaking in hot springs and so forth would raise it. It felt fairly realistic -- we've all had days where a bad mood makes it hard to do something, which makes you angrier which in turn makes you do even worse until you break whatever you're trying to fix or whatever.
The ability to accumulate bonuses by having a very high mood (at least until your mood slips back towards normal) also rewarded players for luxuries and such. For instance, I'd always buy chocolate bars and carry them with me on long sewer missions.
Will adventure mode in DF ever track the player character's mood? It's such a big part of Dwarf Mode that it seems like it'd be a logical thing to extend to adventure mode although, of course, I wouldn't expect players to go insane without something Lovecraft-style causing them to. But there's various other things that could be done with it, like the bonuses / penalties I mentioned above.
There must be lebensraum!Racism as we know it is not really period-appropriate. The oft-cited 1400 level it might arguably be, though that was more of a religious thing than a racial one, and only happened to coincidentally align with race. (and even then was Europe only). However DF tends to use the social paradigms of pre-roman times. That would mean that while attitudes might now be considered racist, they were more rooted in community and national identities than in race - ie "The next civ over murder casually and steal babies." or "the folks in that forest eat humans". Myths about the outsider, in other words. Except in DF those myths are true.
On that note, racism could provide an interesting mechanic, given slave populations. Having second-class goblins working for dwarves sounds quite reasonable; of course, if the goblins later become king (..military coup, perhaps), that situation would reverse itself.
Playing a fort as the despised minority could be.. curious.
If anyone can remember this far back:You could do a lot with some simple serial identifiers. A wound on one part would transfer to the part on the new form with the same identifier. If no identifier match is found, either discard the wounds (no equivalent location) or transfer some degree of injury [1] to the next part up the chain till you find a match.
One problem here: What if it's ambiguous? For instance, a creature with two wings transforming into a creature with four arms. I suppose you could spread the wound over each equivalent arm, or... something.
The idea here is that by giving each part a serial identifier tag rather than just relying on base part types, you can rig things up to behave in a sensible fashion. So in your example, you probably have something like:
Creature A, basic bird shape:
"limb1r" = wing
"limb1l" = wing
"limbnr" = leg
"limbnl" = leg
Creature B, 4 armed biped:
"limb1r" = arm
"limb1l" = arm
"limb2r" = arm
"limb2l" = arm
"limbnr" = leg
"limbnl" = leg
So damage to one set of arms would translate to/from wing damage, while damage to the other arms would probably spread to the upper body
The trick, of course, would be working out a set of tags that would give best behaviour under most circumstances.
also i personally would order large expensive meals if i could in adventure mode without bonuses though i wouldn't see myself grinding for money to get them even if they gave bonuses
With the mention of merchant abilities in adventure mode, I could see it more as, buy the great meal from the poor chef down the road, then sell it to the king for a huge profit.Quotealso i personally would order large expensive meals if i could in adventure mode without bonuses though i wouldn't see myself grinding for money to get them even if they gave bonuses
The only bonuses I could see from that would be some sort of marker where people would associate you with luxuries.
Though to me a great reason to order fine food whenever possible, assuming it won't cripple your budget, would be for your party or other associates.
In old saves, the position will be there, but you won't have to use it. Save compat is fine -- I left the responsibilities in but they aren't used in the code except to load them and not throw an error message. You can just fire your current arsenal dwarf.
This could be blasphemy, but...
Will Armok ever make an appearance in DF? Like as a deity that all dwarves worship (in addition to their other, lesser gods)?
This could be blasphemy, but...The answer to this is almost certainly "no", though of course only Toady can give you an absolute answer there. The popular thought on Armok now is that he is the player.
Will Armok ever make an appearance in DF? Like as a deity that all dwarves worship (in addition to their other, lesser gods)?
This could be blasphemy, but...The answer to this is almost certainly "no", though of course only Toady can give you an absolute answer there. The popular thought on Armok now is that he is the player.
Will Armok ever make an appearance in DF? Like as a deity that all dwarves worship (in addition to their other, lesser gods)?
In the case of supporting tiles for each game object, I need to figure out the deal with all the new SDL code before I can lay anything out in stark terms.
Will the heart and throat ever get any other use? I mean you fixed major arteries for the next update, but a blue heart (function completely lost) should be fatal, at the same time throat wounds should cause death from not being able to breathe like the old 40d days.
The principle problem is basically that luxuries aren't nearly as satisfying in the game as they are in real life. People still tend to enjoy things (as players, not characters) like collecting stuff or gambling in a computer game, since it doesn't deviate too far from the real world equivalents, but a lot of luxuries would be meaningless (consider eating "fine foods", say, though if you are really into the roleplaying it works I suppose)One thing that Gearhead (another roguelike whose themes tended to hit into this) used was tracking the player character's "mood" in terms of a vague mixture of happiness and exhaustion, and displaying it with a series of green + marks or red - marks on the screen. When your mood is high, you get a benefit to your social / mental / manual dexterity stats and a bonus to any actions that require concentration; when it's low, you get penalties to those things.
Things like tracking through a sewer, failing at tasks, eating charred monster corpses and so on would lower your mood, while success, good food, soaking in hot springs and so forth would raise it. It felt fairly realistic -- we've all had days where a bad mood makes it hard to do something, which makes you angrier which in turn makes you do even worse until you break whatever you're trying to fix or whatever.
The ability to accumulate bonuses by having a very high mood (at least until your mood slips back towards normal) also rewarded players for luxuries and such. For instance, I'd always buy chocolate bars and carry them with me on long sewer missions.
Will adventure mode in DF ever track the player character's mood? It's such a big part of Dwarf Mode that it seems like it'd be a logical thing to extend to adventure mode although, of course, I wouldn't expect players to go insane without something Lovecraft-style causing them to. But there's various other things that could be done with it, like the bonuses / penalties I mentioned above.
Will the heart and throat ever get any other use? I mean you fixed major arteries for the next update, but a blue heart (function completely lost) should be fatal, at the same time throat wounds should cause death from not being able to breathe like the old 40d days.
We'll have to see with the new fixes in .9 and from what Toady said in the bug reports and the devlog, that stuff should be fixed.
The situation could change again when supply/demand goes in and that information is considered as acquirable knowledge, but at that point there could be something like a "chat with merchant" option or something that immediately illuminates all the rough pricing information, or that could just be automatic or something.Isn't this what the Appraising skill is supposed to simulate? I mean, why have separate systems when we already have skills? The "chat with merchant" option could probably train the skill or add temporary bonuses.
Yeah, it would be a good angle on adding temple rituals etc. in a non-boring way, as well, since they'd be there for your infiltration. Of course, then there'd need to be some kind of button to let you kneel in front of the sacred rock or whatever.Have you considered how things like "kneeling in front of the statue" will be controlled in terms of interface, etc? I'm a bid afraid that as you keep adding more and more moves/things to do in Adventure mode, the list of commands will become so enormously long it would be unusable. I'm thinking rare things like these might be triggered through some item in environment - like the statue here. Rather than having the next-to-useless "kneel" command available at all times, the player would click "interact" or something on the statue, and the game would list all possible things to do there, including kneeling. Or something... The other issue is that the player might not know he can kneel in front of the statue and that the game would react (and kneeling everywhere just to try if it does something is a bit over the top), so a menu like this would definitely help. The question here is if you have thought about how to handle controls in adventure mode in a way that would both allow the miriad of functions and still stay user friendly at the same time?
The previous problems with cave rivers make me wary of them, but it would be cool to get the place looking nicer. The underground is pretty dreary right now. The treasure hunter role is the best bet there, probably, though that might focus on areas of concentrated local interest at first. I guess enough of those makes for an exciting underground, but we'll probably need to find some middle ground stuff to avoid over-saturation. Dwarf mode wants interesting stuff all over underground but it makes adventure mode cave exploration goofy.How about if some features were added at embark? You could generate the word with the feature frequency optimalised for adventure mode, and then throw in some extra features when the player embarks in fortress mode. Or alternatively scan the neighbouring map squares and move the features from there to the embark idea or something. Or something... The question is whether retrospecting "cheating" like this (that could probably help even in other ideas) is something you might consider, or a thing that doesn't fit into your idea of simulating the world.
Easily handwaved. Call it a cold-sleep seal which is broken when HFS first spawn as it is right now. Call it ignorance of the surface because most demons prefer being deeeeeeeeep down in the pits and have no reason to be around the lowest layers of our DF maps before they realise something can dig 'up there'. Maybe they had no reason to 'invent' the rockpass magic until they found incentive when a dwarf showed up. Reasons why they don't kill everything before we discover them can be thought of later if the rock swimming is implemented at all.What would prevent the clowns from coming straight from the H.F.S. Clown Car to your wagon at embark? If they really want to Entertain (i.e., bring FunTM to) the world's children, and they can swim through rock...Spoiler: HFS rock swimming (click to show/hide)
Will the heart and throat ever get any other use? I mean you fixed major arteries for the next update, but a blue heart (function completely lost) should be fatal, at the same time throat wounds should cause death from not being able to breathe like the old 40d days.
If you shift from (a six-limbed creature with a wound to the middle left limb) to a human, I'd expect you actually shift to (a human with a significant wound on the of your lower abdomen/back). Bleeding is bleeding - you can't shift to a human and mosey off to the dang hospital.Spoiler: Shapeshifting woundshifting (click to show/hide)
Will the heart and throat ever get any other use? I mean you fixed major arteries for the next update, but a blue heart (function completely lost) should be fatal, at the same time throat wounds should cause death from not being able to breathe like the old 40d days.
Yes, this is very important. I was messing around in the arena and noticed that adamantine axe slashes to the throat never did more than "tearing the skin" or whatever- its as if the throat has no arteries or other functions assigned to it!
The first is probably easier than the second to put in, even if the second is more realistic. The first priority will probably just be dealing with walled-off hallways and stuff like that though -- things that are really easy to do that kill off entire sieges. I guess it's entirely possible that they wouldn't be able to find you if you hid behind 10 meter thick walls hidden off in random places, but then it should be possible for them to live in your upper levels for years while you work away tradeless on mushrooms down below (although there are major obstacles to that that make it non-practical for the dev page). They'd probably just leave after looting all your exposed items and slaughtering anybody left outside (including any entity pop infrastructure you've got out there). Although once they can get through a single wall, they can just dig ambitious tunnels for you at random I suppose. As long as walling yourself in has reasonable results, I'll be happy with however they handle it. Right now it's too much of an exploit (of course, the whole "digging invaders" is enough of a touchy subject that it's explictly stated as optional on the dev page, and how you handle exploits is up to you at that point).Will type of material matter in terms of how long it will take to be crushed or whether it can be crushed at all? Theres a big difference between wooden fence and block of solid steel/adamantine.
Seeing as how the whole world would be living, with caravans, thieves' dens, towns and all the schemes and politics, sites growing, thieves stealing, creatures murdering, how will this effect DF, performance wise? For all the calculations, it seems like a black hole of FPS, really. (from a non-expert's viewing position)tying in with this, how much of what goes on in world gen will be continuing in play (aging and wars and buildings and stuff) in the next few releases
About adventure mode reactions, will we be able to assign them the skills that are used for said reaction? Will they be like Fort Mode reactions, in where one gets skill EXP from doing said reaction?Wouldn't we get this answer when .09 gets released? We already have basic adventure mode reactions coming in so we can tinker about in the raws.
Regarding the Arsenal Dwarf, I was just thinking how a more useful incarnation of that position might work. What if they gathered up complete uniforms ahead of time so they would be there as soon as someone needed them? It should be configurable how many of each uniform to keep on hand, and of course if there was no uniform waiting in the arsenal, military dwarves should hunt the pieces down on their own as normal.
Regarding the Arsenal Dwarf, I was just thinking how a more useful incarnation of that position might work. What if they gathered up complete uniforms ahead of time so they would be there as soon as someone needed them? It should be configurable how many of each uniform to keep on hand, and of course if there was no uniform waiting in the arsenal, military dwarves should hunt the pieces down on their own as normal.That sounds as though it would be incompatible with the way uniforms currently work.
Regarding the Arsenal Dwarf, I was just thinking how a more useful incarnation of that position might work. What if they gathered up complete uniforms ahead of time so they would be there as soon as someone needed them? It should be configurable how many of each uniform to keep on hand, and of course if there was no uniform waiting in the arsenal, military dwarves should hunt the pieces down on their own as normal.That sounds as though it would be incompatible with the way uniforms currently work.
I would imagine him having chat with manager dwarf and adding necesary items for full uniform to queue so that they get made.
I would imagine him having chat with manager dwarf and adding necesary items for full uniform to queue so that they get made.
I'm not opposed to that idea, but it might need some other prep first. What if the uniform is set to use something like any metal for some pieces? What metal will be used in the manager order? And what if you don't have enough of a particular materiel? The announcement log will be spammed with armorers cancelling jobs due to lack of metal like what already happens when there's a manager order that cannot be fulfilled. Except this one would recreate the order after deletion.
will moving fortress parts displace water, thus enabling an actual oversized piston pump to be created?
That's entirely dependent on how Toady will resolve undead health. Right now, he's had to fudge in an HP system for undead when everything else doesn't use HP anymore. So the question is what, if any, common thread of 'durability'/'health' will the general Creatures of the Night have. Whether they're dependent on the intactness of the physical body or not.
That's entirely dependent on how Toady will resolve undead health. Right now, he's had to fudge in an HP system for undead when everything else doesn't use HP anymore. So the question is what, if any, common thread of 'durability'/'health' will the general Creatures of the Night have. Whether they're dependent on the intactness of the physical body or not.
It might not be as hard if he adds some kind of ectoplasm-like substance acting like blood so that skeletal creature with crushed bone would leak it, make skull site for "soul" which would release it when broken resulting in instakill and rib-cage site for "ectoplasm source" which would result in massive mystical bleeding out.
It really depends on how becoming and being undead skeleton is modelled and if that is done sensibly, health could be working quite naturaly.
Much too inflexible for Toady's vision of randomly generated Creatures of the Night, which will exhibit all range of undead traits. That means some skeletons won't stay down no matter how much you pulverize their bones because they're actually wraiths that happen to conveniently have a medium to easily manipulate in the physical realm. Some undead will be nigh unkillable except for some special metal like silver. Some will regenerate no matter what unless some specific location is targetted for no apparent logical reason (but you'll get hints where to attack based on villager tales). And some will be modellable with ectoplasm-like blood.That's entirely dependent on how Toady will resolve undead health. Right now, he's had to fudge in an HP system for undead when everything else doesn't use HP anymore. So the question is what, if any, common thread of 'durability'/'health' will the general Creatures of the Night have. Whether they're dependent on the intactness of the physical body or not.
It might not be as hard if he adds some kind of ectoplasm-like substance acting like blood so that skeletal creature with crushed bone would leak it, make skull site for "soul" which would release it when broken resulting in instakill and rib-cage site for "ectoplasm source" which would result in massive mystical bleeding out.
It really depends on how becoming and being undead skeleton is modelled and if that is done sensibly, health could be working quite naturaly.
Kattaroten has entered a fell mood
Kattaroten screams: I need moving fortress parts!
so rumor is the new release is today. but according to the dev page theirs only 3 minor adventure mode improvements complete, and alot of planned ideas.. or am i missing somethingYou are missing http://bay12games.com/dwarves/mantisbt/changelog_page.php?version_id=10
so rumor is the new release is today. but according to the dev page theirs only 3 minor adventure mode improvements complete, and alot of planned ideas.. or am i missing somethingYou are missing http://bay12games.com/dwarves/mantisbt/changelog_page.php?version_id=10
Oddly enough I can't even see the bug tracker... and I don't want to make an entirely new account just to see it either.
Oddly enough I can't even see the bug tracker... and I don't want to make an entirely new account just to see it either.
The bug tracker is actually a fantastically cool place where awesome people to hang out, so you may want to reconsider! (http://www.bay12games.com/dwarves/mantisbt/signup_page.php)
Oddly enough I can't even see the bug tracker... and I don't want to make an entirely new account just to see it either.
The bug tracker is actually a fantastically cool place where awesome people hang out, so you may want to reconsider! (http://www.bay12games.com/dwarves/mantisbt/signup_page.php)
Oh it's all there, you just gotta look for the more controversial bugs. Of course, your definition of "cool place of hanging out" may differ from Footkerchief's.Oddly enough I can't even see the bug tracker... and I don't want to make an entirely new account just to see it either.
The bug tracker is actually a fantastically cool place where awesome people hang out, so you may want to reconsider! (http://www.bay12games.com/dwarves/mantisbt/signup_page.php)
Well I signed up and was hit with a giant wave of disapointment... None of that stuff is there.
Hang out implies other people...xkcd disagrees. http://xkcd.com/324/
At least to me.
Hang out implies other people...I see about 20 people there, how are you counting people?
At least to me.
# Moving fortress sections (lifts, crushing traps, etc.)
WILL it be theoretically possible to make a for that actually inches it's entire bulk acro0s the map?
That wouldn't be a problem... if you could change the map.
I think it might be pretty easy to add a system where you can add and subtract entire world tiles from your map during fortress mode. You know, change a 3x3 map into a 3x4 - then back to a 3x3, moving forward like an inchworm.
Why should this option only be limited to the initial embark? (To answer my own question, there might be issues with sealing off any subtracted world tiles so that your dwarves don't go there anymore)
There have been a number of times where I wish I had added just one more row of tiles during embark, so that I could, for example, dig further into the mountains in search of adamantine.
THIS:Quote# Moving fortress sections (lifts, crushing traps, etc.)WILL it be theoretically possible to make a for that actually inches it's entire bulk acro0s the map?
Spring-driven clocks appeared during the 1400s, although they are often erroneously credited to Nürnberg watchmaker Peter Henlein (or Henle, or Hele) around 1511. The earliest existing spring driven clock is the chamber clock given to Peter the Good, Duke of Burgundy, around 1430, now in the "Germanisches Nationalmuseum (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Germanisches_Nationalmuseum)".
Also, I completely support the following suggestion:I'd like to add to this: Whould the above mentioned feature eventually be replaced with some sort of Fog of War?That wouldn't be a problem... if you could change the map.
I think it might be pretty easy to add a system where you can add and subtract entire world tiles from your map during fortress mode. You know, change a 3x3 map into a 3x4 - then back to a 3x3, moving forward like an inchworm.
Why should this option only be limited to the initial embark? (To answer my own question, there might be issues with sealing off any subtracted world tiles so that your dwarves don't go there anymore)
There have been a number of times where I wish I had added just one more row of tiles during embark, so that I could, for example, dig further into the mountains in search of adamantine.
If these two are ever actually implemented, then my life will be complete, and I will have no regrets about anything. Is resizing the playing field as described above even theoretically possible?
more underground diversity
-- up on dev_next in part, though there are some issues with some of the desired ones, especially with digging down, since it can't load all that many layers, and solutions for slowing downward digging all seem sort of gamey or sketchy
Regarding the "farming improvements" goals, how much detail is currently planned for tracking soil quality?
A completely accurate model would probably be a lot of effort/information with little to gain from it, though enough detail to properly encourage crop rotation seems like something that should make it in eventually.
I suggest a simple 3 number system: sand/clay/organics, your basic soil classification. Sandy soils could be good for glass, clay soils could prevent/slow water from evaporating and be used in any future ceramics, and organics could provide nutrition for crops (and be what is gained from applying fertilizer).
We've already got these soil types, if you weren't already aware. The soil types in DF are pretty much pulled straight from a chart of such classifications.
-snip- Since extremely fine details aren't necessary -snip-
well, dwarves vomit when they see the sunThats a good definition of evil god, I believe.
Dwarves don't really hit me as the kind of guys that think something as a god just because it helps or hurts them.well, dwarves vomit when they see the sunThats a good definition of evil god, I believe.
Will the addition of a crime tracking and investigation system be integrated into fortress mode? In other words, will random dwarves stop getting hammered (in a bad way) because of production mandate issues?Yeah, they'll be gettin' smashed instead.
Will the addition of a crime tracking and investigation system be integrated into fortress mode? In other words, will random dwarves stop getting hammered (in a bad way) because of production mandate issues?
Will the addition of a crime tracking and investigation system be integrated into fortress mode? In other words, will random dwarves stop getting hammered (in a bad way) because of production mandate issues?
Why do I see a situation where when a nobles mandate for platinum figurines or whatever isn't fulfilled he/she begins a massive fort wide investigation, detectives barge into peoples rooms while they're asleep, parties are brought to abrupt halts, the everyday working of the fort are slowed to a crawl in the face of this ever pressing matter. Evidence is brought before the court; platinum bars still not turned into figurines, anvils unused, and forging tools still neatly sorted. In the end, the detective can find no-one at fault for the non-production of this item, but he must appease the noble, so he accuses some poor sap with the metalcrafting labor enabled. Hammer-Time.
Will the addition of a crime tracking and investigation system be integrated into fortress mode? In other words, will random dwarves stop getting hammered (in a bad way) because of production mandate issues?
Why do I see a situation where when a nobles mandate for platinum figurines or whatever isn't fulfilled he/she begins a massive fort wide investigation, detectives barge into peoples rooms while they're asleep, parties are brought to abrupt halts, the everyday working of the fort are slowed to a crawl in the face of this ever pressing matter. Evidence is brought before the court; platinum bars still not turned into figurines, anvils unused, and forging tools still neatly sorted. In the end, the detective can find no-one at fault for the non-production of this item, but he must appease the noble, so he accuses some poor sap with the metalcrafting labor enabled. Hammer-Time.
Well, it would be nice if there was actually more than "hammer time" punishment.
Noble banning all parties or other activities he deemed deterrent to production (i.e. no breaks for offender).
Forced draft to army.
Stocks and Prangers.
Conficating criminals property.
Forbiding him consumption of alcohol or such.
Exile (dwarf is escorted to edge of map and then returns in X months or years, if he does not settle elsewhere or die in wilderness).
Forbiding him from having his currently most trained labor enabled for some time.
Basically, making justice interesting.
Will the addition of a crime tracking and investigation system be integrated into fortress mode? In other words, will random dwarves stop getting hammered (in a bad way) because of production mandate issues?
Why do I see a situation where when a nobles mandate for platinum figurines or whatever isn't fulfilled he/she begins a massive fort wide investigation, detectives barge into peoples rooms while they're asleep, parties are brought to abrupt halts, the everyday working of the fort are slowed to a crawl in the face of this ever pressing matter. Evidence is brought before the court; platinum bars still not turned into figurines, anvils unused, and forging tools still neatly sorted. In the end, the detective can find no-one at fault for the non-production of this item, but he must appease the noble, so he accuses some poor sap with the metalcrafting labor enabled. Hammer-Time.
Well, it would be nice if there was actually more than "hammer time" punishment.
Noble banning all parties or other activities he deemed deterrent to production (i.e. no breaks for offender).
Forced draft to army.
Stocks and Prangers.
Conficating criminals property.
Forbiding him consumption of alcohol or such.
Exile (dwarf is escorted to edge of map and then returns in X months or years, if he does not settle elsewhere or die in wilderness).
Forbiding him from having his currently most trained labor enabled for some time.
Basically, making justice interesting.
Exile would be amusing.
07/15/2010: I cleaned up a number of training issues today. There was various lingering information that would gum up barracks selection over time, and individual training could interfere with squad barracks selection as well. Some out-of-whack personality effects had far too many soldiers skipping out on their individual practice. Demonstration/training organization has been sped up a great deal, and I fixed another problem with class timers. Civilian jobs should respect attribute growth/maintenance properly now, though we'll have to balance that a bit no doubt. Shell moods are restricted to dwarves with shell fetishes. Goblet/flask construction shouldn't shuffle the metal types anymore.This is absolutely fantastic news. I can't wait to start working on a proper military.
Quote from: Devlog07/15/2010: I cleaned up a number of training issues today. There was various lingering information that would gum up barracks selection over time, and individual training could interfere with squad barracks selection as well. Some out-of-whack personality effects had far too many soldiers skipping out on their individual practice. Demonstration/training organization has been sped up a great deal, and I fixed another problem with class timers. Civilian jobs should respect attribute growth/maintenance properly now, though we'll have to balance that a bit no doubt. Shell moods are restricted to dwarves with shell fetishes. Goblet/flask construction shouldn't shuffle the metal types anymore.This is absolutely fantastic news. I can't wait to start working on a proper military.
Exciled to the surface...
Urist McEverysmith, for the crime of mandate unfullfillment you are sentenced to a year and a day above ground...
You could just banish them to one of the underground layers instead.Exciled to the surface...
Urist McEverysmith, for the crime of mandate unfullfillment you are sentenced to a year and a day above ground...
Okay, but maybe there should be something more, especially in a fort like my current one which is almost all above ground. That wouldn't be much punishment.
Toady, if you haven't seen this (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=61507.0), I must bring it to your attention and ask that you find the cause and/or replicate it.
Toady, if you haven't seen this (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=61507.0), I must bring it to your attention and ask that you find the cause and/or replicate it.
Toady, if you haven't seen this (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=61507.0), I must bring it to your attention and ask that you find the cause and/or replicate it.
:PToady, if you haven't seen this (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=61507.0), I must bring it to your attention and ask that you find the cause and/or replicate it.
Toady, if you haven't seen this (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=61507.0), I must bring it to your attention and ask that you find the cause and/or replicate it.
I guess it doesn't quite melt the computer. Though the moon became the elevator it seems. :PQuoteProbably enough to melt your computer. :PQuote...a HFS metal moon, ...HFS metal moon = impetus for the first Dwarven space elevator. How many Z-levels do think it would take to reach a geosynchronous orbit? ;D
Exile (dwarf is escorted to edge of map and then returns in X months or years, if he does not settle elsewhere or die in wilderness).It would be interesting if the exile in question would then, depending on his attributes of course, be forced to (or have the option to) turn to banditry to survive, i.e. preying on the caravans travelling to and from your site.
Still, just making history run on a single, seperate core from the rest (like the graphics thing) would probably be easier than full-blown multithreading it.
Full-blown multithreading is made of lots of little processes that can get shuffled around as necessary. With this idea, all the processes for one broad purpose would be separate, but the main body of the game would still work the same. Like how the current graphics work.Still, just making history run on a single, seperate core from the rest (like the graphics thing) would probably be easier than full-blown multithreading it.
How are those not the exact same thing?
Full-blown multithreading is made of lots of little processes that can get shuffled around as necessary. With this idea, all the processes for one broad purpose would be separate, but the main body of the game would still work the same. Like how the current graphics work.
Yesterday I messed around a lot with sparring and skill demonstrations and made sure they were moving between them properly, and I balanced out some of the timers and skill increases there. The combat rebalancing had had an effect on sparring injuries, which had already been a bit of a problem (and have historically been a major problem), so I put in some more safeguards there. I also found that anybody that was bleeding modestly would take a dive and decide they needed to be carried off to the hospital, even if the bleeding subsequently stopped. That's fixed now.Yet more good news on the military front. Entity populations aught to be nice as well. This raises a question: once entity pops are in, can we expect the current (ridiculously tiny) towns to get scrapped in short order? On a related note, does this mean we won't be seeing mundane people appearing in the legends screen anymore?
Today I took some time to think about the site/population rewrite that's the foundation of a lot of the future developments, mainly having your own sites in adventure mode, having sprawl/rural areas, villain groups, and having more dwarves live around you off-map in dwarf mode. Since I'm aiming for the 22nd or 23rd for the next release, I'm not sure if that rewrite is going to fit or not. I'd like to take some small steps on the dev page each time I release, but this one is larger and it still needs to be done early. If we wind up with some more days of bug fixing and then the site/pop rewrite first thing for the release after the next one, I wouldn't be surprised.
Today I took some time to think about the site/population rewrite that's the foundation of a lot of the future developments, mainly having your own sites in adventure mode, having sprawl/rural areas, villain groups, and having more dwarves live around you off-map in dwarf mode. Since I'm aiming for the 22nd or 23rd for the next release, I'm not sure if that rewrite is going to fit or not. I'd like to take some small steps on the dev page each time I release, but this one is larger and it still needs to be done early. If we wind up with some more days of bug fixing and then the site/pop rewrite first thing for the release after the next one, I wouldn't be surprised.
Will we be able to let the computer run a player created fortress? For instance, to play five years and then let it run itself while we play as adventurer or running other fortresses.New ideas that aren't related to the current development page should probably go in the suggestions forum.
Will we be able to play a fortress, abandon it, then advance the world a set number of years?
Just to clarify on the forcing loyalty, I meant for situations like slavery; following your orders goes against the characters ethics or desires, but they are compelled to do so via fear etc, as opposed to just having subordinates follow you due to gold or reputation. You suggested one example in the dev list, of forcing someone you've captured to act as a guide, I was just asking about a more general system, with say forced labour, forced military service etc. Building on that, would it be possible to have that forced loyalty thing work with other characters? Say you intimidate 5 people into following you, and get them to intimidate 5 more each into following them; the end result is you command 30 people, 5 of which act as slave drivers in a way.
Once there is a notion of relative wealth, will that include dwarf-mode economics, so we don't have to build buckets for our dwarves to sleep in?
Can we have a goblin fry-basket made of magma safe wall and floor grates that we can place and/or trap creatures in, that we can then lower into a convenient pool of magma?
Also, will grates eventually be able to support other grates as if they were all one giant grate?
Quote from: Ratbert_CPAre there any roadmap/plans to move more game interactions out to the RAW files? Specifically, the ability to require certain/custom nobles to enable certain/custom workshops? Or better, the ability to require a (specific?) third-party to cause a reaction?Quote from: RCISWhen will the rest of the workshops/reactions be moved out into raw files? i feel kind of constrained as a modder trying to operate with only limited access to how Toady set up the workshops.Quote from: MephansterasWhen will custom workshops be able to display the color of the building materials the way regular workshops do?
Toady you spoke of "Boulders" Buried in the soil. Does that include Multi-tile boulders like "Glacial boulders"?
Quote from: PsieyeWill the new crushing traps with moving sections have the same 'atomsmashing' effect as raised bridges do now? Or will you get to uh... loot pancakes of whatever you killed?Quote from: HephIn addition to Psieye's question: Wouldt it be possible to remove atom-smashing for bridges and replace it by actual crushing?
Will you be adding in some code to handle worn materials protecting the wearer from various dangerous elements? Things like dragon scale armor protecting from firebreath or an artifact mask that protects against poisonous vapor would be fun.
Surely a catchall "other" category would be superior to leaving stuff off the list?
One of popular mods are custom workshops designed to train skills. How far in pipeline are things that would make it obsolete: like books, master/apprentice relationships, training straw dummies for soldiers, toys providing experience for children and geting experience by observing others to do something or by talking to then about subject.
Is there any possibility that bruising damage can be made to cause a small amount of blood loss? Essentially, bruising is internal bleeding and a great deal of bruising means you are losing a great deal of blood from your circulatory system. Currently, dwarves can punch eachother forever with little effect because these bruising wounds have little relevance in the game other than in causing pain. If some internal bleeding was taken into account whenever bruising occurs, fights between unarmed living creatures would be much more fun and realistic.
With the ability to create and buy sites now in the works, will an adventurer be able to become a landlord and rent out land to the local peasants.
And with the new suspicion system and building system, would it possible to discreetly murder your tenants, hide their bodies in a hidden room and then blame an adventurer wandering into town?
There isn't a fixed tile scale, but wouldn't it be fair to call a boulder as 1/3 a tile width, and give accelleration as something like (3 horizontal tiles per ramp tile) ^ 2 ?
Quote from: AquillionWill adventure mode in DF ever track the player character's mood? It's such a big part of Dwarf Mode that it seems like it'd be a logical thing to extend to adventure mode although, of course, I wouldn't expect players to go insane without something Lovecraft-style causing them to. But there's various other things that could be done with it, like the bonuses / penalties I mentioned above.Quote from: isitanosThis is a great idea, that would give a subtle but real gameplay role to luxuries. A good reason for people who are not too much in roleplaying to buy masterwork beds. For players that actually want to be a sewer dweller and not be depressed all the time (even though a kind of gloomy, self-destructive character would fit with that theme), what makes the player happy/comfortable could change over time.
Will Armok ever make an appearance in DF? Like as a deity that all dwarves worship (in addition to their other, lesser gods)?
Will the heart and throat ever get any other use? I mean you fixed major arteries for the next update, but a blue heart (function completely lost) should be fatal, at the same time throat wounds should cause death from not being able to breathe like the old 40d days.
For when you implement full graphics support... are you going to release the game with its own tilesets already installed? And who would draw those tilesets? (As opposed to releasing it with just the capability to have tilesets installed.)
Speaking of mood, could we have fey/fell moods for the player, where he feels compelled to realize a feat, with a potentially great benefit but also a great penalty if he fails? To avoid a sudden unexpected possession to ruin a game, it should probably be rather easy to foresee, for example if they only have a chance of happening if you push the above mood mechanic to extremes, or you make a visit to an out-of-the-ordinary place such as a god's altar, or engage dialog with a powerful demon.
Isn't this what the Appraising skill is supposed to simulate? I mean, why have separate systems when we already have skills? The "chat with merchant" option could probably train the skill or add temporary bonuses.
Have you considered how things like "kneeling in front of the statue" will be controlled in terms of interface, etc? I'm a bid afraid that as you keep adding more and more moves/things to do in Adventure mode, the list of commands will become so enormously long it would be unusable. I'm thinking rare things like these might be triggered through some item in environment - like the statue here. Rather than having the next-to-useless "kneel" command available at all times, the player would click "interact" or something on the statue, and the game would list all possible things to do there, including kneeling. Or something... The other issue is that the player might not know he can kneel in front of the statue and that the game would react (and kneeling everywhere just to try if it does something is a bit over the top), so a menu like this would definitely help. The question here is if you have thought about how to handle controls in adventure mode in a way that would both allow the miriad of functions and still stay user friendly at the same time?
How about if some features were added at embark? You could generate the word with the feature frequency optimalised for adventure mode, and then throw in some extra features when the player embarks in fortress mode. Or alternatively scan the neighbouring map squares and move the features from there to the embark idea or something. Or something... The question is whether retrospecting "cheating" like this (that could probably help even in other ideas) is something you might consider, or a thing that doesn't fit into your idea of simulating the world.
How about switching from adventure mode to something like fortress mode when ordering minions? You could control you farm like in dwarf mode, then switch back to your adventurer at any time and continue adventuring. Is switching game modes (or more precisely, levels of control) something you would like to explore, or again something you don't like?
I think the issue here might be that it's too "god-like" and gives you more control than you would have if you stayed in "first person". But I disagree. Thinking about how dwarf mode works now, not only you can't control dwarves directly, but also all orders you can issue to your dwarves you could easily issue in "first person" too.
Will type of material matter in terms of how long it will take to be crushed or whether it can be crushed at all? Theres a big difference between wooden fence and block of solid steel/adamantine.
Seeing as how the whole world would be living, with caravans, thieves' dens, towns and all the schemes and politics, sites growing, thieves stealing, creatures murdering, how will this effect DF, performance wise? For all the calculations, it seems like a black hole of FPS, really.
Will it be possible for squads to automatically swap to training weapons when sparring?
Are we going to be able to have statues and figurines of deities soon? This would be a good filler until religion is focused on.
will moving fortress parts displace water, thus enabling an actual oversized piston pump to be created?
Regarding the "farming improvements" goals, how much detail is currently planned for tracking soil quality?
A completely accurate model would probably be a lot of effort/information with little to gain from it, though enough detail to properly encourage crop rotation seems like something that should make it in eventually.
Will blunt weapons be useful against skeletal enemies? One would think that skeletons wouldbe somewhat fragile, and a strong impact would be enough to take off a head or something. Will this be the case?
Question on marksdwarves: If you give them the order to kill a target and they are up in a tower, but on the wrong side, will they go try to find a place near them where they can shoot or will they run out of the tower to go find the enemy on the ground and then start shooting?
Quote from: FestinIs resizing the playing field as described above even theoretically possible?Quote from: TheDJ17Whould the above mentioned feature eventually be replaced with some sort of Fog of War?
With entity populations, I'm assuming that the first step would be taken for overworld nomadic civilizations, but is it likely that they'll be included?
If a dwarf has the personality trait 'likes maces' and he arrives (spawns) with some military skills, will he be a macedwarf or have skill in maces? Or will he spawn as 'likes maces,' arrive as a pikedwarf, and when assigned 'individual choice, melee,' he'll go and pick up a sword?
Do any of the mental skills do anything yet, or are they all flavory placeholders for now?
Spatial sense and kinesthetic sense seem like they could potentially affect certain combat rolls, for instance.
Will the addition of a crime tracking and investigation system be integrated into fortress mode? In other words, will random dwarves stop getting hammered (in a bad way) because of production mandate issues?
When we get to the point where history continues after worldgen ends and even as you control a Fortress or Adventurer, how will you handle this?
once entity pops are in, can we expect the current (ridiculously tiny) towns to get scrapped in short order? On a related note, does this mean we won't be seeing mundane people appearing in the legends screen anymore?
will the entity population update break save compat?
Given how much confusion and problems people have had, would you be willing to produce the exact, precise steps to get a Baron, and to get the economy to turn on? There's so many different and contradictory statements.
Will we be able to let the computer run a player created fortress? For instance, to play five years and then let it run itself while we play as adventurer or running other fortresses.
Will we be able to play a fortress, abandon it, then advance the world a set number of years?
Toady I see the Darkones, whos name leaves me, have slaves. In what ways do you plan for these slaves to come to pass? Will it be anywhere from transformed children, to the controlled, all the way to just people hired with cash?
Quote from: BaughnOnce there is a notion of relative wealth, will that include dwarf-mode economics, so we don't have to build buckets for our dwarves to sleep in?
Do you mean like people having good beds because they can afford them? Or that you wouldn't even have to build the wooden beds because most of the dwarves are destitute and sleeping on the rock (or soil!) floor?
Quote from: BaughnOnce there is a notion of relative wealth, will that include dwarf-mode economics, so we don't have to build buckets for our dwarves to sleep in?
Sorry if it's not the right place to ask, but would someone explain me what means entity populations?
As I understand it, entity populations are basically just.. non-named entities.
Like, "In this city live Urist McDwarf, Poison McElf, Trader McHuman, and fifteen dwarves." The three named characters have legends, and are tracked from birth to death; the other fifteen are more sparingly simulated, possibly even to the point of generating a history the moment you ask for one.
Of course, your own actions could quite possibly promote them to tracked status. Like, if you bring one to kill a dragon.. and he doesn't get eaten.
It's a cheap way to generate a larger-seeming world. I don't know if that's exactly how Toady is doing it, though. :P
Given how much confusion and problems people have had, would you be willing to produce the exact, precise steps to get a Baron, and to get the economy to turn on? There's so many different and contradictory statements.
The mental atts, as of the fixes for 0.31.11 (some of these are weird in part because only 3 mental atts can influence a roll, so there are holes, and there are probably dumb choices): A lot of these will only effect duration, when that is the only available skill effect to begin with, but they are factored into outcomes when it applies.
analytical ability skills: animal care, trapping, cheesemaker, cook, smelter, extract strand, cut gem, siege craft, siege operate, mechanics, architecture, diagnose, appraisal, organization, record keeping, knowledge acquisition, knapping
*snip*
Kind of seperate from adventure mode goals and the like, but will viruses be able to transfer through blood and vomit interaction anytime?
If a dwarf has a vomiting disease, I can see it spreading through a fortress pretty quick unless hospitalised (maybe buckets could be useful here!! hehe)
or a dwarf with a blood disease could be fighting, get a limb chopped off, and any goblins that come into contact with the blood would also be infected.
(as well as these realistic uses. I want zombies with infectious bites! :D I'm finding them hard to mod right now!)
Quote from: MephansterasWill you be adding in some code to handle worn materials protecting the wearer from various dangerous elements? Things like dragon scale armor protecting from firebreath or an artifact mask that protects against poisonous vapor would be fun.
If it's not magic, there are some still missing properties that should help, like thermal conductivity. Right now, a dragon item would become hot and not be damaged, but it would still convey heat to you. Even if it has a high specific heat, it would still store the energy and transfer some of it to you (though slower). So it really needs to reject the heat in the first place, which requires the conductivity. Or there's magic. Which I imagine would cover this kind of thing in most systems, at least in special cases.
Quote from: Ratbert_CPCan we have a goblin fry-basket made of magma safe wall and floor grates that we can place and/or trap creatures in, that we can then lower into a convenient pool of magma?
The only special provision the game would need to understand is that when the fortress part moves down, fluid should be pushed up through fluid-passable floors instead of treating it like an unpassable floor/wall. It'll be something I have to remember to do as a one-liner, but that's really all it comes down to, and I've written it down now to remind me. So yeah.
Quote from: HephToady you spoke of "Boulders" Buried in the soil. Does that include Multi-tile boulders like "Glacial boulders"?
I didn't think about multi-tile boulders. It could be like two rock wall tiles sitting in the soil (or on top of the soil, looking at these pictures) instead of anything treated as a special object. At that point, it's probably more for whenever we get canyons and mesas and interesting above ground stuff, rather than for this "adventurers and soil-bound dwarves get more access to large stones" change.
QuoteQuote from: PsieyeWill the new crushing traps with moving sections have the same 'atomsmashing' effect as raised bridges do now? Or will you get to uh... loot pancakes of whatever you killed?Quote from: HephIn addition to Psieye's question: Wouldt it be possible to remove atom-smashing for bridges and replace it by actual crushing?
The problem there is adding some kind of flag to have an item in a square, above the ground but below the buildings. It would need to be respected everywhere. It's not impossible, because there are already the buried and imbedded flags that are respected everywhere, and it would be nearly identical (except for the few places where it is actually added/removed). There's a further complication with the material spatter, but it's already a problem, which is whether the spatter is on the bridge or beneath the bridge, since I imagine some squashed items would just become spatter, instead of a crushed item.
Quote from: MephansterasWill you be adding in some code to handle worn materials protecting the wearer from various dangerous elements? Things like dragon scale armor protecting from firebreath or an artifact mask that protects against poisonous vapor would be fun.
If it's not magic, there are some still missing properties that should help, like thermal conductivity. Right now, a dragon item would become hot and not be damaged, but it would still convey heat to you. Even if it has a high specific heat, it would still store the energy and transfer some of it to you (though slower). So it really needs to reject the heat in the first place, which requires the conductivity. Or there's magic. Which I imagine would cover this kind of thing in most systems, at least in special cases.
Quote from: darkrider2will moving fortress parts displace water, thus enabling an actual oversized piston pump to be created?
It's doable using a slight modification of the current fluid code, but there are going to be a ton of edge and not-so-edge cases where it doesn't really work right, so we'll have to see how it turns out.
In a somewhat related vein, what are your plans on having equipment created from multiple materials? Spears, for example, are almost never made out of solid metal in real life. And most swords have wood and leather handles, or at least leather wrapped around the metal hilt.
Quote from: FootkerchiefQuote from: diefortheswarmQuestion about adamantine weapons.
If you wanted to make an adamantine hammer, you could make a hollow adamantine shell and fill it with molten lead. This would be a very effective weapon! Will we be able to do anything like this in the foreseeable future?
I could have sworn this exact idea came up before, but I couldn't find much. Anyway, it basically depends on whether/when Toady implements a system for multi-component or multi-material items. The quote below is about armor made of both leather and metal, but the challenges are mostly the same, so it's relevant:There's some trickiness with items that are actually made from multiple materials. Things like studding aren't as much of a problem, since the "improvements" on leather items can handle this. But a lot of the in-game items should actually have several materials just for their basic structure, and it becomes harder to account for them. Armok I played with making items up from components, but that was sort of a mess. On the other hand, I'd want to avoid going through all the hassles of fully respecting a half-leather/half-metal item (with respect to things like weight and temperature effects) if I'm just going to flesh it out more later. So, I dunno. I have to think more about what items will be like if I change it. Something like how it keeps track of threads and dyes might work for quite a long time (I think you can change the material of a bucket handle right now for instance), but certain items really don't have one main material, which is the problem.
Yeah, I remember it coming up before as well, at least as somebody's offhand remark, and yeah, we need some more backing in the code but it's definitely something that dwarves would want to do, assuming they don't have some weird ethics regarding mixing adamantine with stuff. I think at some point there was a rule against improving adamantine items or improving with adamantine, but that might be long gone.
Toady, having just noticed your thoughts on save-compatibility and the breaking thereof....
Have you thought of embedding a save file version number in the save file itself? it's (relatively) trivial to then maintain/upgrade older versions with (again relatively) simple logic.
just a thought. I's vewwy sowwy if it's been mentioned before.
Quote from: BaughnOnce there is a notion of relative wealth, will that include dwarf-mode economics, so we don't have to build buckets for our dwarves to sleep in?
A related question, Will dwarves, other than nobles*, get mood-thoughts from encountering dwarves at different relative wealth. Such as a poor dwarf seeing a rich dwarf. Would that depress or inspire? Instill envy? Can dwarves sense the magnitude of wealth difference?
*And their bedroom envy.
And, as a more serious question, will it ever be possible to add spikes to armor and shields? I'd think that Wrestlers would be a whole bunch more effective if they had spikes on their gauntlets. But IIRC, in the Eragon series, Dwarves have the spikes EMBEDDED INTO THEIR KNUCKLES! You could also put some spikes on the shield to make bashing more effective. Etc, etc, you get the point.
You can add spikes to armor right now, as a decorative improvement... strange that they don't actually come up in fighting... maybe I should jot that down somewhere...
Quote from: DoomduckieSince embedded weapons now cause bleeding to remove, does that mean we can have barbed arrows, spears, and javelins that cause more bleeding to pull out in some later version?
Yeah. That one in particular would be pretty straightforward, assuming barbs don't run afoul of the general item improvement system (with all the spikes and stuff) and get messy. But the pulling-out effects themselves are nicely set aside and can be easily enhanced.
Quote from: CespinarveGiven how much confusion and problems people have had, would you be willing to produce the exact, precise steps to get a Baron, and to get the economy to turn on? There's so many different and contradictory statements.
Well, given as there are plenty of mature forts with lots of economic output, I'm going to pop this in the bug tracker if it is not there already.
EDIT Already exists: http://www.bay12games.com/dwarves/mantisbt/view.php?id=519
I have this vision of DF implemented Tokyo-3 style fortress where buildings raise to surface or sink deep underground to huge carven where they hang from ceiling. (While Shinji McDwarf battles Bronze Collosus in his HFS made armor).Thats awesome idea, actually.
For the record, I don't get what's the excitement about having every single underground feature in every single fortress. Which means that once you've seen one fortress' underground, you've seen them all. Rather than regularly having, say, all 20 interesting features, I'd rather have 4-5 picked at random, and hopefully some variation on the contents of each of these. For obsessive compulsive or very casual players that must absolutely have them all, or for the time where you absolutely need a specific feature for a community game, some option that adds these features to the underground after embark would be perfect.Quote from: Jiri PetruHow about if some features were added at embark? You could generate the word with the feature frequency optimalised for adventure mode, and then throw in some extra features when the player embarks in fortress mode. Or alternatively scan the neighbouring map squares and move the features from there to the embark idea or something. Or something... The question is whether retrospecting "cheating" like this (that could probably help even in other ideas) is something you might consider, or a thing that doesn't fit into your idea of simulating the world.
I think it is more likely that you'd just get to interact with features in a wider area by being able to send out squads/armies through the underground layers to off-screen sites that have been harassing you, and then you'd get to seem them in their full glory (even if it is in frozen time or whatever).
Taken strictly as an isolated single-fort worldless game, it would make sense to add a special feature on every level, and perhaps that kind of thing would work as an init option, but when it comes to villains/etc. I prefer having a historical villain attack from offscreen over a generated villain base being guaranteed, for example. We'll have to see how it plays out as you have more off-screen interactions. If it takes care of itself at that point, with the occasional point of interest actual being under the fort, perhaps with site-finding options, then that would be good. The deepest underground can more afford to be glutted with features in adv mode as well, so that should also help a bit.
For the record, I don't get what's the excitement about having every single underground feature in every single fortress. Which means that once you've seen one fortress' underground, you've seen them all. Rather than regularly having, say, all 20 interesting features, I'd rather have 4-5 picked at random, and hopefully some variation on the contents of each of these. For obsessive compulsive or very casual players that must absolutely have them all, or for the time where you absolutely need a specific feature for a community game, some option that adds these features to the underground after embark would be perfect.Seconded!
And once you have figured out how to make the market economy work, it would be great if you could share some of your code with the folks in Washington DC, Brussels, &c.
Which is to say, first make the market economy work, then consider noble/personality-driven exceptions.
And once you have figured out how to make the market economy work, it would be great if you could share some of your code with the folks in Washington DC, Brussels, &c.
Which is to say, first make the market economy work, then consider noble/personality-driven exceptions.
The problem was that while that was the case for a bit you get a lot of people also who complain that they can't find a site with ALL the features and the number of people who want ALL the features is quite immense.Granted, however some of those complaints would have gone away once the improvements to the site finder are implemented as long as there are some sites with all the features, and relative frequency is controllable from the worldgen parameters.
Mind you I agree that not all sites should have all the features... but well... it isn't that hard to find topics about it.
Second one is regarding ethics, in particular the KILL_PLANT ethic which prevents deforestation around an entity's sites. This one is awkward for me because I'm trying to mod an entity that lives in forests and doesn't cause that sort of deforestation, but will still accept and trade wooden goods. In a larger sense, could such "terraforming" be moved away from ethics and into some other raw flag?
Toady, can you describe how the weapon sizes work in relation to the creature sizes? For example, I've seen dwarves happily pick up and use a modded in weapon one handed even though it has [TWO_HANDED:62500]
From what I've seen with my modding of 31.x, entities that can START in forests do not deforest them regardless of their ethics. My Bugbears are good with pretty much everything, but they don't deforest their homes.
Quote from: tfaalwill the entity population update break save compat?Old saves will be playable, but they likely won't have the additional sprawl that the update will provide on new maps. Since this sprawl won't be used outside of adv mode for a while, it shouldn't be a big deal that it isn't there for dwarf mode games. I imagine loading in a save from now into DF way down the line might be a little weird, especially when we get to the point that attacking armies aren't generated. We'll either make provisions at that point or just let it float. I'm not sure. If village generation at the region level is simple enough, old saves could just get padded out with entity pop settlements on appropriate non-player site squares.
~snip~
In similar vein, will we ever be able to send our own dwarven military units to distant offmap sites, for example, to raid a nearby goblin stronghold? Or perhaps even some REALLY distant targets? I was hoping the game could remove the selected military units for a certain period of time (depending how far the target site is) and make the dwarves return with various injuries and possibly equipment losses, but not without loot, battle experience and other spoils of war! Perhaps do some creative coding magic and print an after-action report explaining how Urist McUnlucky was attacked by a diseased bear on the way back home?
# ARMY ARC: You should be able to control patrols and then armies in dwarf mode. The adventurer should be able to both go with and command armies. In dwarf mode, you should have the option to control your individual patrol members as you would in adventure mode. Entities should war with each other from bandit and monster raids to full fledged wars. Upset entities could patrol near their sites, leading to new wilderness encounters etc. Related to Core26, Core27, Core35, Core45, Core46, [...]
# Core26, OVERLAND ARMIES ATTACKS, (Future): The invasions by various creatures should no longer generate soldiers, but should use overland armies instead. There should be some AI limits in place to stop early dwarven outposts from being overwhelmed (at least as a default). Requires Core25 and Core45.
# Core27, ARMIES OF DWARVES, (Future): You should be able to send patrols (and, as you get more dwarves, armies) out over the world map. They could attack smaller nearby threats, such as a kobold cave, or let you know about incoming invasions. Requires Core26.
# Core35, DWARF RAIDS, (Future): If you send one of your patrols to attack a site, and it is small enough, you should be able to control the units individually, as in adventure mode. If your group is large, then you could either control one squad as a party, and have the others on AI, or you could let the whole thing run real-time as in dwarf mode. Requires Core27.
# Core45, CIVILIZATIONS AT WAR, (Future): Civilizations (for example, goblins or expansionist humans) should be able to declare war on each other and raise armies. They can send messengers to outlying towns or gather soldiers as they march from town to town toward their destinations. Requires Core44.
# Core46, ARMY BATTLES, (Future): Hostile armies that meet each other should be able to fight and take losses. Armies should be able to attack towns, take captive historical figures, and switch towns to new allegiances over time. Does not include protracted sieges, tactics or strategy -- just the basics. An adventurer at the site of an army battle can observe it. Requires Core45.
In similar vein, will we ever be able to send our own dwarven military units to distant offmap sites, for example, to raid a nearby goblin stronghold? Or perhaps even some REALLY distant targets? I was hoping the game could remove the selected military units for a certain period of time (depending how far the target site is) and make the dwarves return with various injuries and possibly equipment losses, but not without loot, battle experience and other spoils of war! Perhaps do some creative coding magic and print an after-action report explaining how Urist McUnlucky was attacked by a diseased bear on the way back home?
This is basically the Army Arc that Toady has been talking about for years. Here are the old dev items: (http://bay12games.com/dwarves/dev_single.html)Quote# ARMY ARC: You should be able to control patrols and then armies in dwarf mode. The adventurer should be able to both go with and command armies. In dwarf mode, you should have the option to control your individual patrol members as you would in adventure mode. Entities should war with each other from bandit and monster raids to full fledged wars. Upset entities could patrol near their sites, leading to new wilderness encounters etc. Related to Core26, Core27, Core35, Core45, Core46, [...]
# Core26, OVERLAND ARMIES ATTACKS, (Future): The invasions by various creatures should no longer generate soldiers, but should use overland armies instead. There should be some AI limits in place to stop early dwarven outposts from being overwhelmed (at least as a default). Requires Core25 and Core45.
# Core27, ARMIES OF DWARVES, (Future): You should be able to send patrols (and, as you get more dwarves, armies) out over the world map. They could attack smaller nearby threats, such as a kobold cave, or let you know about incoming invasions. Requires Core26.
# Core35, DWARF RAIDS, (Future): If you send one of your patrols to attack a site, and it is small enough, you should be able to control the units individually, as in adventure mode. If your group is large, then you could either control one squad as a party, and have the others on AI, or you could let the whole thing run real-time as in dwarf mode. Requires Core27.
# Core45, CIVILIZATIONS AT WAR, (Future): Civilizations (for example, goblins or expansionist humans) should be able to declare war on each other and raise armies. They can send messengers to outlying towns or gather soldiers as they march from town to town toward their destinations. Requires Core44.
# Core46, ARMY BATTLES, (Future): Hostile armies that meet each other should be able to fight and take losses. Armies should be able to attack towns, take captive historical figures, and switch towns to new allegiances over time. Does not include protracted sieges, tactics or strategy -- just the basics. An adventurer at the site of an army battle can observe it. Requires Core45.
I'm really stoked for this update. More than anything, the training, equipment issues, and bugs related to the military have been the biggest stumbling block for me getting back into DF since the big update. Spending two months micro managing soldiers trying to get them to train, only to get wiped out in the first ambush because nothing has actually been working, has killed my desire to play DF. So I'm hoping this next update cures all that, and I can get back to enjoy the full game.
Ah, but the next version (..or the one after it, likely) will support proportional fonts. Meaning, text will not be limited to one letter per cell (unless you turn this off); it'll use a truetype font instead. How's that? :D
From what I've seen with my modding of 31.x, entities that can START in forests do not deforest them regardless of their ethics. My Bugbears are good with pretty much everything, but they don't deforest their homes.
In preparation for the entity pop stuff, I added [START_BIOME:ANY_FOREST] to the humans in addition to their other biomes, and they still deforested. Does that work for you?
Based on the tile grid. I'm altering the interface the absolute minimum amount (adding an option to justify left, right, center or not use truetype at all - defaulting to left), which means it'll be justified inside a box based on the amount of space it'd take if not being rendered using truetype. It's not ideal, but it should be fine.Ah, but the next version (..or the one after it, likely) will support proportional fonts. Meaning, text will not be limited to one letter per cell (unless you turn this off); it'll use a truetype font instead. How's that? :D
Whoa. Will the borders/positioning of text areas have to be based on the tile grid, or will they basically be free-floating? Are they just rendered on top of the tile grid?
From what I've seen with my modding of 31.x, entities that can START in forests do not deforest them regardless of their ethics. My Bugbears are good with pretty much everything, but they don't deforest their homes.
In preparation for the entity pop stuff, I added [START_BIOME:ANY_FOREST] to the humans in addition to their other biomes, and they still deforested. Does that work for you?
Hmm, that's interesting. I get the same result when I add that tag to Humans. But my other new forest races, like Wolfmen and Jackalmen, don't deforest either.
[...]
Based on the tile grid. I'm altering the interface the absolute minimum amount (adding an option to justify left, right, center or not use truetype at all - defaulting to left), which means it'll be justified inside a box based on the amount of space it'd take if not being rendered using truetype. It's not ideal, but it should be fine.
Improving this is the fact that there are (accessible) functions used to decide what text is used in the first place based on how much space is available, which I can modify to take the proportional font into account.
From what I've seen with my modding of 31.x, entities that can START in forests do not deforest them regardless of their ethics. My Bugbears are good with pretty much everything, but they don't deforest their homes.
In preparation for the entity pop stuff, I added [START_BIOME:ANY_FOREST] to the humans in addition to their other biomes, and they still deforested. Does that work for you?
Hmm, that's interesting. I get the same result when I add that tag to Humans. But my other new forest races, like Wolfmen and Jackalmen, don't deforest either.
[...]
Try to change the site type to town. Its only a guess but the Wooden Buildings of Human towns could draw theyr material from the forrests.
Based on the tile grid. I'm altering the interface the absolute minimum amount (adding an option to justify left, right, center or not use truetype at all - defaulting to left), which means it'll be justified inside a box based on the amount of space it'd take if not being rendered using truetype. It's not ideal, but it should be fine.Ah, but the next version (..or the one after it, likely) will support proportional fonts. Meaning, text will not be limited to one letter per cell (unless you turn this off); it'll use a truetype font instead. How's that? :D
Whoa. Will the borders/positioning of text areas have to be based on the tile grid, or will they basically be free-floating? Are they just rendered on top of the tile grid?
Improving this is the fact that there are (accessible) functions used to decide what text is used in the first place based on how much space is available, which I can modify to take the proportional font into account.
I've yet to complete the project, but it's looking good. I'll see if I can get some screenshots up next I have internet.. er, which will be a week from now. (I have web access via my cellphone, so I might post here, but uploading images is a bit harder.)
That sounds radtacular. You should make it only accessible via a widget-oriented API, so that Toady can only have nice fonts if he stops coding menus entirely from scratch (I have no proof that he does this, but it's the only explanation I can imagine for the types of crashes that used to happen on the military menu).Heh. I'd do that, but then it wouldn't automatically work with all the old code. :P
I wasn't aware that Baughn had capability/authority to do that much with the interface code. Is that a recent development, or no?
Yeah, but I still can't help but feel like Baughn's talking as if he can speak on behalf of Dwarf Fortress's development himself. This has happened a few times now, to the point where I'm wondering if it's just a fluke.Lets just not turn this into another flamewar like you did with in-game scripting. Baughn's part is open-sourced, http://github.com/Baughn/Dwarf-Fortress--libgraphics- and he can do w/e he want with it (and, you could too, its open-source), and talk w/e he want about what he does with that part. Its always up to Toady to accept his changes into his tree, and its obvious for everyone.
I think what he was saying was that it may seem somewhat presumptuous of Baughn to speak as though he's the decider on this matter, when it's still Toady's DF. Except that Baughn's doing a good thing which is a huge step forward as far as interface goes, and I really doubt Toady wouldn't include it in the vanilla game. And even if, for some reason, he were to not do so, Baughn could have his own DF download available, like he did with the 40d# series.Yeah, but I still can't help but feel like Baughn's talking as if he can speak on behalf of Dwarf Fortress's development himself. This has happened a few times now, to the point where I'm wondering if it's just a fluke.Lets just not turn this into another flamewar like you did with in-game scripting. Baughn's part is open-sourced, http://github.com/Baughn/Dwarf-Fortress--libgraphics- and he can do w/e he want with it (and, you could too, its open-source), and talk w/e he want about what he does with that part. Its always up to Toady to accept his changes into his tree, and its obvious for everyone.
As any other open-source, if you dont like what Baughn does, you can fork it and do it yourself.
And even if, for some reason, he were to not do so, Baughn could have his own DF download available, like he did with the 40d# series.
Isn't that basically how Moh's hardness scale works already?Quote from: QuatchAlong with the in-game encyclopedia for new creatures, would it be possible (and useful vs above comments) to procedurally generate descriptions of what the various metals are good at?
Well, documentation is documentation, and we've obviously been lacking there. Having random metals would allow for a natural improvement of the descriptions for the stock stuff, so maybe that would be a good ticket. We got the reaction lists up for stone sometime in the past, and I guess it would be something like that, where it would be able to compare the value of metals. I don't want it to display kPA values and stuff, but I guess it could display a list of the common metals and show where your dwarves think the metal/material in question fits in to the picture.
Baughn didn't build the 40d# releases himself; he still relies on Toady for that, as far as I know. I could be wrong, if something has changed.Not exactly. There is pre-compiled binary ./libs/Dwarf_Fortress which is dynamically linked against libgraphics.so.
Two different things:
- The proportional fonts. I've already talked that over with Toady, and he's fine with the proposed interface - as you guessed, there was already an "add this string to the output" function, which I'm just modifying. I'm fine with speaking authoritatively on that, as it's near-guaranteed to go in.
- Scheme UI builder. Not even discussed it with toady. Did I strike the wrong tone there, then? It's just an attempt to show him another way to do things, not something I expect would affect DF as such..
I haven't actually played DF since the 40d version.. don't intend to, anytime soon. Frankly, at the moment it's more amusing to improve it than play it. I'll play later, once all the bugs are out. :P
Moh's hardness is sorta like that, a ranking of hardness (turns out if you use a Ratio level of measurement (ie. rockwell), its non-linear, esp near the top.). And yeah, I suppose it would start to address the issue I suggested, being that hardness is pretty important in the battle calculations (as it stood), but what I was looking for wasn't an additional kind of number (albeit a compressed to 1-10 scale would simplify it for most people), but an in-world recommendation engine for the "dwarf-preferred" material for this endevour (well, dwarf-third-preferred, after Ad. and gold).Isn't that basically how Moh's hardness scale works already?Quote from: QuatchAlong with the in-game encyclopedia for new creatures, would it be possible (and useful vs above comments) to procedurally generate descriptions of what the various metals are good at?
Well, documentation is documentation, and we've obviously been lacking there. Having random metals would allow for a natural improvement of the descriptions for the stock stuff, so maybe that would be a good ticket. We got the reaction lists up for stone sometime in the past, and I guess it would be something like that, where it would be able to compare the value of metals. I don't want it to display kPA values and stuff, but I guess it could display a list of the common metals and show where your dwarves think the metal/material in question fits in to the picture.
Two different things:
- The proportional fonts. I've already talked that over with Toady, and he's fine with the proposed interface - as you guessed, there was already an "add this string to the output" function, which I'm just modifying. I'm fine with speaking authoritatively on that, as it's near-guaranteed to go in.
- Scheme UI builder. Not even discussed it with toady. Did I strike the wrong tone there, then? It's just an attempt to show him another way to do things, not something I expect would affect DF as such..
Isn't that basically how Moh's hardness scale works already?Quote from: QuatchAlong with the in-game encyclopedia for new creatures, would it be possible (and useful vs above comments) to procedurally generate descriptions of what the various metals are good at?
Well, documentation is documentation, and we've obviously been lacking there. Having random metals would allow for a natural improvement of the descriptions for the stock stuff, so maybe that would be a good ticket. We got the reaction lists up for stone sometime in the past, and I guess it would be something like that, where it would be able to compare the value of metals. I don't want it to display kPA values and stuff, but I guess it could display a list of the common metals and show where your dwarves think the metal/material in question fits in to the picture.
If work on displaying strings is going on, any chance on taking the one-time hit to change to unicode? Nice for us non-stateside peoples! Plus, you know, more accents than you could shake a stick at, for those who want to mod in new languages...
No Unicode at the moment, sorry, but I suppose having truetype support in would make adding that a little easier in the future.
One potential problem is that I'm not removing the *old* string display code, so it wouldn't be possible to display uncode in all modes. Hm, but I suppose we could look at replacing the tileset as such with a fixed font, once the "full graphics support" goesin and it's reduced to just text.
I'll have to think about that some more later. It'd be a lot more work for Toady, too.
Toady, can you describe how the weapon sizes work in relation to the creature sizes? For example, I've seen dwarves happily pick up and use a modded in weapon one handed even though it has [TWO_HANDED:62500]
Toady, can you describe how the weapon sizes work in relation to the creature sizes? For example, I've seen dwarves happily pick up and use a modded in weapon one handed even though it has [TWO_HANDED:62500]
On a related note, it seems like all of the two-handed weapons are from the Dwarf/Elf/Goblin point of view. That two-handed sword could be wielded one-handed by even a smallish human. Same with Pikes, Great Axes, and Mauls. This seems a bit odd. Shouldn't the humans have some weapons that are two-handed for them?
One potential problem is that I'm not removing the *old* string display code, so it wouldn't be possible to display uncode in all modes. Hm, but I suppose we could look at replacing the tileset as such with a fixed font, once the "full graphics support" goesin and it's reduced to just text.While it's not a "beautiful" solution, if you stored strings internally as UTF-8, and had the string display function check for a byte-order mark (U+FEFF, 0xEF,0xBB,0xBF in UTF-8) and if it doesn't find it, default to DF's modified CP437. That way, the functions that call the string display could be upgraded piecemeal, rather than requiring a big bang approach.
I'll have to think about it some more. Come to think of it, is a BOM even allowed in utf-8?Ah, that depends on who you ask. If you ask the Unicode Consortium, they say it's not necessary, since a stream is either valid UTF-8 or it isn't. However, it's not illegal. In DF, you could probably use some never-printed-as-text character as a marker instead, but you might as well use one that makes sense in a unicode context.
While it's not a "beautiful" solution, if you stored strings internally as UTF-8, and had the string display function check for a byte-order mark (U+FEFF, 0xEF,0xBB,0xBF in UTF-8) and if it doesn't find it, default to DF's modified CP437. That way, the functions that call the string display could be upgraded piecemeal, rather than requiring a big bang approach.How about converting all text to UTF-8 everywhere and using UTF-8 strings everywhere, and simply have a function that translates UTF-8 to CP437 for the cases that need it?
Re-writing the language files etc. as UTF-8 encoded is easy, since I've already got a program that does it for the log files.
Well, I don't want to speak on his behalf, but I think Baughn's overriding principle is "make no extra work for Toady," which is why the idea for a function that works exactly the same for all the existing call points in Toady's code, but if at some point in the future he wants to try out a Unicode string or two, it's in there ready to go.While it's not a "beautiful" solution, if you stored strings internally as UTF-8, and had the string display function check for a byte-order mark (U+FEFF, 0xEF,0xBB,0xBF in UTF-8) and if it doesn't find it, default to DF's modified CP437. That way, the functions that call the string display could be upgraded piecemeal, rather than requiring a big bang approach.How about converting all text to UTF-8 everywhere and using UTF-8 strings everywhere, and simply have a function that translates UTF-8 to CP437 for the cases that need it?
Re-writing the language files etc. as UTF-8 encoded is easy, since I've already got a program that does it for the log files.
You could also implement a data file (init, raw or otherwise) that contains a translation table from Unicode to tile indexes. So you could map U+0041 to tile 204 if you really wanted to. This also creates a neater solution to the issue of advanced tilesets modifying the language files to remove accented characters: Instead just make accented character codepoints translate to the unaccented tile images.
There are equations for acceleration on an inclined plane.They aren't really needed for the discrete timescales you're dealing with.
...but it potentially sets things up for crazy Dwarven Marble Madness. :D
If you wanted to get even more fancy…
The interesting (and harder to program) question is what happens when a fast rolling boulder hits a ramp up, or a sideways ramp. The easy solution would just ignore them and roll onwards, shedding energy when forced to go up, but it potentially sets things up for crazy Dwarven Marble Madness. :DOf course, when we get really insane we will also want to use ramps to change the boulders directions... Or launch them into empty space (although I think Toady is already ahead of us there- "things arcing through the sky")
Two different things:
- The proportional fonts. I've already talked that over with Toady, and he's fine with the proposed interface - as you guessed, there was already an "add this string to the output" function, which I'm just modifying. I'm fine with speaking authoritatively on that, as it's near-guaranteed to go in.
- Scheme UI builder. Not even discussed it with toady. Did I strike the wrong tone there, then? It's just an attempt to show him another way to do things, not something I expect would affect DF as such..
X is still problematic, because besides stairs, it's used for bins and floodgates and the cursor and probably some other things I'm not remembering at the moment.Two different things:
- The proportional fonts. I've already talked that over with Toady, and he's fine with the proposed interface - as you guessed, there was already an "add this string to the output" function, which I'm just modifying. I'm fine with speaking authoritatively on that, as it's near-guaranteed to go in.
- Scheme UI builder. Not even discussed it with toady. Did I strike the wrong tone there, then? It's just an attempt to show him another way to do things, not something I expect would affect DF as such..
There's just one thing I want to know about this:
Does this mean that we can replace the parts in the tileset reserved for letters with symbols and still have letters show up when required? No more "x" up/down staircases, for example.
Archery targets.
I loaded up my save in the new version, spent a minute trying to find my archery range before figuring it was the room with Xs down both sides: bins of ammo and archery targets.
I'm using an actual outright truetype font file, data/art/font.ttf, so font rendering should be basically the same as in every other application.
You will still be able to turn that off, to get the old look, but yes - if you don't, tilesets that alter the alphabetic letters should no longer affect text.
You will still be able to turn that off, to get the old look, but yes - if you don't, tilesets that alter the alphabetic letters should no longer affect text.
Archery targets.
I loaded up my save in the new version, spent a minute trying to find my archery range before figuring it was the room with Xs down both sides: bins of ammo and archery targets.
Urist McCrossbower cancells practice crossbowery: Unsure of which end of the room to shoot at.
We haven't made any final decisions. I think a NPK+pH model does give you something back, because you'd get some really great varied local landscapes and it would take care of crop rotation, composting, naturally poor soil, or whatever else, but it introduces a farming interface problem to dwarf mode in terms of conveying the information in wholesome terms and allowing you to solve problems that come up.
As for the zoning for commerce part, that was simply an example of "loosening the leash", something else we could do, for example, is simply not assign labors to dwarves, and just have job requests which dwarves fill based upon what job they want to perform that day. If dwarves own their own workshops, that would be significantly changed by what they own.
It could even be a model where dwarves own the resources they harvest or create, and you have to "buy" it from them with fortress funds, and they can simply start setting up their own industries based on their own preferences, and you just post "contracts" to buy certain amounts of products or materials, and let the dwarves do the rest as they see fit, while paying them in money that presumably must be taxed of them.
That would be SIGNIFICANTLY slipping their leash, to the point where dwarves are total free spirits that you have very little direct control over. I'm asking for a matter of degree players would want their dwarves to become autonomous.
@kohaku:
autonomous dwarf behaviour.
In dev* it states that dwarves are planned to follow veins when mining.
That is a small step forward in autonomy.
(*just below the improved mechanics section).
@kohaku:
autonomous dwarf behaviour.
In dev* it states that dwarves are planned to follow veins when mining.
That is a small step forward in autonomy.
(*just below the improved mechanics section).
that is, the player -- would have to be the driving force of labor.
I wonder... The old Dev items are gone but is there anywhere they have been preserved? I liked looking at them in the same way I like looking at the Armok 1 devs.
@kohaku: The Majesty (r) paradigm.
I like the principle, but I fear a game has to be designed from such principles from the start, otherwise gameplay will suffer.
I'm in a pessimist mood though. :P
What I am talking about in that thread I referenced is, at its most extreme, starting to remove the whole need to assign labors to dwarves, because they start deciding what jobs they want to take up on their own, based on financial incintives from the player and the personality and likes of the dwarf.
I'm not sure what you mean by "The Majesty Paradigm" (and Google didn't help much) but...
Random question: When are Adventurers and Fortress Mode dwarves going to get Mounts? What are the current hurdles involved in allowing those, since invaders seem to use mounts just fine?
-seeds will germinate into seedlings if their favoured conditions are met. (min_floortype/req soil/mud etc, moisturelevel/near water, etc) else, seeds can lie dormant for years, waiting. attrition applies though.
The problem with that is that we are trying to make soil conditions only be recorded for tiles that are farm tiles, rather than having it be tracked for every tile on the map, where the costs of recording nutrient data would be massive when you multiply by the hundreds of thousands of tiles that can be on a given map.
Note the "you'd get some really great varied local landscapes" part of Toady's comment, so he's clearly thinking beyond just farms. How about just the muddy/soil tiles, then? (Unless we're looking for really weird floating spore trees or something. Which do sound pretty cool, actually)
Could add even more FPS limitations on massive fluid projects, though some of the stuff with having actual pipes (instead of muddy hallways to fill with roads) might help some of that.
Well, I would only see that mattering underground, with all the muddy tiles over random stones. Aboveground, all the soil is very likely to be the same kind of soil, which should mean the same nutrients (unless we are talking about having a model for having certain patches of soil be depleted or especially fertile randomly before dwarves show up, or have models for water runoff that leech nutrients in certain areas more than others... which seems extreme even for Toady).
I read it more as different biomes/etc having different soil properties, so a forest on a higher pH soil might play host to different plants than a forest on a lower pH soil, or something like that. Variation on what the local level is like, rather than variation within the local level.
I read it more as different biomes/etc having different soil properties, so a forest on a higher pH soil might play host to different plants than a forest on a lower pH soil, or something like that. Variation on what the local level is like, rather than variation within the local level.
I only know a few plants we use, or used, for food that actually use acidic soil.
While underlying rock is important in generating soils, recent glaciology is critical and often mixes things up substantially. Only in tropical soils and very thin soils are you likely to always have a strong relationship between underlying rock and soil.
I don't actually recall hearing about glaciers and their effects on soil forming, or how soils are chosen in game.
I want.
What I am talking about in that thread I referenced is, at its most extreme, starting to remove the whole need to assign labors to dwarves, because they start deciding what jobs they want to take up on their own, based on financial incintives from the player and the personality and likes of the dwarf.
What I'm talking about is taking some of the control out of the hands of the player, as opposed to simply automating a process that a player would normally simply have to micromanage. Reducing micronmanagement is a relatively simple argument to make, but I think people would have very conflicted views on whether or not to start giving the player less God-like control over the thoughts of his/her dwarves.
Under what circumstances would you ever consider releasing the game under creative commons or some other open source license? Would you do it if you were terminally ill and had 3 months to live?
Hey Toady, What's your favorite DF drink? Are you a Dwarven Rum man, or a Strawberry Wine guy? Or some MYSTERY THIRD OPTION!?!
Purring Maggot Milk?
NOT A DRINKHey Toady, What's your favorite DF drink? Are you a Dwarven Rum man, or a Strawberry Wine guy? Or some MYSTERY THIRD OPTION!?!
Purring Maggot Milk?
Hey Toady, What's your favorite DF drink? Are you a Dwarven Rum man, or a Strawberry Wine guy? Or some MYSTERY THIRD OPTION!?!
Hey Toady, What's your favorite DF drink? Are you a Dwarven Rum man, or a Strawberry Wine guy? Or some MYSTERY THIRD OPTION!?!
7/30/2010 Dev Note: Add Zima as brewable drink
He doesn't often drink beer, but when he does, he prefers DosEquisElfos.
He doesn't often drink beer, but when he does, he prefers Dos Equis.
Will we have goblin bones re-enabled for use in decoration? I recall I used them for that purpose in 40d.
I don't quite see how it's a bug that dwarves don't butcher goblins or use their remains to decorate stuff or create crafts when their ethics say that this isn't a proper thing to do. Sure, I guess you could tell them to ignore their ethics and have them suffer bad thoughts, but that's more of a feature request, isn't it? Well, and the possibility to make use of sentient creature corpses for more practical things like bolts.
Ah, well, that sorta is a bug, though as you say, it's needed for undead skeletons. The original post was about goblin bone decorations, though, so it didn't quite register what you meant.
Don't worry, the font getting too large isn't a problem. :-XHmm. Since it looks like you've got the capacity to post images at the moment, could we maybe get some sort of collage type deal illustrating how it works out in different situation? The single example is perhaps not super revealing.
What about square tilesets, how will TTF work with that?Baughn explained a few pages back, an area is defined according to where the text would be if it were still tile-based, and the TrueType text is just printed in there, with no regard for tiles. Thus the shape of the tileset doesn't matter.
Don't worry, the font getting too large isn't a problem. :-XHmm. Since it looks like you've got the capacity to post images at the moment, could we maybe get some sort of collage type deal illustrating how it works out in different situation? The single example is perhaps not super revealing.
During worldgen the dwarven civilisations are occasionally wiped out by war, with many dwarves fleeing to the hills. At what point do you see it being possible for the player to launch a reclaim mission on the original Mountain Halls? Do you see this as more of an adventurer mission that would be ordered by the king?
Before you can reclaim a worldgen site, there needs to be code to generate dwarven fortresses procedurally...
I need to make that suggestion, already...
Before you can reclaim a worldgen site, there needs to be code to generate dwarven fortresses procedurally...
I need to make that suggestion, already...
Toady already commented on it and he wants to make them like Player fortresses (which I don't think is really all that needed) and frankly I don't see what is soo difficult about making a Dwarf City proceedurally when Toady already created limitations within known as "Noise".
Dwarf Fortresses are easy enough.
It is the Dwarf towns and cities that are the more questionable aspect. Are they above ground or huge sprawling underground cities?
Actually, it would be kind of nice if there was code that could keep skeletons together for the purposes of making undead, but could recognize when it's just normal-dead, and things could just plain rot so our stockpiles don't fill up with various unrotting body parts either for all eternity or until we use some kind of exploit like an atom smasher to get rid of them.
It's not like this HAS to be either-or.
That could also be useful for modders.
Imagine monsters made of metal and stuff simply falling apart when they're 'killed'.
That would be fun.
Or they have the technology to make metal foam (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metal_foam).
I would assume it's only about one meter or five feet cubed, based on the sizes of the intities which construct buildings and whatnot. Bigger creatures will likely be multitile, once that functionality goes in.Or they have the technology to make metal foam (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metal_foam).
Unfortunately, not even that works, as it's only about 5% as dense or 20 times as voluminous as regular metal.
If we go by the 3-meter-cube assumption for tiles, we are turning a 2-liter bar of metal into a 27m3 or 27,000 liter wall, a change of 13,500 times the volume.
I would assume it's only about one meter or five feet cubed, based on the sizes of the intities which construct buildings and whatnot. Bigger creatures will likely be multitile, once that functionality goes in.
It looks like humans have gotten the most of the recent village development. How are the other races going to handle things? Are we going to see goblin villages and the like? And how are they going to be different from what you're doing with the humans?
It looks like humans have gotten the most of the recent village development. How are the other races going to handle things? Are we going to see goblin villages and the like? And how are they going to be different from what you're doing with the humans?
A obsidian castle with magma moat or people-burning-inside pit with towers occupied by poison-breathing FB's would do nice :D
Hey Toady, you use the term "townsperson" in the latest dev post, and contrast these people with "farmers". I'm not really sure what the distinction here is. Would you clarify what you mean for me?"
Problem is that the first underground layer is a good 20 z-levels below the surface. Bit deep for a farmer to dig.Dwarves already dig underground roads. I see no reason a settlement couldn't exist in the underground.
Hey Toady, you use the term "townsperson" in the latest dev post, and contrast these people with "farmers". I'm not really sure what the distinction here is. Would you clarify what you mean for me?"Presumably farmers farm, and live out in the countryside, whereas townspeople live in towns, and run the local inn and general store and whatever else
Hey Toady, you use the term "townsperson" in the latest dev post, and contrast these people with "farmers". I'm not really sure what the distinction here is. Would you clarify what you mean for me?"
Townspeople live in towns and probably have the normal variety of trades -- blacksmith, clothier, leatherworker, etc. Farmers live in villages and do farmer stuff.
I would assume it's only about one meter or five feet cubed, based on the sizes of the intities which construct buildings and whatnot. Bigger creatures will likely be multitile, once that functionality goes in.
First, 1 meter does not equal 5 feet. 1 meter is about 3.28 feet. Yes, they are "dwarves", but they aren't lawn gnomes. They are only 6/7ths of human size.
Second, yes dwarves are short, but even if we say they were about 4'6" on average, with 5' being as rare as 6'6" is to humans, then you still wouldn't build floors 5 feet apart. For one thing, you need about two feet of actual floor between floors, and for another, you don't build houses for humans with only 6' of headroom even if it is rare for humans to be 6' tall. You build them with 8' of headroom, where most people would have to jump to touch the ceiling.
That means we're talking 2.5 meters, minimum, although 3 meters is more likely, and frankly, makes an easier number to calculate with.
Finally, even if we were talking about a 1 cubic meter tile, that's still 1,000 liters of wall being constructed from 2 liters of metal, when even metal foam would only stretch that to 40 liters.
It looks like humans have gotten the most of the recent village development. How are the other races going to handle things? Are we going to see goblin villages and the like? And how are they going to be different from what you're doing with the humans?
A obsidian castle with magma moat or people-burning-inside pit with towers occupied by poison-breathing FB's would do nice :D
And dwarfs use the first layer of the UG where they carve rooms into the walls of the caves which they use as farms.
I think they're 5 feet square, and 10 feet tall.
Or they have the technology to make metal foam (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metal_foam).
Unfortunately, not even that works, as it's only about 5% as dense or 20 times as voluminous as regular metal.
If we go by the 3-meter-cube assumption for tiles, we are turning a 2-liter bar of metal into a 27m3 or 27,000 liter wall, a change of 13,500 times the volume.
Unfortunately, not even that works, as it's only about 5% as dense or 20 times as voluminous as regular metal.
If we go by the 3-meter-cube assumption for tiles, we are turning a 2-liter bar of metal into a 27m3 or 27,000 liter wall, a change of 13,500 times the volume.
What if the wall-cube is hollow?
Turning 2 liters (.002 m3) into a surface of 54 m2 would leave us with a thickness of... 3.7037073 *10-5 meters, or roughly .04 mm thick.
For comparison, paper is roughly .1 mm thick.
Turning 2 liters (.002 m3) into a surface of 54 m2 would leave us with a thickness of... 3.7037073 *10-5 meters, or roughly .04 mm thick.
For comparison, paper is roughly .1 mm thick.
So it is about the thickness of Aluminium foil (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aluminium_foil)
The one in the photo is 0.013 mm thick.
So now we can have a consensus that dwarven walls are hollow cubes with sides made of metal foil...
Btw why assumption that metal bars are 2 litres? I have always assumed thay are much more metal amount, about the volume of a dwarf. Notice that it says "Iron bars" not "Iron bar" ingame, so there can as well be a huge pile of them.
More fun with numbers:
Every bar appears to be 2 liters.
Logs are 50 liters.
Most layer stones have some form of default density, but they all have 186 kg mass.
Judging by minerals, which I presume produce the same volume of ore as a non-economic stone does, all stones have 70 liters of volume.
(Note that you reduce an ore from 70 liters down to 2 liters, which may explain why it takes three metal units to make one furniture unit... although, of course, that's nowhere near enough.)
Bins are 15 liters.
Barrels appear to be about 20 liters.
Chairs are 30 liters.
Tables are 30 liters.
etc.
Isn't it better to assume that the mass figures for metal bars are broken, and should be fixed?
you are describing the entire point of the Volume and Mass thread, which argues for precision to at least the liter or kilogram level.Oh, good you have a whole topic for this already. Please continue the discussion over there and let this topic focus on current development stuff.
Oh, good you have a whole topic for this already. Please continue the discussion over there and let this topic focus on current development stuff.
If people do not discuss in the thread, chances are people just don't care that much.Oh, good you have a whole topic for this already. Please continue the discussion over there and let this topic focus on current development stuff.
"Discussion" requires more than one person. Being as it seems few people read that thread no matter how much I link it, it requires I repost what was in that thread in relevant conversation in order to actually have a discussion, or at the very least, answer questions related to the topic that arise.
If you have a problem with this model, then perhaps you would be willing to address the dearth of feedback, yourself with a few constructive comments on the matter?
If people do not discuss in the thread, chances are people just don't care that much.Or it's self evident. e.g.: Q) "Would it be nice if the game had consistent physical units and quantities?" A) "Yes"
Yeah, I don't see the purpose of essentially hijacking the development thread just because an idea isn't getting discussed much in its own. Hell, I've made threads that have gone defunct, even without much talk in them, but I'm not about to start cross-posting the stuff in here just to make extra sure I can drum up discussion about it.Agreed. I saw that this a 5 new pages after the dev log update, I was expecting 5 pages of discussion on the new feature. Instead I get one page on the new dev log and a couple pages of the discussion of what size stuff is. Come on guys.
Quote from: BaughnI mean market economics. Supply and demand.
As an example, currently if you build only luxurious bedrooms, the poor dwarves don't get to use them at all yet most bedrooms will stay empty. That's of course not realistic; the price will be what the market can bear, and no more - basically, the dwarves should bid on bedrooms.
(As an aside, "and no more" only applies where there are no ongoing maintenance costs, but since such things aren't in the game yet.. well, if the market couldn't bear the maintenance they'd go derelict, not just stay empty.)
Of course, bedrooms are just the most obvious example. This applies to everything that enters the economy, including money itself; minting more (without a corresponding increase in economic size) should cause inflation, minting too little deflation - and as real life shows, both can be very bad things (though especially deflation). Insufficient money would cause the economy to not work properly, too much.. well, that depends on how, exactly, the new money is distributed.
I can think of plausible exceptions to the economy, like nobles not wanting the rabble to have rooms as good as they do, but they should be exceptions - not the rule. Which is to say, first make the market economy work, then consider noble/personality-driven exceptions.Quote from: QuatchWill dwarves, other than nobles*, get mood-thoughts from encountering dwarves at different relative wealth. Such as a poor dwarf seeing a rich dwarf. Would that depress or inspire? Instill envy? Can dwarves sense the magnitude of wealth difference?
Is this the only impact these attributes currently have? Some had guessed that there were other impacts:
Memory: skill gain/rust rates
Focus: how long a dwarf stays at a task
Willpower: possible this relates to tantrums, happiness, insanity, or possibly other effects
Are these: currently in place and working, currently in place and not working, planned, or not planned.
With relation to 40d, you had said that various jobs were required to get a Baron: " 4 of the following: 25 crafting jobs, 25 metal-related jobs, 25 wood-related jobs, 10 gem jobs, 25 stone jobs, 25 food jobs. " Also, some have mentioned constructed roads as being required to get a baron. Are these requirements now obsolete?
Any plans for flows in the ocean that cool or heat up the land (and have impact on the weather sim)?
When will dwarves (and people in general in adv mode) have more needs, economically speaking ?
Also, speaking about markets, how does the owner of a market decide what item he can take from the fortress property ? It didn't seem like he was buying them, just taking what interested him from the stockpiles.
Toady in terms of martial arts where weapons are concerned using your body to attack instead of a weapon in most games gives you an oddly powerful attack. In this game weapons are clearly supperior excluding the infamos "Eye gouge". Are you going to balance the non-weapon techniques of weapon fighting and if so how are you going to do it? I assume it is going to be by "Opportunity" so a character in a weapon lock would find it a great time to get those powerful kicks out.
Are we going to see some Hermit/Monk Sifu? Though admittingly there is a LOT less of this in Europian culture
Could we get also notion on liquid density and according floating for buildings? I guess it would be required for things like ships anyway.
So Tokyo-3 style buildings could be built on, say, 5-level deep water, with large air tank in their basements, and their lowering/raising would be as easy as draining water tank or refilling it again.
For the record, I don't get what's the excitement about having every single underground feature in every single fortress. Which means that once you've seen one fortress' underground, you've seen them all. Rather than regularly having, say, all 20 interesting features, I'd rather have 4-5 picked at random, and hopefully some variation on the contents of each of these. For obsessive compulsive or very casual players that must absolutely have them all, or for the time where you absolutely need a specific feature for a community game, some option that adds these features to the underground after embark would be perfect.
In legends: export xml, historical events, each has a type. I've discovered 33 different event types:
add hf entity link ? add hf hf link ? add hf site link ? attacked site ? body abused ? change hf job ? change hf state ? create entity position ? created site ? created structure ? created world construction ? creature devoured ? destroyed site ? entity created ? field battle ? hf abducted ? hf died ? hf new pet ? hf razed structure ? hf reunion ? hf simple battle event ? hf travel ? hf wounded ? impersonate hf ? item stolen ? new site leader ? peace accepted ? peace rejected ? razed structure ? reclaim site ? remove hf entity link ? remove hf site link ? replaced structure. If you could tell me how many there are, and/or what they are, that'd be fantastic. Thanks!
First one is regarding sites - are there plans to move the way sites are generated into the raws, and if so, are there any plans on when it will happen?
Second one is regarding ethics, in particular the KILL_PLANT ethic which prevents deforestation around an entity's sites. This one is awkward for me because I'm trying to mod an entity that lives in forests and doesn't cause that sort of deforestation, but will still accept and trade wooden goods. In a larger sense, could such "terraforming" be moved away from ethics and into some other raw flag?
Judging from your answer dumps you have thought about fortress that move around the world map.
Have you thought about ones which move vertically? Ala Journey To The Center Of The Earth, or perhaps going down a volcano in a submagma sealed fortress.
Will there ever be a change to the flow system that makes it so my flooding traps work without me closing off the water source first? When fluid's 7/7 it teleports to the end of the flow, but that keeps things in between (such as goblins) from being pushed (into a fifteen-story drain, for instance).
Toady, how are you going to handle food production for the various entity sites? For example, will a farming civilization like humans produce more food and therefore have larger populations than a non-farming civ like Elves or Goblins?
On a related note, it seems like all of the two-handed weapons are from the Dwarf/Elf/Goblin point of view. That two-handed sword could be wielded one-handed by even a smallish human. Same with Pikes, Great Axes, and Mauls. This seems a bit odd. Shouldn't the humans have some weapons that are two-handed for them?
How will the new population rewrite affect cave dwellers like the kobolds? Will they get things like small hunting groups scattered around their caves and small raiding parties wandering around attacking unwary travelers, or are they just going to remain as they are right now?
How will sending out armies/raiding parties relate to embarking? Could you conceivably embark somewhere in the foothills of a mountain range and build a road going up into the mountains (by sending out teams of masons/miners), and then build your mountainhome in the peaks? What about the other way around - embarking in the mountains and building a road to make it accessible by caravan?
Since it seems like trading/travel/marching will be more specific in the coming releases, will geography matter to a fortress? That is, if the only/best way through a big mountain range is this one pass, could building your fortress straddling the pass be strategically valuable as a way of intercepting caravans/armies? If trade happens overseas eventually, could being a major port matter? What about controlling a specific resource? Finally, what are your thoughts on territorial behavior - goblins being more likely to attack a fortress that embarks in 'their' mountains, for instance?
Will all crops use NPK+pH (+water) as a model, or will mushrooms and other underground crops need to have alternative sources of energy? Even simply making it be NPK+pH+water+carbohydrates (which require the occasional dumping of some form of "dead stuff" as a source of carbohydrates for a non-photosynthesizing lifeform, even a highly efficient one like fungi) would break out of the notion that all crops are photosynthetic.
Would you even consider changing the relationship that the player has with the dwarves right now (as unquestioned overlord and direct allower and denier of all things dwarves can and cannot do), so that dwarves can become more autonomous and individual, and possibly create a better simulation, while on the other hand, potentially dramatically upping the potential for Fun because dwarves are stupid and very likely to hurt themselves unless continually babysat, or perhaps more importantly, if it meant that the player had less direct control over his fortress, and had to rely more on coaxing the ants in his/her antfarm to do his/her bidding?
How much automation do you forsee allowing players to set up with regards to their farms? Will this be something similar to the new Military screen, where we can set cycles of an arbitrary length in years for planting and harvesting, as well as amounts of fertilizers to be used, and will we have some means of linking a water source to a farm, so that dwarves can have an automated watering system (such as the "sprinkler" system I suggested in my last post) that does not require player input?
In further automation, could we ever see something like a burrow that auto-designates any tree within it to be cut down, so that repeatedly designating the same areas that you have built as tree farms are no longer another seasonal player micromanagement task?
When are Adventurers and Fortress Mode dwarves going to get Mounts? What are the current hurdles involved in allowing those, since invaders seem to use mounts just fine?
Will it be possible to use the natural attacks (firebreath etc.) of a mount while being mounted? How about using wagons and similar constructions like the later siege Engines?
Is it possible with the current code to have other civs ride war trained animals? Because normal (tame) mounts act on their own, and tend to flee.
Currently, creatures pass on physical characteristics to their children. At least theoretically, this is respected in worldgen and over generations of breeding yields nations of dwarves who appear ethnically similar to one and other, but ethnically distinct from those of other nations. How will the entity sprawl interact with this genetic data-transfer?
How far out will this entity sprawl, er, sprawl? Will cottages and hamlets start to pop up somewhat far from the city centers? Will we get an indication of sprawl on the embark screen -- perhaps an additional local map screen, similar to the relative elevation and steepness screens? Will we even be able to embark on the sprawl, or will the majority population and their homes be too abstract to actually create for now?
With the entity populations and according site rewrite, what are the chances that more religions spring up, even if only as small shrines? Currently, it seems that it's almost always the same divinity in a given civilization that gets a religion dedicated to it, so that when you see a Cult of Gold, you know that it is likely dedicated to, say, the dragon Sloron Gemheat the Flames of Taxes.
Quote from: VerouleDuring worldgen the dwarven civilisations are occasionally wiped out by war, with many dwarves fleeing to the hills. At what point do you see it being possible for the player to launch a reclaim mission on the original Mountain Halls? Do you see this as more of an adventurer mission that would be ordered by the king?Quote from: monk12In fact, as sieges get expanded, could you attempt to reclaim a fortress that had been conquered and settled by an enemy of some sort? This would be way cool to do to fortresses lost in world gen, but even cooler if a fortress you built was lost in a siege and settled by an enemy, allowing you to reclaim with your own siege force to take it back.
Plus, if the farming settlements are anything like current towns, they'll get savaged by ravenous woodland creatures every time you come out of retirement. What's up with that bug, anyway?
So lets see Daggerfall had 5000 villages and 750K NPCs. Lets say we have 50 civs on a middle-sized map with a average of 100 villages. 50 * 100 = 5000. Ok that record is broken! Now with 5000 villages a 50 village-people makes 250000 - not so much :( . But we have still 50 Mayor citys with say 3000 people each we get another 150000 NPCs. So 400K NPCs!
Will we get the villages be included into the xml output? How many historical persons are there per Village? Are there new Buildings (Barns, shrines, artificial ponds for fishing and fire-fighting)? Road-signs?
That's a bit more sprawl than I expected, though I guess part of that is because presumably the farming villages occupy the same portion of region squares as towns. Maybe if villages could be larger than that? Anyway, it should be interesting to see how this works out for other races. Maybe the sprawl could be controlled in the entity raws as well?
It looks like humans have gotten the most of the recent village development. How are the other races going to handle things? Are we going to see goblin villages and the like? And how are they going to be different from what you're doing with the humans?
I haven't thought much about the xml, since I wasn't aware of it being used by anybody and nobody ever mentioned it to me again aside from some dismissive remarks (and the other question above). If it is useful to anybody I can try to keep it up to date and fill in some of the missing fields. Was it being used by a legends viewer now? I don't recall if it was being used or if it was just mentioned in the thread.
Quote from: NW_KohakuHow much automation do you forsee allowing players to set up with regards to their farms? Will this be something similar to the new Military screen, where we can set cycles of an arbitrary length in years for planting and harvesting, as well as amounts of fertilizers to be used, and will we have some means of linking a water source to a farm, so that dwarves can have an automated watering system (such as the "sprinkler" system I suggested in my last post) that does not require player input?
That sounds reasonable enough, though I'm not sure how water is going to end up working.Quote from: NW_KohakuIn further automation, could we ever see something like a burrow that auto-designates any tree within it to be cut down, so that repeatedly designating the same areas that you have built as tree farms are no longer another seasonal player micromanagement task?
It's a reasonable suggestion -- we'll have to see how things like harvesting fruit are handled, once we have things that can grow like that. It'll probably all fit under the same umbrella. Overall, it might just be zone/burrow environment management options or something, although there are parallels with farming that complicate it a bit. Removing the farm as a building might work best. (I cut yours to four questions, since preparing the post has already taken hours, feel free to re-ask in moderation)
I suppose that this one would be the one I would want to re-ask most:
Will we also be able to have an inport/export to text file feature, similar to Worldgen data or Embark Profiles, so that when we set up a working system we enjoy, we can reuse those systems in future fortresses (or even share them with other players)?
I'd also like to follow up on the way that water works, as I've
Will rain (or at least climate) play a larger role in the new farming/wild shrub system? We will start needing water for our crops, but since rain is so infrequent currently in most climates (although I've certainly found one fort that seemed to be in permanent monsoon season), will we see a change in the way rain is handled to be able to more frequently naturally water crops to allow for rainfall farming of crops specialized for that climate? Will there potentially be (psuedo-invisible) "light showers" that do not really show up on the fortress mode radar that can slightly water crops between serious rainstorms?
It could be possible to have natural rainfall generally take care of all your watering needs if you happen to live in the right kind of climate for such a thing, especially since most of the seeds dwarven farmers will get for aboveground farming have to grow as wild crops, unless you buy seeds off of elves and humans, and this could be a potential way of really differentiating fortresses, based upon having a large enough crop library that every different biome you embark upon will give you a different set of crops that you can naturally grow (at least, aboveground), provided that the wild shrubs grow based upon what weather patterns (and soil types) are appropriate for them, and we have a broad enough library of new, differentiated crops. (This, in turn, brings up questions about, now that crops can actually be differentiated significantly, how many crops you'd start allowing?)
Finally, furthering the subject of having more different types of crops, I'm wondering about expanding the uses of crops, (such as the fungus that grows a small gem while it leeches minerals from the rock and helps develop the soil), but will we ever get to see things like elves being capable of growing plant monsters to unleash upon their foes from seeds in their farms?
I read all of the posts in this thread, but if you want a reply to a specific point, then I guess that's what should be green. I worked through more than half of the new questions this morning, and I just went with one of your actual question mark questions, but if you've got a few things you want me to focus on, you can highlight those. It'll be difficult to get to everything. I should be able to post my next giant reply tomorrow or the next day, depending on how everything else is going.
Just a reminder:I read all of the posts in this thread, but if you want a reply to a specific point, then I guess that's what should be green. I worked through more than half of the new questions this morning, and I just went with one of your actual question mark questions, but if you've got a few things you want me to focus on, you can highlight those. It'll be difficult to get to everything. I should be able to post my next giant reply tomorrow or the next day, depending on how everything else is going.
Oh, NW_Kohaku mentioned NPK/pH a while back, and asked whether or not fungus would get energy from a different source.
I know that was a while ago, but it might be worth mentioning that those things aren't a source of energy to begin with, just essential nutrients and such. Energy is another matter entirely.
Quote from: HephSo lets see Daggerfall had 5000 villages and 750K NPCs. Lets say we have 50 civs on a middle-sized map with a average of 100 villages. 50 * 100 = 5000. Ok that record is broken! Now with 5000 villages a 50 village-people makes 250000 - not so much :( . But we have still 50 Mayor citys with say 3000 people each we get another 150000 NPCs. So 400K NPCs!
The villages currently have 100 people and support 150 people (the 50 from the dev log was the addition people living in towns), so 5000 villages and the accompanying towns would get you to your 750K goal. The 5000 villages part might be iffy though, especially on a medium map, since a medium map only has 16641 tiles, so you'd have farmed out almost a third of the world.
Quote from: MephansterasToady, how are you going to handle food production for the various entity sites? For example, will a farming civilization like humans produce more food and therefore have larger populations than a non-farming civ like Elves or Goblins?
Yeah, it'll be necessary to track the food stores and production numbers, but that isn't going to determine the populations entirely, since we're probably going to have different nutrition requirements and breeding rates for the immortal races and whatever else going on. Some of that will be going in this time most likely, if we want to keep goblins competitive, since I don't expect them to be farming at all, and if they live on hunting and raiding, they'll probably need to eat less to maintain proper numbers, but we'll have to see how that turns out. They'll have more layers to hunt in, but crops yield a lot of food.
Quote from: MephansterasOn a related note, it seems like all of the two-handed weapons are from the Dwarf/Elf/Goblin point of view. That two-handed sword could be wielded one-handed by even a smallish human. Same with Pikes, Great Axes, and Mauls. This seems a bit odd. Shouldn't the humans have some weapons that are two-handed for them?
Yeah, the two-handed values for things like the maul shouldn't be 67500. I'm not sure why I set them that way.
Quote from: HephWill we get the villages be included into the xml output? How many historical persons are there per Village? Are there new Buildings (Barns, shrines, artificial ponds for fishing and fire-fighting)? Road-signs?
I'm still sorting out the adv mode maps, so I don't have any buildings yet. Villages are sites for the xml, though I haven't added the additional population information. I haven't thought much about the xml, since I wasn't aware of it being used by anybody and nobody ever mentioned it to me again aside from some dismissive remarks (and the other question above). If it is useful to anybody I can try to keep it up to date and fill in some of the missing fields. Was it being used by a legends viewer now? I don't recall if it was being used or if it was just mentioned in the thread.
Well the landscape has never been a HUGE absorbing part of world generation except when a lot of rejection comes involved.
Well the landscape has never been a HUGE absorbing part of world generation except when a lot of rejection comes involved.
Which reminds me,
When do you foresee worldgen allowing the player a cursory inspection of history and surviving civs? I hate genning a world, accepting, offloading all those units, going to embark and finding out that the goblins didn't make it past year 7. It seems like the ability to see civilization sprawl and surviving races should be a couple lines after the list of the dead.
Quote from: Mason11987With relation to 40d, you had said that various jobs were required to get a Baron: " 4 of the following: 25 crafting jobs, 25 metal-related jobs, 25 wood-related jobs, 10 gem jobs, 25 stone jobs, 25 food jobs. " Also, some have mentioned constructed roads as being required to get a baron. Are these requirements now obsolete?
The baron never needed a road, and yeah, the old craft diversity requirement is gone now. Just trade and production now, with 20 dwarves. Upgrades to count and duke should just require further trade and production. The population requirement was kept at 20 in consideration of smaller fort people, and you can make it even smaller in the raws if you want.
Yeah, it'll be necessary to track the food stores and production numbers, but that isn't going to determine the populations entirely, since we're probably going to have different nutrition requirements and breeding rates for the immortal races and whatever else going on. Some of that will be going in this time most likely, if we want to keep goblins competitive, since I don't expect them to be farming at all, and if they live on hunting and raiding, they'll probably need to eat less to maintain proper numbers, but we'll have to see how that turns out. They'll have more layers to hunt in, but crops yield a lot of food.Considering that the goblins snatch a lot of non-carnivorous folk, have you considered adding in slave-run farming villages for the goblins? Even if the goblins only gain from it through increased fodder for animals it might make an interesting element. Dwarven farmers down in the caverns, humans and elves farming on whatever soil borders the goblin's mountain range.
So I have over 3 million created, 80k exported wealth, 200+ dwarves and zero nobles. Can you please add a periodic check or something, maybe it could also make sure doctors aren't completely ignoring to diagnoses patient that have been resting in hospital for years.
Of course, if you want to have a large population concentrated in a single area, it's almost impossible to do so without farming or at least a seriously coordinated herding effort (like a cattle drive to keep from overgrazing). If anything, I'd expect farmers in some kind of underground "muck farm" made of decomposing parts and mud where slaves cultivate a sort of very base, low-quality fungus version of animal fodder that is mass-produced to feed livestock for slaughter if you have a meat-heavy goblin civ menu. Sounds appropriately goblin-y, no?
Quote from: AndreusFirst one is regarding sites - are there plans to move the way sites are generated into the raws, and if so, are there any plans on when it will happen?
I don't have any specific plans or timelines at this point. Things are obviously still in flux, and I don't know what I need to or can put out there.Quote from: Knight OtuThat's a bit more sprawl than I expected, though I guess part of that is because presumably the farming villages occupy the same portion of region squares as towns. Maybe if villages could be larger than that? Anyway, it should be interesting to see how this works out for other races. Maybe the sprawl could be controlled in the entity raws as well?
I mentioned in the log that the little 3x3 gray squares are just the area for the village buildings. Crops and pastures etc. will be spread out from that, forming possibly an 8x8 or a bit larger, I think. The village buildings aren't precisely for the 3x3 either, although it might start that way. If cottages end up spread down a single road a little farther than 3 pixels, but in a narrow strip, that would be fine too. Large towns will also outgrow their 3x3s.Quote from: MephansterasIt looks like humans have gotten the most of the recent village development. How are the other races going to handle things? Are we going to see goblin villages and the like? And how are they going to be different from what you're doing with the humans?
The humans have received the attention at this point, but before the next release I'd like to get the dwarf and goblin models up. I don't want to commit yet, until something is in, but it should be in a log soon. They will be quite different from each other. Kobolds will remain mostly unchanged and elves can't receive proper attention until they have their proper trees.
The introduction of sprawl around the fort could change the rental situation drastically, but the overall price setting would apply there, assuming rooms in your fortress aren't so rare and the outside population so vast that they aren't all the exceptions you mentioned. It's hard to say how it'll turn out.
I would think that the optimal solution here would be to generate a set of frequencies for the traits for each nation, at the end of worldgen, and then draw directly on those to generate sprawl people.Quote from: CruxadorCurrently, creatures pass on physical characteristics to their children. At least theoretically, this is respected in worldgen and over generations of breeding yields nations of dwarves who appear ethnically similar to one and other, but ethnically distinct from those of other nations. How will the entity sprawl interact with this genetic data-transfer?
I haven't decided quite how to do it yet, mainly because I was hoping to mingle things a bit at the overlaps. At the most simple, it would just take the full range of the initial historical pairs and realize villagers from that range when they are generated (that would make citizens a bit more diverse than they are now, since there wouldn't be any selection, but it would still be a subset). It could use the surviving hist figs instead if it wanted to have less variety. Ideally, it might track a bit more information. We'll see when I start generating villagers as units on the local map.
I would think that the optimal solution here would be to generate a set of frequencies for the traits for each nation, at the end of worldgen, and then draw directly on those to generate sprawl people.Quote from: CruxadorCurrently, creatures pass on physical characteristics to their children. At least theoretically, this is respected in worldgen and over generations of breeding yields nations of dwarves who appear ethnically similar to one and other, but ethnically distinct from those of other nations. How will the entity sprawl interact with this genetic data-transfer?
I haven't decided quite how to do it yet, mainly because I was hoping to mingle things a bit at the overlaps. At the most simple, it would just take the full range of the initial historical pairs and realize villagers from that range when they are generated (that would make citizens a bit more diverse than they are now, since there wouldn't be any selection, but it would still be a subset). It could use the surviving hist figs instead if it wanted to have less variety. Ideally, it might track a bit more information. We'll see when I start generating villagers as units on the local map.
The reason this requires special consideration is because members of entity sprawl do not explicitly exist until encountered. Thus your suggestion is essentially impossible. It would, I suppose, be possible for historical figures to be removed from the general population with the explanation that they emigrated, and then their traits could be given to the members of a certain village. But this would be a lot of extra work and infrastructure, and the benefit would be small at best, while at worst it could end up with villages of near clones, and no similarity between members of different villages, even if they're members of the same national group and should be members of the same ethnic group.I would think that the optimal solution here would be to generate a set of frequencies for the traits for each nation, at the end of worldgen, and then draw directly on those to generate sprawl people.Quote from: CruxadorCurrently, creatures pass on physical characteristics to their children. At least theoretically, this is respected in worldgen and over generations of breeding yields nations of dwarves who appear ethnically similar to one and other, but ethnically distinct from those of other nations. How will the entity sprawl interact with this genetic data-transfer?
I haven't decided quite how to do it yet, mainly because I was hoping to mingle things a bit at the overlaps. At the most simple, it would just take the full range of the initial historical pairs and realize villagers from that range when they are generated (that would make citizens a bit more diverse than they are now, since there wouldn't be any selection, but it would still be a subset). It could use the surviving hist figs instead if it wanted to have less variety. Ideally, it might track a bit more information. We'll see when I start generating villagers as units on the local map.
Or the sprawl could be created out of Mountainhome emmigrants, meaning they have distant relatives back in the Mountainhome, although if they emmigrated at the first generation, they may have unique traits to that nation, so that one particular village is the only place you find "flax-colored" hair because it was where the only two flax-colored haired dwarves in the whole Mountainhome went at the start of worldgen, and they interbred only with that one particular isolated village's population without really ever immigrating back to the Mountainhome, and only slightly with some of the other villages. A small hamlet set up by some of those decendents, however, might also be one of the strongholds of flaxen-hair-dom.
An item made of superior materials than the body materials would generally be better in a non-magical setting, given equal training time. In a magical setting, which would include martial arts that behave like magic, anything goes, as powerful as magic can get, and we'd want to try to respect that fact all around, so that if it is easy to learn, people wouldn't bother with weapons so much in general, if they had access to the knowledge. In thinking about the generation of magic systems, we're trying to remain mindful of easy learning/industrialization of magic. It's not a bad thing if you want it, but it is extra work to support that kind of setting
Or the sprawl could be created out of Mountainhome emmigrants, meaning they have distant relatives back in the Mountainhome, although if they emmigrated at the first generation, they may have unique traits to that nation, so that one particular village is the only place you find "flax-colored" hair because it was where the only two flax-colored haired dwarves in the whole Mountainhome went at the start of worldgen, and they interbred only with that one particular isolated village's population without really ever immigrating back to the Mountainhome, and only slightly with some of the other villages. A small hamlet set up by some of those decendents, however, might also be one of the strongholds of flaxen-hair-dom.
The reason this requires special consideration is because members of entity sprawl do not explicitly exist until encountered. Thus your suggestion is essentially impossible. It would, I suppose, be possible for historical figures to be removed from the general population with the explanation that they emigrated, and then their traits could be given to the members of a certain village. But this would be a lot of extra work and infrastructure, and the benefit would be small at best, while at worst it could end up with villages of near clones, and no similarity between members of different villages, even if they're members of the same national group and should be members of the same ethnic group.
So yeah, I don't believe that's a viable solution, nor would I consider it to be a good idea were it viable.
An array of brad ethnicities is not the same as making the members of each village ethnically unique. Some geographic variation within national entities might not be a bad thing, but it should certainly not happen in this fashion. And it also shouldn't happen immediately.Or the sprawl could be created out of Mountainhome emmigrants, meaning they have distant relatives back in the Mountainhome, although if they emmigrated at the first generation, they may have unique traits to that nation, so that one particular village is the only place you find "flax-colored" hair because it was where the only two flax-colored haired dwarves in the whole Mountainhome went at the start of worldgen, and they interbred only with that one particular isolated village's population without really ever immigrating back to the Mountainhome, and only slightly with some of the other villages. A small hamlet set up by some of those decendents, however, might also be one of the strongholds of flaxen-hair-dom.
The reason this requires special consideration is because members of entity sprawl do not explicitly exist until encountered. Thus your suggestion is essentially impossible. It would, I suppose, be possible for historical figures to be removed from the general population with the explanation that they emigrated, and then their traits could be given to the members of a certain village. But this would be a lot of extra work and infrastructure, and the benefit would be small at best, while at worst it could end up with villages of near clones, and no similarity between members of different villages, even if they're members of the same national group and should be members of the same ethnic group.
So yeah, I don't believe that's a viable solution, nor would I consider it to be a good idea were it viable.
Actually, having isolated areas have very similar genetic traits with one another due to interbreeding of the same 2-3 families is a very realistic mechanic, and is simply the extreme end of the very "genetic similarity" effect this entire mechanic is supposed to create, so I have trouble seeing why you'd suddenly be opposed to it.
As for implimentation, this could be achieved without creating a huge backlog of individual historical figures by having a much less detailed "Historic immigration/emmigration flow" record. Rather than tracking individual dwarves (and their genes), you could have what amount to average rates of integrating populations, which create an abstract range of possible bloodlines for all the citizens of one particular area. The actual data on the bloodline only becomes hard data when a member of that bloodline is encountered. Until that point, villages are essentially just Shrodenger's Cat's Descendents, composed of proportionate amounts of possible bloodlines until you actually look at them. (At which point, the game rolls dice to see who, exactly, they belong to.)The main problem with this implementation, at least for the immediate future, is that it is now a big new system that needs to be worked out and have all its own problems and bugs worked out. The other problem that I immediately see is that the game will have to essentially piece together bloodlines on the fly, and with this it's going from both ends of the family tree. That will either result in all sorts of weirdness, or it will necessitate so much data storage that the purpose of entity sprawls in the first place is negated.
If, for example, four families immigrated at Year 1 to set up an isolated mountain village, then there are only two families to draw genetic information from, and they will almost certainly interbreed repeatedly. If a citizen of another group immigrates in halfway through worldgen, and intermarries with that isolated village, and he was from a group that had 12 families largely stuck together, then, as long as none of those 12 families have yet been forced to be defined, he can have theoretical properties of any of those other twelve families as well (only some of which would have to be defined if you met this person, as there is only one exemplar of this entire bloodline unless you meet that original village), then, depending on how much further down worldgen you go, you could have this one thread of a bloodline also be added into the original four families, or you could have this bloodline only partially mixed in with the bloodlines of the original four if this occured soon before the cutoff date on worldgen.
First I would like to thank Toady for answering my questions (or question, I havn't finished it) anyhow.
Edit addition: Ohh, It seems I do have unanswered questions... though seeing as I don't remember them very well I guess I don't mind.QuoteAn item made of superior materials than the body materials would generally be better in a non-magical setting, given equal training time. In a magical setting, which would include martial arts that behave like magic, anything goes, as powerful as magic can get, and we'd want to try to respect that fact all around, so that if it is easy to learn, people wouldn't bother with weapons so much in general, if they had access to the knowledge. In thinking about the generation of magic systems, we're trying to remain mindful of easy learning/industrialization of magic. It's not a bad thing if you want it, but it is extra work to support that kind of setting
Ohh no that wasn't what I was trying to say at all... Ill try again.
Toady how are you going to balance out techniques with weapon wielders that use a person's physical body (and other less then full strength attacks)? In real life a body attack doesn't deal anywhere close to as much damage as a weapon strike but there are often opportunities where it is advantageous.
-My comment on other games is that when you use a bodily attack while weilding a weapon they tend to be oddly powerful. For example in Soul Calibur your kicks scale to your weapon
If you're talking about what I think you're talking about, you might want to describe your various kung-fu fighting styles, or at least link to the Dual Wielding thread. Currently, all attacks with a weapon are assumed to actually be with the weapon
Of course, I see no reason why carrying a steel sword would actually make you kick harder
i guess he's talking about something like feinting an attack with your sword, and while the enemy is busy parrying it you kick it's knee, unbalancing him and getting an opportunity for a coup de grace
I haven't thought much about the xml, since I wasn't aware of it being used by anybody and nobody ever mentioned it to me again aside from some dismissive remarks (and the other question above). If it is useful to anybody I can try to keep it up to date and fill in some of the missing fields. Was it being used by a legends viewer now? I don't recall if it was being used or if it was just mentioned in the thread.
Mason11987's World Viewer. (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=60913.0)
Quote from: UntelligentHow far out will this entity sprawl, er, sprawl? Will cottages and hamlets start to pop up somewhat far from the city centers? Will we get an indication of sprawl on the embark screen -- perhaps an additional local map screen, similar to the relative elevation and steepness screens? Will we even be able to embark on the sprawl, or will the majority population and their homes be too abstract to actually create for now?
It depends. Many of the villages I've been reading about have their buildings centralized, but there are examples of villages with homesteads spread out as well. Fields and pastures will spread out in any case, and I haven't settled on a display there. I'm not really satisfied with the picture I put up, since it is quite monotonous, especially if a village only ends up eating a 1/4th of its square with tilled land. On the other hand, the embark screen's local squares could show the tilled land more reliably, and those pictures could just replace the terrain tile, which would no longer be accurate itself. Once the adv mode maps are in, it won't be too abstract to realize, and I'm hoping to get to the basics this time around, but embarking on dwarf mode would need to be restricted then, especially in towns, as you'd just have too many people. The focus of the viewpoint on the adventurer gives me more ways to deal with lots of people in that mode, and embarking on towns has always been sorta silly anyway, since they don't react to your presence.
Since text is finally getting separated from map tiles
Few pages back. Baughn even put up a screenshot.Since text is finally getting separated from map tiles
Wait, what.
Like Kohaku, I use the minimap for letting me know when a dangerous creature's close to my fort. Even if the minimap got a resolution upgrade, I can't really imagine using it for anything else.
Quote from: BaughnI mean market economics. Supply and demand.
As an example, currently if you build only luxurious bedrooms, the poor dwarves don't get to use them at all yet most bedrooms will stay empty. That's of course not realistic; the price will be what the market can bear, and no more - basically, the dwarves should bid on bedrooms.
(As an aside, "and no more" only applies where there are no ongoing maintenance costs, but since such things aren't in the game yet.. well, if the market couldn't bear the maintenance they'd go derelict, not just stay empty.)
Of course, bedrooms are just the most obvious example. This applies to everything that enters the economy, including money itself; minting more (without a corresponding increase in economic size) should cause inflation, minting too little deflation - and as real life shows, both can be very bad things (though especially deflation). Insufficient money would cause the economy to not work properly, too much.. well, that depends on how, exactly, the new money is distributed.
I can think of plausible exceptions to the economy, like nobles not wanting the rabble to have rooms as good as they do, but they should be exceptions - not the rule. Which is to say, first make the market economy work, then consider noble/personality-driven exceptions.
Yeah, supply and demand are up for the trader role, and they'll start once we have the amount of things counted up on sites and the availability established through trade connections. Demand is a bit trickier, but it'll be more clear once the resources are in use. That will propogate over to your fortress vs. the caravans. The specific elements of the dwarven economy that exist more in isolation could be handled once that's up, but I'm not sure which of them will survive. The introduction of sprawl around the fort could change the rental situation drastically, but the overall price setting would apply there, assuming rooms in your fortress aren't so rare and the outside population so vast that they aren't all the exceptions you mentioned. It's hard to say how it'll turn out.
something like that for meat gathering, elves will have...elf stuff.Soilient Green, gets its color from the many layers of splatter and covering that are on the dwarves before they are ground up and pressed into neat wafers. An excellent example of how elves use the cave adapted dwarves. Remember that Soilient Green tastes better then Orange.
Our eventual goal is to have the player's role be the embodiment of positions of power within the fortress, performing actions in their official capacity, to the point that in an ideal world each command you give would be linked to some noble, official or commander.
"No! I must kill the nobles" he shouted.
But Armok said "No Urist. You are the nobles"
And then Urist was a Baroness.
I'm curious about how important having every underground feature is to people.
I'm curious about how important having every underground feature is to people.Magma and to a lesser extent, HFS are two features I consider essential. And really, on Earth the magma is guaranteed as you WILL eventually dig past the crust. That the Earth's crust is a lot thicker than what DF's z-levels imply is a minor detail in fantasy generated worlds. Underground plants and underground water sources I also consider very important. Add in underground life forms and I count 5 'features', maybe 6 with forgotten beasts. How many features do you count that you approximate it to ~20?
Running two sites at a time where you have access to both of the maps is a messy matter. Limited things like road building projects are possible, or even site sprawl to sort of Moria-ize your main fortress, but actually playing the two maps is tricky, for the same reasons as fortress retirement, but worse.Is Digging or even Deforestation included in "Limited things"? It could be made more abstract than an actual fortress map: you send off some miners with food/drink, equipment (might include furniture) and some means of transport (pack animals or mine cart rails) and after a period of time (for travel both ways and the work itself), they come back with stuff they've gathered with options for ignoring common stone. It would suddenly get complicated if the player wanted to watch it in real time, but 'snapshots' during Paused Time of how the off-site map is changing might be feasible.
Strange. I haven't had that problem, and the mounts should be subject to the regular invader/marauder code. If the mounted humans etc. are always running off, it's a bug. I'm not sure what training was involved for horses used in war in real-life. The current attack bonuses are a little weird and would be even stranger applied to mounts.Amphibious mounts may decide to swim, drowning their riders while continuing their invasion path. Considering you don't want mounts to be unthinking 'motorbikes with legs', will this be perfectly acceptable behaviour if the mount is badly trained?
eh, i used to capture chasm creatures in 40d and dig out enormous chambers several z levels high to flood with water, then dry them all and leave a stream running, then i'd release the ratmen, giant moles and cave crocodiles, all this with dwarves with [speed:0], [no_eat], etc. then i'd remove the cheat tags from the dwarves and start to dig my fortress with it's entrance on the underground it was terrible on my fps, tough.Do those classify as features?
you can see how i enjoy the new underground
I'm curious about how important having every underground feature is to people.
And if we get "traits" for plant types we could see - over a longer time - different crops arising from one species. Like potatos before the industrialisation of farming and Seed-creation. There were thousands of different potato variants (White and red one, sweeter and Muddyer tasting ones, Big ones small ones - you name it) sadly the number declined - [sarcasm] thank you Monsanto and Consorts [/sarcasm]!.Megabeasts do not breed.
On Fort scale you could trade these Variants and with some skill cross-breed them like Mendel (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gregor_Mendel) did with his peas.
Heck toady could start with a smaller number of plants and Mushrooms in the raws and get - if geographical separation, Pollen-flight, Seed transport by birds etc. could be tracked - by genetics and some actual mutation a fullblown Plant-world. Could you do that toady? It would be a nice extension to random generating plants. Naturally the same thing applies to animals.
Oh one question since i am at breeding stuff: If a female and a male demon of the same kind meet each other can they have offspring (In the games current stage i mean not in general)? I have seen in the legends-mode a pair of demons that were the same kind with different genders so i wondered if "Demon"-lineages ruling something.
I'd like to see underground features like rivers, and springs where underground rivers flow into the surface. Huge underground oceans and massive underground rivers. Not every place can have them, but they'd enhance the feeling of underground exploration. When you add in old tombs from lost underground dweller civilizations that sprang up and disintegrated before the beginning of time, you've got some real fun underground activities to do. Dwarf Mode doesn't benefit, but they can certainly be embarked on for flavor. That's what I've thought we were talking about when it came to underground features.
I feel that special geographical features, landmarks, and so forth should arise as naturally as possible from the simulation as opposed to being predefined, although obviously the latter is going to be the case much of the time for quite a while, if not always.
How is the mass of obsidian swords handled for combat, what with them being composed of two significantly different materials?
Is weapon length taken into account in combat, and if not, will it ever be? It is my understanding that the spear is by far the most popular weapon in the history of warfare. Now, the spear has a lot of things going for it. It's cheaper, easier to make, and easier to use when compared to something like a sword, but I think a HUGE part of the spear, and pole-arms in general, is the ability to stab the other person with your pointy bit of metal while keeping your soft and squishy body as far away from their pointy bits as possible. But in my experience, when I move into a tile adjacent to a goblin thief, he will be able to take off my ear with his nine inch dagger before I get a chance to stab him with my twelve-foot pike.
My understanding regarding length is that it is figured in when determining how deeply a blow my go - you may not stab a weapon deeper into a fellow than the length of its blade. To my knowledge, it is not possible to exceed this by additionally plunging one's arm into the target's body, but if it is, this nonetheless happens after the entirety of the weapon has been dealt with.
Does the weight of a weapon affect the velocity of the strike or recovery time/frequency of attacks? Will a weak dwarf swing an artifact platinum mace with the same velocity as one of adamantine?The reason so many people think this is bugged is the bugged strength formulae. It's evident that you can't swing a mace quicker than your hands can move, and right now preety much all creatures can swing a platinum mace that quickly. Think of how often you have been encumbered in adventurer mode, you can preety much swing a dragon corpse around without much speed penalty. So a truly weak dwarf wouldn't, but a "very weak" dwarf (who can carry "platinum table" without [much] encumberence) would.
The reason so many people think this is bugged is the bugged strength formulae. It's evident that you can't swing a mace quicker than your hands can move, and right now preety much all creatures can swing a platinum mace that quickly. Think of how often you have been encumbered in adventurer mode, you can preety much swing a dragon corpse around without much speed penalty. So a truly weak dwarf wouldn't, but a "very weak" dwarf (who can carry "platinum table" without [much] encumberence) would.
Does it at all make sense that a bulked-up muscledwarf that weighs 500 lbs is going to be able to sprint like a scrawny 150lb one? No, he's always going to move slower. We've moved out of the 40d system, there are tradeoffs for things like strength. It's just another example of DF (accidentally?) imitating real life.
Not at the rate it is implimented, it doesn't.
Consider a football player like a Halfback or Running Back. Yes, some players are less strong but faster, and some are stronger and slower, but the way that DF is currently set up strength all but completely counteracts every point of agility you gain. That would make someone with a balanced ratio of strength and agility who was super-fit essentially the same as a couch potato whose strength and agility had dwindled to almost nothing. Even if they are large, burly men, Halfbacks can easily outrun most untrained humans. It is, after all, exactly what they are paid to do.
5000 Strength, 5000 Agility is just the most extreme example, it literally goes down the line - a 1 Strength, 1 Agility character who probably has trouble standing up under their own power is almost as fast as a 2000 Strength, 2000 Agility character or a 1000 Strength, 1000 Agility character.
The problem is that strength nearly nullifies agility.
That is not to say that a large degree of muscle mass should not have some effect on agility, but that it shouldn't have such an effect that it actually means that agility gains are almost entirely nullified by your strength.
If someone trains in track and only trains to be able to move faster, not to be stronger, that's fine if they are faster than someone who trains to do both equally, but someone who trains to do both equally should not be tied in a footrace with someone who can hardly carry the weight of their own body. Even walking, a physically fit person with well-rounded training should have a better pace than a person who can hardly walk.
Oh, and speaking of adding weight... It turns out that weight slowing down creatures is not at all relative to their own size and strength - playing around with oversized (by two factors of magnitude) dwarves has shown me that they start wearing 4 ton pigtail dresses that slow them down to glacial paces, even though it is the exact same equipment, just scaled up to fit the giant dwarf.
I suspect the Square-Cube Law (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Square-cube_law) might be coming into play here. If I'm reading this right, it works against your giant dwarf in two ways: Your dwarf's strength should actually decrease proportionately while the mass of the dress increases. (Unless the raws just allow you to type in the values for strength and mass yourself, in which case I guess it's just luck that it suggests a real-life phenomenon. Like when a bathtub swirls in the "proper" direction while draining.)
Ooh, or maybe the adventurer could be blamed for a crime an NPC committed! Hehehe...Tarem the crossbowman adventurer enters the dwarfen fortress.
I'd like to see underground features like rivers, and springs where underground rivers flow into the surface. Huge underground oceans and massive underground rivers. Not every place can have them, but they'd enhance the feeling of underground exploration. When you add in old tombs from lost underground dweller civilizations that sprang up and disintegrated before the beginning of time, you've got some real fun underground activities to do. Dwarf Mode doesn't benefit, but they can certainly be embarked on for flavor. That's what I've thought we were talking about when it came to underground features.Ah, so you meant features interesting for adventure mode but only flavour in Fortress mode. So long as I get some natural water underground so plants grow down there, I don't care whether it's a river, pool or ocean in the caverns. Likewise, I care little in Fortress mode for interesting ruins and mysterious constructions.
Now we can drive the Humans mad by stealing theyr crops!Steal? You mean BURN WITH MAGMA.
Devblog update people! And this (http://www.bay12games.com/dwarves/imgs/outskirts.png) looks sexy! Thought a little bit to modern but im am not proficient in the history of farming. Anyway Nice job toady! Now we can drive the Humans mad by stealing theyr crops!
Which reminds me...I don't think Toughness = fat. Just because fatness can play a role in toughness in how the game is put together doesn't mean it should be tied together.
Are there plans to destroy the physical attributes Strength, Toughness, and Endurence completely? The first two of those have body equivilants (muscle=strength, fat=toughness), and the other is a combination of the calorie system and Willpower. Agility, DR, and Recupration do not have equivalents that are easily programmable without the body shape rewrite, so I'm not worried by those.
If that change were made, the only negative effect strength would have is added weight. Granted, you wouldn't be able to see Supieor Strength that easily anymore, but it would allow different strength in different parts.
Ah, so you meant features interesting for adventure mode but only flavour in Fortress mode. So long as I get some natural water underground so plants grow down there, I don't care whether it's a river, pool or ocean in the caverns. Likewise, I care little in Fortress mode for interesting ruins and mysterious constructions.I'm thinking that if there is rivers, there is a way that water accumulates and flows. Which means there is a equivalent of rain, which to me makes sense.
Something that's been bugging me for a little bit and just popped into my head.
Starting with 31.01, phantom spiders are no longer venomous. Is this due to an oversight, or because paralysis is almost certain death with the new venom system and you nerfed the spiders until the next significant venom update because you didn't want vermin to be lethal?
Will the new villages result in greater amounts of farmland required to feed individuals? If so, will there be "farmers caravans" that come to the fortress with food you can buy?
It's still easy to implement. With the replacement, Strength can be different in different parts, and so can toughness. Toughness for breaks can be represented by bone elasticity and density, which we probably already track. Toughness for slashes is the fat.Which reminds me...I don't think Toughness = fat. Just because fatness can play a role in toughness in how the game is put together doesn't mean it should be tied together.
Are there plans to destroy the physical attributes Strength, Toughness, and Endurence completely? The first two of those have body equivilants (muscle=strength, fat=toughness), and the other is a combination of the calorie system and Willpower. Agility, DR, and Recupration do not have equivalents that are easily programmable without the body shape rewrite, so I'm not worried by those.
If that change were made, the only negative effect strength would have is added weight. Granted, you wouldn't be able to see Supieor Strength that easily anymore, but it would allow different strength in different parts.
My understanding on how toughness works is it reduces how severe an injury is. If that is true, I don't see toughness being tied to fat at all good.
It's like people who can fall down a flight of stairs and have nothing broken versus people who fall down a flight of stairs and end up breaking every bone in their body twice.
Will the new villages result in greater amounts of farmland required to feed individuals? If so, will there be "farmers caravans" that come to the fortress with food you can buy?
You'd hope so. As it is, a 10*10 plot can sustain a 200 dwarf fort with ease, the farms in that screenshot alone could probably sustain 2000 people with ease. I wouldn't mind fams for fort mode becoming bigger than what they are now too.
Our eventual goal is to have the player's role be the embodiment of positions of power within the fortress, performing actions in their official capacity, to the point that in an ideal world each command you give would be linked to some noble, official or commander.
Doesn't worldgen go 64 "ticks" a year? I'm preety sure fortress mode could round to the nearest tick...
And, I doubt that farming would be changed. The main interaction with those humans is in adventurer mode, 72 times as slow as fort mode and forcing you to eat every day (which humans do). Fort mode farming needs to be "fixed" somehow else (like eating 72 things every eat break, to balence stuff out), so I think that's what Toady's going for eventually.
Worldgen can do however many ticks per year it wants, but you don't need to actually calculate everything until the player can see it.That sort of thing could matter as far as when your parent civ declares war, when an enemy army arrives to siege your fort, when you get refugees fleeing to your fortress... If you have events from the world simulation affecting your fortress while you're playing, it may matter when the simulation occurs.
I see, yeah you're seeing it entirely from adventurer view yes. To my knowledge, underground plants cannot exist at all in fortress mode unless there's some underground water on your map. Doesn't matter where, but it must exist for caverns to have plants. That doesn't apply in adventurer mode of course. That knowledge may be out of date, I've never deliberately generated caverns iwht 0% and 1% water content to try it out.Ah, so you meant features interesting for adventure mode but only flavour in Fortress mode. So long as I get some natural water underground so plants grow down there, I don't care whether it's a river, pool or ocean in the caverns. Likewise, I care little in Fortress mode for interesting ruins and mysterious constructions.I view it as the vast majority of the caverns is like the current "dry" caverns, which are still filled with trees and stuff blocking your path. It'd be neat (a dwarf fortress kind of neat) if there were biomes underground so you'd have desert undergrounds you could embark on, with underground but desert creatures, but we'd need some way of telling underground biomes on embark mode.
I see, yeah you're seeing it entirely from adventurer view yes. To my knowledge, underground plants cannot exist at all in fortress mode unless there's some underground water on your map. Doesn't matter where, but it must exist for caverns to have plants. That doesn't apply in adventurer mode of course. That knowledge may be out of date, I've never deliberately generated caverns iwht 0% and 1% water content to try it out.
It's still easy to implement. With the replacement, Strength can be different in different parts, and so can toughness. Toughness for breaks can be represented by bone elasticity and density, which we probably already track. Toughness for slashes is the fat.Again, I disagree. Some people get cuts easier than others. if anything, large amounts of fat seem to have the opposite effect on skin thickness, and cutting into parts that bleed is easier.
Toady with contextual end games or end career I suppose (EG, if you travel from town to town, you're a trader because of your actions.), will be be seeing this with Fortress End goals? As in if we produce a lot of arms and armor, we get to be known for this or produce a lot of brew we become a known brewery? Something other then the generally forced New Capital thing that currently happens.
And I disagree. Why have all that tied to a single Toughness when we can have skin thickness? Take your average human, ie.It's still easy to implement. With the replacement, Strength can be different in different parts, and so can toughness. Toughness for breaks can be represented by bone elasticity and density, which we probably already track. Toughness for slashes is the fat.Again, I disagree. Some people get cuts easier than others. if anything, large amounts of fat seem to have the opposite effect on skin thickness, and cutting into parts that bleed is easier.
By this thought, we could replace slashing toughness with dirtiness, since the dirt would reinforce the skin.
It also goes into bruising. Someone with high toughness isn't quick to bruise. It seems to me that fatness makes people quicker to bruise than normal.
How do you propose to track this? Arterial wall elasticity and density? I know, we can go ahead and do that, but give it a different name!
Let's see, it'd be "tough" to bruise them, so let's call it "Toughness".
Since we have that attribute, we can tie it to bone density and elasticity as well. And since we got that, let's make skin resistance part of it. That makes it nice and easy.
Head
⇕(Neck)
Left Arm ⇔ UB ⇔ Right Arm
⇕
Left Leg ⇔ LB ⇔ Right Leg
lop off everything but the Head, UB, LB, and left limbs, and give him a toughness of 1200. (s)He is a tough human in the current system. But, since we already track bones in bodyparts (you can see this by butchering), we can expand the notion: Head (Skull, density: 900, elasticity: 900)
⇕(Neck)
Left Arm ⇔ UB
(humerous, D:1300, E:1300)
Left Leg ⇔ LB
(femur, D:1200, E:1400)
This might work out to a Toughness of 1200. But, as you can see, our human is much more vulernable near the head areas, and his leg is much more resiliant to blunt hits than slashing hits.Will you eventually differentiate cultures' and species' combat styles? Some styles and armaments are especially effective against some other styles and armaments.In the latest DF Talk, he referred to martial arts as things that would be largely entity dependent, so there will certainly be some variation there. How much that effects actual military remains to be seen, of course.
Let's say that a dwarven civilization fond of using heavy war axes and broadswords and wearing heavy plate armor is at war with an elven society using light armor and rapiers with bucklers. This would be an interesting feature if it varied from civilization to civilization, and moreover the elves would slaughter the big, strong dwarves if they managed to ambush them in close combat.
Can you give us some way of comparing beasts in our menagerie?We already have such descriptive text relating to relative size, fat, and muscle. I don't know what more you need.
I know you want to avoid immersion-breaking features like "strength of 21, weight 220 stones, fat% 20, agility 15" and so on. But surely dwarves can look at one cow and another, put them through their paces, and get some idea of their comparative physical and mental attributes. The breeding system (which is pretty incredibly cool at first glance when considering its potential and all of the nice features you have built in like generational tracking) is rather useless without this basic ability.
We already have such descriptive text relating to relative size, fat, and muscle. I don't know what more you need.
Some goblin tribes have been engaged in tribal warfare for hundreds of years (think Germanic tribes or Mongols), and have experienced an accelerated period of natural selection.Uh...
Wait, do you mean actually removing the ponds from the game in non-marshlands? That's just silly, then we wouldn't have aboveground water sources in places without rivers.
Wait, do you mean actually removing the ponds from the game in non-marshlands? That's just silly, then we wouldn't have aboveground water sources in places without rivers.
Wait, do you mean actually removing the ponds from the game in non-marshlands? That's just silly, then we wouldn't have aboveground water sources in places without rivers.
Who needs water when you have booze?
I have to say, the number of ponds is quite nonsensical. They should be larger and far less frequent. In my opinion, it wouldn't be problematic in terms of lack of water - because nobody would choose to embark in an area without water unless they wanted to see how long it takes for dwarves to die of thirst.
Wait, do you mean actually removing the ponds from the game in non-marshlands? That's just silly, then we wouldn't have aboveground water sources in places without rivers.
Many of the villages I've been reading about have their buildings centralized, but there are examples of villages with homesteads spread out as well.
snip
This might work out to a Toughness of 1200. But, as you can see, our human is much more vulernable near the head areas, and his leg is much more resiliant to blunt hits than slashing hits.
That same reasoning can be applied to strength. Endurence is more of Willpower plus calorie system, so that can be replaced too.
About the ponds: probably just a marshy area. If this is the normal then that's not very realistic I think.
And I disagree. Why have all that tied to a single Toughness when we can have skin thickness? Take your average human, ie.And yet Toughness ≠ fatness, nor is it an arbitrary number that is the same for any human.Code: [Select]Head
lop off everything but the Head, UB, LB, and left limbs, and give him a toughness of 1200. (s)He is a tough human in the current system. But, since we already track bones in bodyparts (you can see this by butchering), we can expand the notion:
⇕(Neck)
Left Arm ⇔ UB ⇔ Right Arm
⇕
Left Leg ⇔ LB ⇔ Right LegCode: [Select]Head (Skull, density: 900, elasticity: 900)
This might work out to a Toughness of 1200. But, as you can see, our human is much more vulernable near the head areas, and his leg is much more resiliant to blunt hits than slashing hits.
⇕(Neck)
Left Arm ⇔ UB
(humerous, D:1300, E:1300)
Left Leg ⇔ LB
(femur, D:1200, E:1400)
That same reasoning can be applied to strength. Endurence is more of Willpower plus calorie system, so that can be replaced too.
So you have a society that has been naturally selected to be stronger and more fit than normal. Then because they conquered everyone they become decadent and more easily overcome. I guess the genes weren't that strong and/or there was too much crossbreeding with their conquered civilizations.Spoiler (click to show/hide)
i also believe that brooks having 7/7 water is a bit absurdYes. Brooks should have 3/7 water. You can swim in them, but not drown. Maybe some smaller like 2/7.
Wait, do you mean actually removing the ponds from the game in non-marshlands? That's just silly, then we wouldn't have aboveground water sources in places without rivers.
Wait, do you mean actually removing the ponds from the game in non-marshlands? That's just silly, then we wouldn't have aboveground water sources in places without rivers.
Could be solved easily enough if we could build cisterns that collect rainwater the way that murky pools do.
About the ponds: probably just a marshy area. If this is the normal then that's not very realistic I think.
I get murky pools in scortching deserts, that can't contain water for more than a couple minutes before going dry, and they're STILL about 4 of them on a 4x4 desert embark. How do those things even exist before your dwarves get there? They evaporate faster than rain can fill them.
Could be solved easily enough if we could build cisterns that collect rainwater the way that murky pools do.All constructed flooring should be impermeable and collect water. Then we'd have to consider drainage in above ground forts, and a working surface storm sewer would be the logical outcome. If you had permeable and tracked soil water flows, subsurface storm sewers for de-watering would also be useful.
I think I have justified it enough. DF keeps track (or will keep track) of enough information to "simulate" Strength (mainly mustle), Toughness (a combination of many thing like skin material, blood pressure, blood thickness, bone density+elasticity), and Endurence (efficiency, Willpower, metabolism, calories), because put simply, those do not depend on knowing the shape of the body. We could add 50 different other factors to those, but produce an argument that any of those need knowing body shape. You could say that Toughness also includes blood salinity, but soon, we'd be tracking that.That same reasoning can be applied to strength. Endurence is more of Willpower plus calorie system, so that can be replaced too.And yet Toughness ≠ fatness, nor is it an arbitrary number that is the same for any human.
Also, Endurance is more than willpower plus calories. Calories are an expression of energy available to the body, not energy usable by the body. Endurance is more of efficiency of energy used and availability of that energy. Two people with the same amount of willpower and the same amount of calorie intake can have quite different endurance amounts. This is easily seen when you compare Olympic sprinters versus Olympic marathon runners. One trains up speed, the other endurance. Do you wish to claim sprinters have less willpower than marathon runners? Or that sprinters don't eat enough?
You argue for "simplifying" the system while making it more complex. Remove aspects because you feel that something tied to appearance can represent something that you cannot even tell in human appearance. I don't understand why, except because it can be. Is there really any great benefit to removing the arbitrary numbers that can be assigned to creatures in dwarf fortress that represent abstract concepts like toughness, willpower, stamina, and strength?
(Muscle mass is not directly equal to usable strength in humans as well, but at least there it is close enough that I could let it slide.)
Bottom line, justify why it is needed. Just to "reduce the variables" isn't a good reason, because we don't have a true to life simulator that can simulate the pressure in the veins so only the exact amount of blood comes out. We also don't simulate the lungs oxygenating the blood which is then pumped via the heart to pass oxygen to all the important body parts. There are MILLIONS of variables for every bit of tissue in your own body, so why reduce the variables that represent this to create a sum whole with tissue interactions that are based on appearance modifiers, when the appearance of a body changes due to those hidden variables in the first place?
It seems odd to me, and I don't understand why it should be done your way rather than how Toady is currently progressing with it. Again but with less math and more justification.
Yes. Brooks should have 3/7 water. You can swim in them, but not drown. Maybe some smaller like 2/7.Such an amazing and simple idea! This would also mean you wouldn't need to have the counterintuitive "floor on top of 7/7 water" system. People would simply cross the water. The only new thing required would be sloped river/brook banks.
Also, will villagers actually harvest the crops, store them, then eat them ? In general, will villagers have needs (like food and drink) and a schedule by which they live? I think this would enable you to put in mills and barns and wheat silos and stuff while giving them real purpose. We could cause all kinds of mischief then, like sabotaging their food production lines. This would then have real consequences.
I think I have justified it enough. DF keeps track (or will keep track) of enough information to "simulate" Strength (mainly mustle), Toughness (a combination of many thing like skin material, blood pressure, blood thickness, bone density+elasticity), and Endurence (efficiency, Willpower, metabolism, calories), because put simply, those do not depend on knowing the shape of the body. We could add 50 different other factors to those, but produce an argument that any of those need knowing body shape. You could say that Toughness also includes blood salinity, but soon, we'd be tracking that.I disagree still. You are advocating the removal of the abstracted "strength" value (among others) on the basis that you can bring it from hundreds of other variables that are tracked.(for who knows what purpose, since it increases calculation time, but for the purposes of this argument, we are ignoring that, since we cannot be sure exactly how much)
Judging by the shear amount of farmland for those villages posted in the screenshots does this imply any farming changes like making things take longer to grow?
I think you may be reading a bit too far into this.
Not only do areas outside the fortress have to deal with real time but they also have to deal with much larger populations then a fortress ever dreamed of.
A Fortress has 100-200 dwarves max in most cases.
Cities in Dwarf Fortress once the changes have been made are dealing with thousands.
I highly doubt there is going to be as dramatic of a change over the output of farms inside a fortress... At least to the extent that I do not believe we will need extensive farming plots that cover over half our fortress space. (Though that would make sieges deadly if Fortresses relied on the surrounding towns for food)
Don't forget the farms might not even be functional, ie. I doubt they'll actually produce food as a resource to be consumed. And even if they did, Fortress Mode has its own rules. I'm not saying I wouldn't like farming changes (I would) but these are probably coming in later...
...wait...
...farming improvements ARE a part of the new development list, right? So perhaps some will indeed slip in the upcoming release.
Anyway... we know a village from that screenshot has 100 people while its production can feed 150 people. If you want to calculate something, use these numbers ;)
Disagreeing again. Your argument states that the human arm can be constructed in millions of ways, which is correct. However, unless an arm is defected, it can be assumed that any arm with higher mustle mass is going to be "stronger" than the other compared arm. In this case, a tendon slightly off isn't going to affect the arm so much it gets a ±10 to the strength measured in attribute units. A tendon off enough will produce a "functionality slightly impared" with the appropriate strength penalties. The same argument applies to toughness as well, just more complex. Endurence, is, as I said, trivial to implement with what we already have (efficiancy, metabolism, the calorie system, Willpower).I think I have justified it enough. DF keeps track (or will keep track) of enough information to "simulate" Strength (mainly mustle), Toughness (a combination of many thing like skin material, blood pressure, blood thickness, bone density+elasticity), and Endurence (efficiency, Willpower, metabolism, calories), because put simply, those do not depend on knowing the shape of the body. We could add 50 different other factors to those, but produce an argument that any of those need knowing body shape. You could say that Toughness also includes blood salinity, but soon, we'd be tracking that.I disagree still. You are advocating the removal of the abstracted "strength" value (among others) on the basis that you can bring it from hundreds of other variables that are tracked.(for who knows what purpose, since it increases calculation time, but for the purposes of this argument, we are ignoring that, since we cannot be sure exactly how much)
Something like this exists for every single attribute you think should be replaced with something else. RPGs abstract a lot, because there really isn't any other way of doing it.
---While I can argue with you all day, it won't be very productive until you get a much broader base of knowledge than you have. I suggest you begin with some basic physics knowledge, then maybe a little anatomy.
EDIT: Oh, and about the villages, are they really supposed to be as close together as they are here (http://www.bay12games.com/dwarves/imgs/villages.png)? It seems rather... claustrophobic.The area that most folks would consider a village occupies only those small areas like the one labeled "structures" and parallel such zones. If you keep that scale in mind, they're not really overly close.
I think that forcing players to either put up a very large amount of space and effort for their food or forcing them to rely upon their sattelite villages is pretty much what is going to come... I mean, why else would we care about having to protect villages of dwarves in the surrounding land if we didn't need any of the crops they produce?
I think that forcing players to either put up a very large amount of space and effort for their food or forcing them to rely upon their sattelite villages is pretty much what is going to come... I mean, why else would we care about having to protect villages of dwarves in the surrounding land if we didn't need any of the crops they produce?There's drafting villagers for armies to send abroad, defending them to keep the reputation of the fortress intact, and also not letting your civilization be nearly wiped out.
Actually, way back in 2D time, getting enough food to pass your first winter and start your fortress proper was the first challenge a newcomer had to overcome. I think it would actually be cool to have to work and think a bit about basic subsistence again.
it was simple when there were only one level, but with several z leves it no longer makes sense and couldn't be implemented as simply
I think my main issue was that I was missing the scale of the whole location; I was assuming the bridges and roads to be around three tiles wide, when in fact they are considerably larger. I'm still not sure I completely understand the size of it. It would be nice to have a high resolution version of that image, so we could see the individual tiles.EDIT: Oh, and about the villages, are they really supposed to be as close together as they are here (http://www.bay12games.com/dwarves/imgs/villages.png)? It seems rather... claustrophobic.The area that most folks would consider a village occupies only those small areas like the one labeled "structures" and parallel such zones. If you keep that scale in mind, they're not really overly close.
I still am worried about making an elaborate farming system a necessity for new players to learn (and for more experienced players to set up for every fort.) Systems like that make it so I can't help but imagine that most of the failed fortresses littering the ideal world Toady has in his slogan of "Losing is fun" won't be from goblin invasions or dwarven revolutions, but rather because "Mayor Urist couldn't figure out how to farm, so everyone starved" or "a single troll killed everyone because the leader couldn't figure out how to build a military." I know most such systems can be disabled in the .ini or raws, but new players shouldn't be expected to do that.
I think there should exist a relatively hassle-free way to set a farm, even if less yield/worse crops/etc, and allow the complex stuff for good crops or special ones. That way you get the best of both worlds, from say...potatoes (random example, it might not be appropriate) being almost as easy to set as the current farming (emphasis on "almost"), and more nutritious/better yield ones requiring to put some work, and awesome special ones (like those gem yielding crops you mentioned in this or other thread) requiring even more care and preparation.
EDIT: Oh, and about the villages, are they really supposed to be as close together as they are here (http://www.bay12games.com/dwarves/imgs/villages.png)? It seems rather... claustrophobic.
So, then, if we make some crop that is so easy to grow that you can grow it continuously without having to care about upkeep... why would you ever bother learning the system?
So, then, if we make some crop that is so easy to grow that you can grow it continuously without having to care about upkeep... why would you ever bother learning the system?
There would be in-game incentives for growing the harder crops. Dwarfs would grow unhappy only eating potatoes and drinking vodka(?) all the time. Higher quality crops would produce better food/alcohol, making dwarfs have more happy thoughts. Maybe Nobles could request meals with high-quality food. Brainstorm some more ideas....
Kohaku: there are two kinds of difficulty.
The same goes for farming. Farming should be extremely easy to figure out! The difficulty should stem from extraordinary circumstances such as sieges, floods or grasshoppers. The player should always know what to do in terms of controls! Choosing the proper response, that's the challenge. Not knowing about the possibility of response isn't a challenge, it's bad design!!!
Oops, I started to form this while it was a huge oddball quote pyramid. It's been edited since. Well that changes things, but since I went through the effort of creating this, here it is. This is how I came to asking this question:
The convo broken down in spoilers:Spoiler: isitanos (click to show/hide)Spoiler: Toady One (click to show/hide)Spoiler: Jiri Petru (click to show/hide)Spoiler: isitanos (click to show/hide)Spoiler: Toady One (click to show/hide)Spoiler: Kogan Loloklam (click to show/hide)
I don't think when we talk about underground features in this train of thought we are talking about Plump helmets or the Bottom of the world HFS. I think we are talking about cave rivers and cave lakes, and chasms and natural ramps up/down, as well asSo, how important is it that the site you are on has features that you cannot currently go to any random point in the underground and have a 100% chance of finding it? I'm pretty certain it's near zero on the importance scale, since the big things, Magma and HFS, are now accessable on every site. I might change my mind if off the map animalmen can't raid once stuff is added, since that used to be a major drawing point of cave rivers and chasms. Some people might want it all, but that is what world gen seeds are ultimately for, so those people can find those sites and share them. It seemed a pretty thriving setup in the past. There are problems if they couldn't be seen in the embark map, but as long as they can be I don't see too much of an issue. Ultimately spawned "features" aren't that important in fortress mode, but will make a great deal of difference for adventure mode. Cavern water is as good (or bad, your choice) as pond water currently (last I checked, anyway) so even the loss of the "great pond" doesn't affect much, since it's the plump helmets that are desired for the wine.Spoiler: the HFS associated with the HFS (click to show/hide)
Many times I wished I could follow a underground river with some logic to where it was going rather than forge ahead through the stale water underground in my quest to find previously mentioned HFS. It'd also have been easier to remember landmarks if there was a flowing landmark. I remember passing one particularly interesting bit of terrain that I could never find again because there was no point of reference to measure it off of. Too much was the same underground.
Anyone who has done some serious cave crawling in the newest versions of DF probably knows exactly what I mean.
I'd like to see underground features like rivers, and springs where underground rivers flow into the surface. Huge underground oceans and massive underground rivers. Not every place can have them, but they'd enhance the feeling of underground exploration. When you add in old tombs from lost underground dweller civilizations that sprang up and disintegrated before the beginning of time, you've got some real fun underground activities to do. Dwarf Mode doesn't benefit, but they can certainly be embarked on for flavor. That's what I've thought we were talking about when it came to underground features.
Compare the suggestions for farming to the military changes from 40d to .31. Unwieldy at first, but rewarding because of the level of control you get. We adapted to that.
Compare the suggestions for farming to the military changes from 40d to .31. Unwieldy at first, but rewarding because of the level of control you get. We adapted to that. More complex farming can work as long as there is enough automation to make it possible to set it up and forget it, but to have more control if you so desire. (and by that, I mean automatic production of fertilizer, crop rotation, planting schedules, etc. Everything. Unless something out of the ordinary happens, it should be able to run itself.)
Wait what? So it's harder for the sake of being harder with no other gains?
Wait what? So it's harder for the sake of being harder with no other gains?
I am all for extremely complex systems if you can do great things with them (like general architecture in DF, you can do 1x3 rooms or 5x6 rooms with ornate walls and furniture). But an extremely complex system just to obtain "game time"? (what food essentially comes down to). That's homework.
Make it complex if you can make it rewarding, if not, there is a limit on how complex you can get. Make it so you can have the reddest, biggest, tastiest tomatoes of the vicinity if you spend time, but don't over-complicate a simple timer/happiness mechanism such as food.
Still, what available crops are into the IF thread? There HAS to be some advantage to make up for the added complexity. Wood sources? Chemistry? Healing herbs? (realistic or fantastic style). Have you planned about modding so those advantages can be added at least? Plus, IF only seems to be "difficulty once" as in once you solve it, it's the same as now. Let me know, this is interesting.
I still am worried about making an elaborate farming system a necessity for new players to learn (and for more experienced players to set up for every fort.) Systems like that make it so I can't help but imagine that most of the failed fortresses littering the ideal world Toady has in his slogan of "Losing is fun" won't be from goblin invasions or dwarven revolutions, but rather because "Mayor Urist couldn't figure out how to farm, so everyone starved" or "a single troll killed everyone because the leader couldn't figure out how to build a military." I know most such systems can be disabled in the .ini or raws, but new players shouldn't be expected to do that.
People keep saying this as if it's a bad thing. Here, I keep hearing people say how much they enjoy playing this game because it's "hard", but when one of the most absurdly easy things in the game finally looks like it might be updated, everyone's going all Helen Lovejoy, and yelling "Oh! Won't SOMEBODY think of the newbies?!" Why can't the people who enjoy having to design a complex infrastructure have it? This game isn't even nearly as hard as the Sierra Citybuilder games right now, it's just that it's less forgiving of mistakes when you DO screw up, anyway. And frankly, whenever people are asked about why they enjoy DF, it's because of its realism and complexity... so why do people keep getting so gunshy whenever the complexity might actually be improved?
Honestly, I'd like to see the game force you to scramble to feed your people, but if we get a system where it's possible for dwarves who honestly wouldn't know silt from sand, then you can just bring fisherdwarves and herbalists and plenty of food stocks and hope you can just trade your way to all your food needs, then that's perfectly fine, and it ensures that there's no real reason other than utter negligence for a player to starve.
And if this means that many players lose a fortress before they can figure out how to adequately prepare to feed their people, so be it. They'll learn from their mistakes, and be better players for it. It's the ability to overcome a challenge that defines a game, after all.
Once again, I find it quite amusing that everyone likes to brag (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=63562.0) about how "hard" and "complex" and "realistic" DF is, but any time something actually changes to be made harder or more complex or more realistic, people run around like the sky is falling. The current farming system is, quite simply, way, way too easy, and effectively just hands you all the food you could ever want on a silver platter. (Same with livestock until they are actually made to start eating, and require feed or grazing, especially eating based upon their size and mass...)Had I my preferences, I'd make enough food very easy to get for up to, say, 30-40 dwarves, but institute gradual mechanics that made it more and more of a challenge for larger fortresses. Food really should be a big potential problem in DF, since it's a realistic problem from medieval history. But learning elaborate farming mechanics are not a good thing to flat-out require for a game. I'd love to see elaborate schemes being able to minimize the effects of the system of diminishing returns that would stop a fortress from getting too big (and see these farming megaprojects posted on the board), but players need to be able to make that transition from newbie to experienced player to innovative designer as smoothly as possible.
I've done what I can to make the suggested system complex even to those who know what they are doing, and to hopefully make the system dynamic enough that you have to adapt to each climate differently, and requires an eye towards keeping the system sustained. If you have a real suggestion to make, then I'm all ears, but I'm sort of tired of people arguing against the farming upgrade simply on abstracts and game design idealogy that doesn't really mean anything.
Medieval landscape was extreme. The inhabited parts had a very high population density – no forests, only houses and farms. The wilderness was very virgin and untamed. Much unlike today.
-snip-Take deep breath and calm down.
I have had it with the new military system! >:(
...
I love this dang game. I just wish I could love all of it.
My idea of farming in Dwarf Fortress is:Sorry, but that sounds like no fun at all. You want to dumb it down even compared to the current system. A little micromanagement is good, and I like to choose my plants and set up crop rotation myself. You haven't described a simple and intuitive interface, BTW, you have described automation, i.e. AI doing things for you, which is a completely different thing.Anything more complicated is just bad design.
- I designate an area of land as a farmplot
- I choose farmers and tell them: "Farm!"
- It works!
The AI would select appropriate crops for the soil type, would handle crop rotation, the dwarves would water the soil using buckets as needed, would plant and harvest automatically. It should be difficult, meaning it would be ineffective and require lots space, dwarfpower and time. Making it more effective would the the fun part - ie. creating an elaborate irrigation system to save dwarfpower, ordering better crops from a caravan that would have better yields on my soil, etc. But the interface should be extremely simple and intuitive (basically my three points above).
I would love more varied crops, I would love realistic soil types, I would love acidic crops that require acidic soil or crops that require lots of mud (rice) - all of it adds variety to the game, which is good. I want to drastically reduce crop yields because right now food is too abundant. But unless the AI is intelligent enough to handle most of the system automatically and unless the interface is good enough to make it easy to control, there's no point in implementing the farming "improvements". They would only make the game worse.Toady likes to let us discover how the world works, and we'll eventually have randomly-generated plants and mushrooms that you can't even look up in the wiki. Experimenting with plants in the game to learn about their needs, or obtaining this knowledge in-game through skills or by buying the info sounds fun to me. The game should remember what you've discovered, though, and automation should pick up from then on, once you're supposed to know how much water, nutrients, etc that plant needs.
Examples:(...)
- The player should never, ever be required to look up the most appropriate crop for his soil in a table on the wiki. The game should simply choose the best crop itself... or at least highlight it, saying "we recommend planting this!".
Toady likes to let us discover how the world works, and we'll eventually have randomly-generated plants and mushrooms that you can't even look up in the wiki. Experimenting with plants in the game to learn about their needs, or obtaining this knowledge in-game through skills or by buying the info sounds fun to me. The game should remember what you've discovered, though, and automation should pick up from then on, once you're supposed to know how much water, nutrients, etc that plant needs.
Not having farming will murder a fortress if you don't do it (or more likely, don't figure it out), having it means feeding dwarves is a piece of cake. A couple of good military dwarves will eviscerate almost all opponents (that's getting much better with the HFS and the forgotten beasts - but still nothing can defeat the mighty constructed wall.)
...
With the farming revamp, what I'm worried will happen is not that the game will be more challenging to experienced players, but that farming becomes automatic and irrelevant after a lot more work - and all that work will be necessary to get any food out of farming. I don't want it to just mandate a long wiki cross-referencing session where you compare the alkalinity and moisture of soil to plant the best crops, then you forget about farming entirely (because that only raises the thin line between annihilation and irrelevancy). Nor do I want to constantly micromanage seasonal crop rotation, because it's boring, easy to forget and screw up your whole food industry, and almost certainly not what the player wants to do in a fantasy world.
Can you still make farming more complex and yet not either a constant micromanagement nightmare or just another roadblock to a new person and another wiki-dive for an experienced one? Yes. Suppose that a race of snail-men invade, and their acidic trails screw with the soil composition which kills off the crops that they walked over; but that also lets you import acid-loving plants and grow them too. Suppose that the sea gods get annoyed with you and send a tidal wave that, in addition to the obvious effects, leaves a lot of salt on the ground that screws with the plants you can grow. Or have the invading goblins who can't find a way into your fortress get frustrated and start salting the ground and the water supply you use to water your plants. These things are unlikely to happen to a new player yet bring new challenges to an experienced one - that's the best kind of challenge I can think of. Forcing you to do the same thing the same way for each fort isn't fun.
Ad Farming:
My idea of farming in Dwarf Fortress is:Anything more complicated is just bad design.
- I designate an area of land as a farmplot
- I choose farmers and tell them: "Farm!"
- It works!
What's the point in even having dwarves eat or drink at all if you want all your food handed to you without effort? As Askot said, wouldn't this mean that it would be better still to just put [no_eat] and [no_drink], since in that way, you don't need the "bad design" of making people make a farm in the first place? Why even bother with the "bad design" of having to look for metals or chop down trees, either, when you can just set up reactions that give you adamantine versions of everything you could ever want generated from nothing?
Will historical events be able to affect a subset of a population? For instance, a megabeast attack that kills one tenth of a village's residents. Would this affect the individual histories of population members we meet?Yes. If you go into adventure mode right now and ask villagers about their families, you constantly hear about how bronze colossus x has slaughtered their great grandpappy and now they want vengeance.
Will portions of a population be able to emigrate to another site? Ideally this would towns with immigrants, whose history could be traced back to another location via an immigration wave event.I believe immigrants are already pulled from the entity population of the civilization you are embarking from.
Finally, will the family members of people we meet have histories themselves, including the possibility of their death?See answer number 1
I'll be honest with you here, I'm mostly just hoping to find a farmboy orphaned and displaced by a dragon attack and bring him along on my quest to kill the foul creature.This can already happen.
...No wonder you hate the thing, you don't seem to have a understanding of it at all.
People just want to express their opinions and fears about the game without having to study dozens of pages in a different thread. You're saying all our concerns are already adressed in your suggestion topic? Great to hear that! I won't go read that because it has 40 pages and I can't really be bothered. I wasn't interested in specific suggestions, I just wanted to express my fears about future development. This is what this thread is about. You are taking it too seriously.
Toady said the farming improvements depend heavily on what he'd be able to communicate to the player meaningfully. He seemed reluctant to implement a system that couldn't be easily understood and handled in the interface. Which is an optimistic good sign, I guess.
I believe immigrants are already pulled from the entity population of the civilization you are embarking from.To my knowledge, migrants are currently spawned ex nihilo. So long one member of your home civilization is alive, the number of migrants is unlimited.
Medieval landscape was extreme. The inhabited parts had a very high population density – no forests, only houses and farms. The wilderness was very virgin and untamed. Much unlike today.
Indeed, you can just look at satelite photos on google maps and see it for yourself, it really looks kinda like what was on screen-shots.
Spawning extra brooks and rivers is - in my opinion - a bad way. Normally Rain and aquifer-water should be enough for farming and if not herding sheep might be a good solution. I would say that the villages could have one mayor up to one well per field. Dry regions also developed often enough crops that could coop with the dryness. Hehe an droughts were and are a problem you have to deal with.Actually, the improved river density is probably more realistic. Assuming a scale of 1 town DF=1 village now-real-life, there are streams every village, even those now that don't need any. What we do need is larger and fewer ponds, even the smallest ponds (in my area, at least) are many now-houses (bigger than then-houses) large, and they don't occur every 8 houses. The murky pools can really only fit 4 houses.
Well, being as you're setting up everything I could possibly say as either being "more micromangament" or "more automation", and BOTH are always bad, and we're only talking about this in the most utter abstract, tell me, Kilo, how, exactly, am I supposed to satisfy these mutually exclusive goals, especially when we're not even talking about the nuance or details, but just pure Gaming Philosophy?The best rule of thumb that I can think of is if that a system does not encourage creative solutions to problems, then it should be either redesigned, scrapped, rendered invisible to the player (unless he specifically wants to see it), or automated as best as the game engine can handle. The "encourage creative solutions to problems" is vague, and should be weighed against the strain that the system places on the player.
Adding a system with little application happened rather frequently in DF's development. Without keeping such suggestions that have an effect on gameplay at the forefront, then a system can't be accurately valued.
Can you still make farming more complex and yet not either a constant micromanagement nightmare or just another roadblock to a new person and another wiki-dive for an experienced one? Yes. Suppose that a race of snail-men invade, and their acidic trails screw with the soil composition which kills off the crops that they walked over; but that also lets you import acid-loving plants and grow them too. Suppose that the sea gods get annoyed with you and send a tidal wave that, in addition to the obvious effects, leaves a lot of salt on the ground that screws with the plants you can grow. Or have the invading goblins who can't find a way into your fortress get frustrated and start salting the ground and the water supply you use to water your plants. These things are unlikely to happen to a new player yet bring new challenges to an experienced one - that's the best kind of challenge I can think of. Forcing you to do the same thing the same way for each fort isn't fun.
And here we go, the rare actual suggestion, which happens to be something already in the suggestion, but since people only talk about it in the abstract, they don't realize it.
I know that you, kilo24, are certainly capable of thoughtful discussion, and I would really welcome it if you would join the actual discussion, but when Improved Farming keeps getting dragged out into these arguments about abstract concepts about what Improved Farming will entail, it always involves arguments against things Improved Farming isn't, and people wishing Improved Farming were changed more towards becoming what it already is.I've posted in there before, and I might do so again. It still seemed to be mainly a discussion of how to make farming more complicated, realistic and time-consuming, without much focus on interesting and unique farming challenges.
The current round pretty much starts here: http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=22015.450;start=%1$d
Ad Farming:This could be a good UI - if it doesn't preclude the ability to specify more. What farmers will automatically do with the simple "Farm!" command should be good crops, but not guaranteed to be the best for your given fortress. Not because the game intentionally screws it up, but because the depth of the system is such that the game can't predict it accurately.
My idea of farming in Dwarf Fortress is:Anything more complicated is just bad design.
- I designate an area of land as a farmplot
- I choose farmers and tell them: "Farm!"
- It works!
The new river network looks fantastic! I've made a few river networks myself, and there's one thing I learned that might be of use while you're playing with it. I learned that when making a river network, there is no right answer for which way a river might flow, as long as it goes downhill. If you choose a random flow direction that is downhill the whole river network will still make sense with itself. So one thing you can do to make a really nice looking river network on a square grid is to never let a river run straight unless it's the only downhill option. So if a flow enters a square from the west, try to avoid letting it also leave to the west. This eliminates almost all the scenarios that might create a river that's too straight for too long, and does a good job of hiding the fact that were on a square grid.
As for displaying the river, I think the first example shows too few rivers and the next one shows too many. You might tune the amount of water needed for this or that size river so that it looks best. You might even consider a relative scale so that, for example, a fourth of all river lengths are major rivers etc. People love major rivers and tend to be dissapointed when they don't get any.
Spawning extra brooks and rivers is - in my opinion - a bad way. Normally Rain and aquifer-water should be enough for farming and if not herding sheep might be a good solution. I would say that the villages could have one mayor up to one well per field. Dry regions also developed often enough crops that could coop with the dryness. Hehe an droughts were and are a problem you have to deal with.
Well in the medieval times there was deforestation for 2 mayor things:
- making charcoal
- Building ships
The Roman Empire did use the wood mostly for charcoal thus for metalwork which ended in the fact that they had to import wood from the Kelts for high prices. Later the big countrys like Spain or great Britain etc. drained there forrests for these gigantic fleets.
A Village will only deforest the area it needs for being self-sufficient everything else would be to Labor intensive.
The best rule of thumb that I can think of is if that a system does not encourage creative solutions to problems, then it should be either redesigned, scrapped, rendered invisible to the player (unless he specifically wants to see it), or automated as best as the game engine can handle. The "encourage creative solutions to problems" is vague, and should be weighed against the strain that the system places on the player.
In other words, if an increase in farming complexity only gives us the crop diversity we have now but with extra work for the player (through, say, queueing watering or fertilization jobs), I'd oppose it strongly. The more effects that encouraged creative solutions that it could have would lower my resistance (like letting other things affect quality of the soil such as fortress location and my aforementioned suggestions for events affecting salinity/acidity). But I'd never want to force the player to waste any significant amount of time doing things that have no creativity involved. That applies to all of Dwarf Fortress, and is at the core of at least my complaints about the UI.
I honestly think that a better way to handle keeping enough water around for farmers (other than limitless aquifers, which aren't nearly the hassle when you don't need to dig beneath them, anyway) would be to have farms that are open to air simply take rain water as effective irrigation. That way, you can have farms that grow crops appropriate for the rainfall of the region that grow there (if, perhaps, not the most regular crop yields because there isn't absolute control over the water supply).
The best rule of thumb that I can think of is if that a system does not encourage creative solutions to problems, then it should be either redesigned, scrapped, rendered invisible to the player (unless he specifically wants to see it), or automated as best as the game engine can handle. The "encourage creative solutions to problems" is vague, and should be weighed against the strain that the system places on the player.
In other words, if an increase in farming complexity only gives us the crop diversity we have now but with extra work for the player (through, say, queueing watering or fertilization jobs), I'd oppose it strongly. The more effects that encouraged creative solutions that it could have would lower my resistance (like letting other things affect quality of the soil such as fortress location and my aforementioned suggestions for events affecting salinity/acidity). But I'd never want to force the player to waste any significant amount of time doing things that have no creativity involved. That applies to all of Dwarf Fortress, and is at the core of at least my complaints about the UI.
First off, be careful about the difference between slashes and backslashes. :P Also, leaving a break of a couple lines between [ /quote ] and the response really helps people who might quote you in the future, even if you don't make that mistake.
Anyway, as I've been repeatedly trying to say, this is exactly the sort of thing I have been doing my best to include - whether through aquaducts, sewage and waste treatment, pests that offer dynamic problems, and expanded types of crops, including biome-specific forms of crops and massive increases in crop diversity. I honestly have trouble thinking of anything more to put into it, and if you can, by all means, do add to it. (Although I would prefer a swarm of locusts attacking your farm and maybe at the most the acidic slugs over "Poseidon crashes a tidal wave on you"... when you're in a cave.)
I guess that the main point we differ on is that I'd like the system to be either trivialized or the default settings to be good enough that, outside of those dynamic problems, it takes a minimum of effort to maintain and establish. You're not as worried about keeping the effort to maintain and establish it low. Is that a fair assessment?
Will there be an adjustment on the way rust works in regards to skills? As is, in forts where there aren't a lot of injuries, it's frustrating that the moment you really need your legendary surgeon, he's so rusty as to be almost useless.
I think Toady said that rust only reduces skill by half and it goes away after a single job.
Well, maybe your doctors progressed beyond rust and actually started to lose their skills. I guess you could set up a device where any dwarf attempting to enter your dining room had a small chance to fall through a hatch and break a leg on the ground a couple stories below, giving your doctors plenty of jobs to keep busy.You could say that he'd be taking a fall for the team...
You could just train your soldiers and your medics at the same time.
Well, maybe your doctors progressed beyond rust and actually started to lose their skills. I guess you could set up a device where any dwarf attempting to enter your dining room had a small chance to fall through a hatch and break a leg on the ground a couple stories below, giving your doctors plenty of jobs to keep busy.
Someone set up a "training camp" for armor use by setting up spike traps with wood training spears (not menacing spikes) inside of a barracks, and repeatedly throwing the lever to give his dwarves the ability to repeatedly defend against a fairly weak attack. It still resulted in plenty of yellow wounds to patch up. You could just tain your soldiers and your medics at the same time.
You have to admit that is utterly ridiculous. "Here, let me break your arm so I can practice my bone setting.."
Someone set up a "training camp" for armor use by setting up spike traps with wood training spears (not menacing spikes) inside of a barracks, and repeatedly throwing the lever to give his dwarves the ability to repeatedly defend against a fairly weak attack. It still resulted in plenty of yellow wounds to patch up. You could just tain your soldiers and your medics at the same time.
You have to admit that is utterly ridiculous. "Here, let me break your arm so I can practice my bone setting.."
You have to admit that is utterly ridiculous. "Here, let me break your arm so I can practice my bone setting.."
Havent been here for awhile so this probably was covered already but whats up with the non decaying blood on the ground? After just 2-3 years I got all sorts of pus, blood and other fluid pretty much swimming around the place. While its not game effecting I dont think, its rather disconcerting to have everything covered in red "paint" and my dwarfs wasting time cleaning themselves.
It's hard to say since I'm pretty much just fixing issues and following ripples from the world gen changes and so on.
QuoteIt's hard to say since I'm pretty much just fixing issues and following ripples from the world gen changes and so on.
So toady is experiencing some kind of butterfly-effect? Serriously what does 'ripples' mean in this context?
QuoteIt's hard to say since I'm pretty much just fixing issues and following ripples from the world gen changes and so on.
So toady is experiencing some kind of butterfly-effect? Serriously what does 'ripples' mean in this context?
Probably a ripple as in a ripple in the water.
I dare someone to take an Adventurer into that cottage and try and win...also, what's wrong with that? It could be a big family!
I can confirm he did, but I'm not sure where. Possibly he mentioned it in a DF talk
I remember toady saying that he would implement multi tile trees? Then I faintly remember him talking about how he would use them to build cities in the trees for elves.
Also, he said there would be investigations, so no more telepathic villagers coming to kill you for stealing.
I can confirm he did, but I'm not sure where. Possibly he mentioned it in a DF talk
I remember toady saying that he would implement multi tile trees? Then I faintly remember him talking about how he would use them to build cities in the trees for elves.
***wall of text***Suggestions should probably go in the suggestions forum, especially for things this long, since making the mass-reply posts already takes Toady hours.
Ahh there we go. Proof that Toady isn't Paranoid when he cares about Save capatability.
***wall of text***Suggestions should probably go in the suggestions forum, especially for things this long, since making the mass-reply posts already takes Toady hours.
Ahh there we go. Proof that Toady isn't Paranoid when he cares about Save capatability.
Did I miss an update? I don't see one for today, even refreshing...
iron relies on technology of smelting, which humans&dwarves should know right from the start
Of course, if you want to actually get Toady to respond to a suggestion (and that post was basically asking Toady questions), the suggestion forum is pretty much the one place where you are guaranteed that Toady will not respond unless he is brought in as a moderator to stop an argument.
I'm not even sure if he even looks at the suggestions threads anymore (something that obviously takes more than the several hours this one thread takes), as the last time I remember seeing a comment about it, he had said he was several months behind on reading the suggestions, and that was before DF 2010 came out and made the forums explode.
A comment was made by Asmageddon regarding keeping worlds that have been generated across save compatibility broken borders by setting it so that history generation could be done with pre-generated worlds.Ahh there we go. Proof that Toady isn't Paranoid when he cares about Save capatability.
Did I miss an update? I don't see one for today, even refreshing...
McDaughter: In 512 McMom married Urist McDad. I detest Urist McDad for his false ribs and being old(remember? old is opposite of young, which is related to child, which McDaughter is)
iron relies on technology of smelting, which humans&dwarves should know right from the start
Starting with 31.01, humans actually don't know how to smelt iron anymore. They're back in the bronze age now.
iron relies on technology of smelting, which humans&dwarves should know right from the start
Starting with 31.01, humans actually don't know how to smelt iron anymore. They're back in the bronze age now.
Are you sure they don't know how, or do they just not use it? After all, bronze is better to begin with.
I know this is from a few pages back, but it wasn't greened and it should be.Yes. Brooks should have 3/7 water. You can swim in them, but not drown. Maybe some smaller like 2/7.Such an amazing and simple idea! This would also mean you wouldn't need to have the counterintuitive "floor on top of 7/7 water" system. People would simply cross the water. The only new thing required would be sloped river/brook banks.
I like that your suggestion for how whatever this is (some sort of AI conversation generator?)Nope. The generator would remain almost unchanged. Just topics instead of always going through a set up chain, ie.: [info about village] [who lives here] [what he does] would be picked at random and assembled by chosing related words and topics, this would also help to determine religious/private value for an item, so villager of "WoodAncient" would like wood, as such also trees, and thus be a bit more friendly toward elves.
In many games mounts are basically motorbikes with legs, will mounts in DF, especially badly trained or with a low riding skill, be treated more realistically as separate agents that you just give commands? This is especially important with intelligent ones, which should probably be handled more like your companions than like a warhorse.
Will the addition of different travel rates like walk, jog, canter, run, etc. be available to all entities or will it only be applied to mounts? If it is available to all entities do you have plans to make dwarves in fortress mode choose to move at different paces during work or only in response to threats?
Amphibious mounts may decide to swim, drowning their riders while continuing their invasion path. Considering you don't want mounts to be unthinking 'motorbikes with legs', will this be perfectly acceptable behaviour if the mount is badly trained?
Will the zones mentioned for combat also be used for other things? For example, random creture generation of stuff along the lines of shimeras and mermaids could have more use of swapping zones between species than bodyparts maybe.
Will all kinds of creatures have the same zones, or will that be something defined in the RAWs?
Considering that the goblins snatch a lot of non-carnivorous folk, have you considered adding in slave-run farming villages for the goblins?
When you do implement [diplomacy/war], how is that going to change fortress mode? Is there going to be an option during world gen to stop when a controllable civ is at war? I know we'll be able to start wars ourselves, but will diplomatic events be happening in the background as we play, so we'll get notifications of peace treaties and new conflicts and whatnot during the course of the game? In that vein, if we start a war with the humans will that effect the entire Dwarven Civ or just our Fortress?
are you saying that dwarfs may emigrate to the sprawl if fortress housing prices are too high? More broadly, what are your plans for emigration during fortress mode in general?
Anyone know the details about what kind of structure toady will put in? Will there be barn houses,mills, and stables and such? Also, will villagers actually harvest the crops, store them, then eat them ? In general, will villagers have needs (like food and drink) and a schedule by which they live? I think this would enable you to put in mills and barns and wheat silos and stuff while giving them real purpose. We could cause all kinds of mischief then, like sabotaging their food production lines. This would then have real consequences.
Also what about citys near bigger lakes and rivers? Will they get channels and screw-pumps for watering the fields or for drainage of swamps and marshes for farmland? Little one-tile boats for fishing? Aqueducts for dwarves?
Will there be herding/fishing based civs too?
Could [demons] change how and where sites are created/expanded/abandoned and alike?
Is weapon length taken into account in combat, and if not, will it ever be?
Does the weight of a weapon affect the velocity of the strike or recovery time/frequency of attacks? Will a weak dwarf swing an artifact platinum mace with the same velocity as one of adamantine?
In the thief section of the devlist, there's a few bits about tracking your appearance for bounties and being wanted for your crime(s) and whatnot. If you find someone with a similar enough appearance, would it be possible for the crime(s) to be blamed on that person?
Toady how are you going to balance out techniques with weapon wielders that use a person's physical body (and other less then full strength attacks)? In real life a body attack doesn't deal anywhere close to as much damage as a weapon strike but there are often opportunities where it is advantageous.
Quote from: TormyAny plans to make farming more difficult?Quote from: Kilo24How difficult do you want farming (and feeding a fortress in general) to be, both for an experienced player trying to get everything working and for a new player learning the ropes? Will trading be able to wholly replace a dwarven fortress food industry at home?Quote from: Kogan LoloklamWill the new villages result in greater amounts of farmland required to feed individuals? If so, will there be "farmers caravans" that come to the fortress with food you can buy?
How important will farming be, both for a NPC settlement and for a fortress? Will it be a flat-out necessity for large cities/fortresses, or can hunting and/or fishing in a reasonably wildlife-heavy place be sufficient?
[when] crops can actually be differentiated significantly, how many crops would you start allowing? Instead of having a dozen plants everywhere (and one for each of Good, Evil, and Savage), can we get tropical-jungle-on-silty-loam-specific fruits where it's possible for one fort to see an entirely different set of crops for its whole existence than another fort?
Will we have country bumpkins coming in from offmap needing health care or to buy items at the fortress stores?
Will the villagers sometimes detect raiding parties and warn of them coming?
Quote from: EdurenSo will there be a way to harvest crops from these new fields? Will taking from them make the owners hostile if you are caught?Quote from: dree12I see that the new farms look like shrubs. Will we be able to gather[p] those shrubs? Because that seems a little overkill, because it can feed 200 dwarves each year if they regrow.
Judging by the shear amount of farmland for those villages posted in the screenshots does this imply any farming changes like making things take longer to grow?
Will historical events be able to affect a subset of a population? For instance, a megabeast attack that kills one tenth of a village's residents. Would this affect the individual histories of population members we meet?
Will portions of a population be able to emigrate to another site? Ideally this would towns with immigrants, whose history could be traced back to another location via an immigration wave event.
Finally, will the family members of people we meet have histories themselves, including the possibility of their death? I'll be honest with you here, I'm mostly just hoping to find a farmboy orphaned and displaced by a dragon attack and bring him along on my quest to kill the foul creature.
I live in an area between Bresse plain, the soil being roughly speaking clay, and Jura mountain, the soil being limestone. I learned in school that the villages of Bresse and Jura have very different shapes, because of the capacity of the soil to retain water. Limestone being unable to retain water, the Jura villages are very tight and dense around the scarce watering places, while the Bresse villages have homesteads scattered in a very large area because you can find ponds anywhere. Did you consider using that kind of rule for the villages morphology? That could be simple, by just relying on the soil type, or even be based on the actual water layout, with this layout depending on the soil type, although that would probably be more complex to implement.
Plains civs have farms now from what I gather. I assume goblins will have hunting sheds or livestock pens or something like that for meat gathering, elves will have...elf stuff. Will modders be able to pick and choose which kind of structures are available to a civ? For example replacing the majority of a [CARNIVORE] race's farms with hunting lodges or animal pens or something? Like reducing farms to 5%, hunting lodges up to 35%, livestock pens to 35%, woodcutting outposts to 15%... and so on and so fourth?
Quote from: Jiri PetruAnd yeah, the lakes/ponds are weird. Any chance you'll get rid of them, Toady?Quote from: Thief^Are there any plans to remove the "brook tile" hack and replace it with sloped banks and less than 7/7 water?
I don't like the idea of having 3/7 water a Z level down, although a lot of the streams should probably connect up with the aquifer. This would make fewer places inhabitable by digging creatures unless the stream were smoothly lowered a bit, but I'm not for turning them into rivers with less water in them since that introduces problems with connecting rivers (would all 3/7 rivers connect to 7/7 rivers in waterfalls? Otherwise you'd have reverse waterfalls, or you'd have to introduce a 4/7 ground square, which feels like a can of worms) and people walking across a brook should not be in a separate Z level with respect to projectiles/LOS, etc. People swimming on the surface of a river should probably also be vulnerable to archers, but having an ankle-high brook hide you is worse.
Quote from: Kilo24How important will farming be, both for a NPC settlement and for a fortress? Will it be a flat-out necessity for large cities/fortresses, or can hunting and/or fishing in a reasonably wildlife-heavy place be sufficient?
I think it'll be necessary for large cities that are inhabited by people that need to eat a normal amount or else starve in some weeks. Goblins might not fall in that category. A human capital would likely only be supportable with farming, though I'd consider any real world counter-examples from the right period. What were the biggest fishing/hunting-fed settlements back then (that didn't also get a lot food from crops and livestock -- theirs or otherwise)? Does the answer change much if livestock is included but not crops?
Essentially, the only example of a "hunting" people that ever managed to get enough numbers to ever be a real threat to anyone were the Mongols
to quote Wikipedia (Article "Hunter-Gatherer")
Many hunter-gatherers consciously manipulate the landscape through cutting or burning undesirable plants while encouraging desirable ones, some even going to the extent of slash-and-burn (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slash_and_burn) to create habitat for game animals. These activities are on an entirely different scale than those associated with agriculture, but they are nevertheless domestication on some level.
I won't pretend I'm a specialist on the topic, but my understanding is that these invading waves from central Europe people, including Mongols, were pillaging food from farming settlements as their main mean of subsistance, which was also their strength, because they could devote themselves entirely to war rather than hunting/gathering or farming. Then they 'disappeared' because they took power over farming people and were absorbed by their civilization... just like their culture was weaker than the culture of the people they conquered.
That would be quite a proper behavior for goblins, no?
Do they? We don't have that much to go on about goblin expansionistic policies that aren't directed by a Demon.
The thing is, that DOESN'T describe how goblins behave at all, where this seems to be even more a matter of cultural warfare than it does racial warfare. (In fact, goblins seem to be the most egalitarian of all races - survival of the fittest, regardless of race.)This is probably the most informative post i've ever read.Anyway,you forgot to add the Slavics,who pretty much fall in the same category as the Huns.
The Huns and the Mongols assimilated into other cultures because, once they had pillaged the "civilized empires", they rather liked the lifestyle, and abandoned their nomadic ways....
Yes, but that's what happens right now. I'm not sure what Toady's future goals for that sort of thing include. Although I'm sure that cultures will persist somewhat in the future even after a site is occupied. Plus, it would be neat to see how the different races handle living in various cultures. A dwarf should not magically become identical to a goblin just because he grew up with them. Some dwarven traits should still influence how they act, even if the basic ethics might be based on the parent civ.Do I sense occupation in these words? As in,a dwarf fortress would continue to live,thrive and work,but would still have to give some taxes to the occupator? Maybe sacrifice childrens to the goblins?
Do they? We don't have that much to go on about goblin expansionistic policies that aren't directed by a Demon.
Well, we have what happens in the game: whenever a civ conquers, they force all the subjugated peoples into adopting the policies and ethics of their own civ.
Elves conquered by dwarves live like dwarves. Humans conquered (or snatched) by goblins live like goblins.
Hmm, another thing I noticed:
Right now, NPC buildings and farms look very sterile blocky and mass produced. And with some very reasonable assumptions on tile size the buildings are VERY large for a mideval civ. Toady, are you planing on at some point make things look more organic, dramatic, and homely?
... Of course, even this thread has poor odds of having your questions answered...If you read the post, that's not an inherent flaw of the thread, but is in fact due to people (primarily yourself, by my perception) throwing in massive amounts of discussion that does not belong here. The remedy to this should be fairly apparent.
Hmm, another thing I noticed:
Right now, NPC buildings and farms look very sterile blocky and mass produced. And with some very reasonable assumptions on tile size the buildings are VERY large for a mideval civ. Toady, are you planing on at some point make things look more organic, dramatic, and homely?
If you read the post, that's not an inherent flaw of the thread, but is in fact due to people (primarily yourself, by my perception) throwing in massive amounts of discussion that does not belong here. The remedy to this should be fairly apparent.
When we get specialized "grazing" crops, it's entirely possible to do something like pig farm or chicken farm (or perhaps some fantasy livestock type) for extra meat in a fairly small area, and still keep goblins carnivores who would never consider eating the raw muck fungus that they feed the pigs, when the muck is constantly fed by the bodies and bones of those who failed to survive
I have no strategy, I was merely pointing out the flaw in your deduction. I was not intending to be insulting, merely to let you know something you appeared to miss. You are right that this discussion contributes nothing. It does have the benefit of being brief, and thus hindering little, but nonetheless I agree that it should be ended.If you read the post, that's not an inherent flaw of the thread, but is in fact due to people (primarily yourself, by my perception) throwing in massive amounts of discussion that does not belong here. The remedy to this should be fairly apparent.
A new strategy, hmm? I don't know, contributing nothing but a few random insults doesn't seem to be doing you too much good, either.
If you read the post, that's not an inherent flaw of the thread, but is in fact due to people (primarily yourself, by my perception) throwing in massive amounts of discussion that does not belong here. The remedy to this should be fairly apparent.
A new strategy, hmm? I don't know, contributing nothing but a few random insults doesn't seem to be doing you too much good, either.
I hadn't thought of joining brooks to rivers, that's a tough one.Quote from: Thief^Are there any plans to remove the "brook tile" hack and replace it with sloped banks and less than 7/7 water?[...] Another obstacle is having new moist tiles or tiles with some water without having them having floors on a different Z level. Brooks are currently handled that way. I don't like the idea of having 3/7 water a Z level down, although a lot of the streams should probably connect up with the aquifer. This would make fewer places inhabitable by digging creatures unless the stream were smoothly lowered a bit, but I'm not for turning them into rivers with less water in them since that introduces problems with connecting rivers (would all 3/7 rivers connect to 7/7 rivers in waterfalls? Otherwise you'd have reverse waterfalls, or you'd have to introduce a 4/7 ground square, which feels like a can of worms) and people walking across a brook should not be in a separate Z level with respect to projectiles/LOS, etc. People swimming on the surface of a river should probably also be vulnerable to archers, but having an ankle-high brook hide you is worse.
There is, pretty simply, no way to have a large hunting-fed permanent settlement. (No more than a "hunting lodge" of a few dozen.) If you are talking about hunters of wild game, you are talking about Mongolians or Soiux Native Americans who were nomads that chased after the large herds. If you are talking about livestock that aren't fed by farming, you are talking about herding nomads who send their herds out on year-long treks so that no one area becomes overgrazed, the way that Cowboys did in the old west. Whatever permanent settlements they might come back to would be ones that could stay there for more than a year because they farmed.I just want to state that this is not entirely true. Populations of hunters could be pushed into the thousands.
Fishing is a different matter, if and only if they are ocean fishers with boats capable of surviving voyages out into deep water, and/or they have located themselves in a place with an irregularly large fish population (like cod were in the New World before they were overfished), and the fishers are actually careful to avoid overfishing... (which doesn't seem like a very gobliny trait to me...) It's difficult to say how large such places might get, as even most fishing-heavy cultures tended to garden. I would say the norse colonists of Greenland and their Inuit neighbors are a good example of people who survived entirely off fishing or occasional grazing livestock, mostly because it's just too cold to farm. (Note: This did not go well for the Norse, whose entire colony starved to death.) It would depend largely on being able to claim a large enough body of water that they never overfish, and can prevent other nearby villages from popping up to fish the same waters. (Best estimate, though, would be from English fishing villages or the like where they are carved into a little valley, and you could get a few hundred, MAAAAYBE a thousand people in a "city" based entirely on fishing.)
Stocked fishing, such as specifically breeding oysters for fishing can expand your ability to fish (as less adults need to survive to adulthood to spawn if you protect the eggs from predators for them), but only if you have dedicated fish breeding programs.
Goblins couldn't possibly generate the populations required to zerg like they currently do, not from single site locations.
THey tend to live in caves also, if theres fungal growth and undeground game i could see them thrive with farming
Well, they could... if they require less food than humans. In a fantasy game, different metabolisms may be a way of achieving results that wouldn't be plausible in the reality.
(This is not a nitpick, it's more like a suggestion ;))
Could always have the goblins drop the current zerg approach and go with a more protoss approach instead. Smaller numbers of highly trained soldiers instead of massive quantities of cannon fodder that barely know which end of the sword to hold.
I would think a culture that spends all it's time hunting would make better warriors than farmer cultures anyway. Probably every member of the civilization would be passable with some kind of implement of death. Spears, javelins, and bows in particular.
They have been around from the beginning, and I never got around to the local variations in the landscape that I'd need to get a better distribution of differently-sized small features. We might see something on this with underbrush (which is up in the first category on the dev page with the other things I've been working on), since I wanted to mix tree/brush density up within a given world map square, though soil information might have to come first for that to be satisfying. Another obstacle is having new moist tiles or tiles with some water without having them having floors on a different Z level. Brooks are currently handled that way. I don't like the idea of having 3/7 water a Z level down, although a lot of the streams should probably connect up with the aquifer. This would make fewer places inhabitable by digging creatures unless the stream were smoothly lowered a bit, but I'm not for turning them into rivers with less water in them since that introduces problems with connecting rivers (would all 3/7 rivers connect to 7/7 rivers in waterfalls? Otherwise you'd have reverse waterfalls, or you'd have to introduce a 4/7 ground square, which feels like a can of worms) and people walking across a brook should not be in a separate Z level with respect to projectiles/LOS, etc. People swimming on the surface of a river should probably also be vulnerable to archers, but having an ankle-high brook hide you is worse.
I stopped historical figures from bouncing around between cottages each visit
In a histry class I took the professor mentioned that basic agriculture can support 100 times the population of a hunter/gather society in the same area.
In a histry class I took the professor mentioned that basic agriculture can support 100 times the population of a hunter/gather society in the same area.
I think that's a simplification. It depends on the methods and the crops and the year--year because if conditions are bad, hunter/gatherers up and move, while agrarians starve to death.
And (I was surprised to learn this) hunter/gatherers tend to have better nutrition than agrarians because of a more varied and ample diet.
I think it'll be necessary for large cities that are inhabited by people that need to eat a normal amount or else starve in some weeks. Goblins might not fall in that category. A human capital would likely only be supportable with farming, though I'd consider any real world counter-examples from the right period. What were the biggest fishing/hunting-fed settlements back then (that didn't also get a lot food from crops and livestock -- theirs or otherwise)? Does the answer change much if livestock is included but not crops?
In a histry class I took the professor mentioned that basic agriculture can support 100 times the population of a hunter/gather society in the same area.
I think that's a simplification. It depends on the methods and the crops and the year--year because if conditions are bad, hunter/gatherers up and move, while agrarians starve to death.
And (I was surprised to learn this) hunter/gatherers tend to have better nutrition than agrarians because of a more varied and ample diet.
Well your forgetting that in a agricultural society not everyone is a farmer
But in a hunter gatherer society... everyone is a hunter or gatherer (well just about)
There is, pretty simply, no way to have a large hunting-fed permanent settlement. (No more than a "hunting lodge" of a few dozen.)I don't think Toady should really give too much weight to reality, as DF is after all, a fantasy game. As Stephen King said, "as far as I'm concerned, reality can go take a flying fuck at a rolling doughnut." And as long as the end-result is a playable and fun game, do we really care? I think Toady's policy should be the same.
Maybe goblins have a better metabolism that gets more out of less food and can thus survive well on hunting alone? After all, many carnivorous animals live only on what they catch. Your argument against goblins that wouldn't survive on what they can catch should apply as well to all the lions and wolves out there too, if you apply your human-centric logic and thinking to them equally. And goblins have some levels of technology to aid them too.
Fishing is a different matter, if and only if they are ocean fishers with boats capable of surviving voyages out into deep water, and/or they have located themselves in a place with an irregularly large fish population (like cod were in the New World before they were overfished), and the fishers are actually careful to avoid overfishing... (which doesn't seem like a very gobliny trait to me...) It's difficult to say how large such places might get, as even most fishing-heavy cultures tended to garden. I would say the norse colonists of Greenland and their Inuit neighbors are a good example of people who survived entirely off fishing or occasional grazing livestock, mostly because it's just too cold to farm. (Note: This did not go well for the Norse, whose entire colony starved to death.) It would depend largely on being able to claim a large enough body of water that they never overfish, and can prevent other nearby villages from popping up to fish the same waters. (Best estimate, though, would be from English fishing villages or the like where they are carved into a little valley, and you could get a few hundred, MAAAAYBE a thousand people in a "city" based entirely on fishing.)
Stocked fishing, such as specifically breeding oysters for fishing can expand your ability to fish (as less adults need to survive to adulthood to spawn if you protect the eggs from predators for them), but only if you have dedicated fish breeding programs.
Being as goblins are found in mountains, however, requiring being near an ocean may make goblins nearly impossible to place.
and it doesn't show anybody's name until you learn it (you know everybody in your starting town).
i could be completely wrong but i was under the impression that over fishing (certainly of sea and ocean stock) was a modern phenomenon simply because the sea is so productive compared with historical population densities. The north sea is only in plight today because we scoup out tonnes of fish in huge nets.
Well time to disregard the current conversion and blurt out a random question.
Will there be any interactions between wanderers and your fort? The ability to set up an inn for them to stay in would be cool. Maybe expand thieves to pretend to be travelers at first?
Heh, suddenly, I'm reminded of that talk about contracting out work and "Majesty"... Travellers are now miniature-caravans and also mercenaries you can hire to loot dungeons or slay dragons, if you post a high enough reward for the behavior?
But how do you trade with a traveller? Do you set up a store and post what you'll accept as payment? Or do you have to go into an individual caravan trade screen for each and every random hobo who walks into your tavern?
Of course, this is going the route of just being an entirely new suggestion... Someone else want to make the thread, or should I?
Well time to disregard the current conversion and blurt out a random question.
Will there be any interactions between wanderers and your fort? The ability to set up an inn for them to stay in would be cool. Maybe expand thieves to pretend to be travelers at first?
That sounds slightly amusing... but what will wanderers do at your inns? Do they purchase food and drink? If they "purchase" it, how do they pay, because players may not want coins...
i could be completely wrong but i was under the impression that over fishing (certainly of sea and ocean stock) was a modern phenomenon simply because the sea is so productive compared with historical population densities. The north sea is only in plight today because we scoup out tonnes of fish in huge nets.
That's just plain not right. Overfishing and overhunting have been problems throughout all of history. Not just human history, but all of for animals, as well - populations rise, overgraze or overhunt, kill off their food supply, and start to starve, until their numbers drop low, and the plants or prey numbers start to recover from having less grazers/predators.
Whalers killed off the vast majority of whales without huge nets.
The people of Easter Island are believed to have dissapeared in part because they overtaxed the land, which led to them having to rely on fishing exclusively for their food, and eventually exhausted the fish populations, inflicting famine upon the island, whose remaining population afterwards was not enough to sustain human life on the island.
As long as you are killing more fish than can respawn, you're going to overfish... and if the only limit on population is food, then if you can feed your population now, it will rise, and when it rises, you have to get more food.
I thought the people on easter island dissapeared because the deforested their entire island and destroyed its ecosystems.
They have been around from the beginning, and I never got around to the local variations in the landscape that I'd need to get a better distribution of differently-sized small features. We might see something on this with underbrush (which is up in the first category on the dev page with the other things I've been working on), since I wanted to mix tree/brush density up within a given world map square, though soil information might have to come first for that to be satisfying. Another obstacle is having new moist tiles or tiles with some water without having them having floors on a different Z level. Brooks are currently handled that way. I don't like the idea of having 3/7 water a Z level down, although a lot of the streams should probably connect up with the aquifer. This would make fewer places inhabitable by digging creatures unless the stream were smoothly lowered a bit, but I'm not for turning them into rivers with less water in them since that introduces problems with connecting rivers (would all 3/7 rivers connect to 7/7 rivers in waterfalls? Otherwise you'd have reverse waterfalls, or you'd have to introduce a 4/7 ground square, which feels like a can of worms) and people walking across a brook should not be in a separate Z level with respect to projectiles/LOS, etc. People swimming on the surface of a river should probably also be vulnerable to archers, but having an ankle-high brook hide you is worse.
Hey Toady, wouldn't it be physically accurate to keep the brook surface tile and make the "body" of the brook a localized aquifer rather than 7/7 water? Units can still walk on it, it's still a source of water, nothing can swim or live in it, and the best part is that there'd be no flow calculations so brook sites would be great for FPS.
Never heard of this part before; Diamond and a few other sources I've read emphasize the ways the on-land ecosystem's collapse made it difficult to fish--no more big trees for their dugout canoes nor plant fiber for their nets. It's sort of a moot point, though, I don't think anyone wants to see goblins have to rely entirely on deep sea fishing to be a threat.I thought the people on easter island dissapeared because the deforested their entire island and destroyed its ecosystems.Yes, and when they deforested the island, the soil eroded, and crops failed, so they were forced to rely upon the sea to get all their food - but the ocean did not have the sealife populations to support that, so they overfished the area quickly, and eventually destroyed the marine ecosystem the same as they destroyed the land ecosystem. That's the entire point - It's entirely possible to overfish, it only takes you being able to catch fish at rates greater than their replacement rate. (Plus that ignores the Greenland example.)
Currency could be used in the future to deal with all sorts of non-material needs . . .
. . .
. . . especially once a supply/demand economy is in working order, and not everyone considers gabbro mugs legal tender.
Currency could be used in the future to deal with all sorts of non-material needs . . .
- pay off bandits to leave your trade routes alone
- pay tribute to foreign lands
- hire a quick mercenary army
- purchase goods that can't be made domestically (books, whenever libraries get in)
- pay a bounty to hunters for the ears of some pesty animal
- offer a bonus for immigrants of a certain type
- bribe the human kingdom to cut down the elven forest
- pay for information from travelers
. . . especially once a supply/demand economy is in working order, and not everyone considers gabbro mugs legal tender.
I think everyone is missing what should be the Goblins primary food source...Elves. Goblin snatchers should be a form of hunter, and the Goblins shouldn't be converting other species to thier point of view, they should be using them as live stock.
Or they could have other reasons (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ViftZTfRSt8) for taking the children of other civilizations.
Currency could be used in the future to deal with all sorts of non-material needs . . .
. . .
. . . especially once a supply/demand economy is in working order, and not everyone considers gabbro mugs legal tender.
Except that each civilization has its own currency. So either you could trade within your own civ only, if you could exchange it somehow, or if you could force them to convert to your currency.
This might be useful though.
Or they could have other reasons (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ViftZTfRSt8) for taking the children of other civilizations.
Gold also had ceremonial and percieved magical properties - because of its uncorroding nature gold and silver were believed to have spiritual properties.fixed.
The phrase "born with a silver spoon in their mouth" comes from the fact that children from wealthier families who could afford silverware were less likely to die young - silver protects people from disease. Not understanding the reason silver protects people from disease, it was thought this was a property of silver that protected people from disease.
Or they could have other reasons (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ViftZTfRSt8) for taking the children of other civilizations.
That movie was iirc one of toadys inspirations for the snatching thing.
IT would be cool thought if the gobins would have a preverence for catchyMusic and musicals as only form of art they know.
Of course the snatching thing is part of the traditional mythos of the Fae, of which Elves, Dwarves, Goblins and other standard fantasy races were all part (changlings being the most common).Or they could have other reasons (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ViftZTfRSt8) for taking the children of other civilizations.
That movie was iirc one of toadys inspirations for the snatching thing.
IT would be cool thought if the gobins would have a preverence for catchyMusic and musicals as only form of art they know.
One thing that personally comes naturally to mind with the recent discussion of outlying community sprawl here is the idea of court life. etc.
One thing that personally comes naturally to mind with the recent discussion of outlying community sprawl here is the idea of court life. etc.Still, yes, Toady seems more interested in military than civil matters, just looking at those old devpage items. I do hope that civil matters are given a great deal of depth, as I see this as one of those things that could potentially be of benefit to people of multiple playstyles - if you have a court with various agents and officials and nobles, you can delegate the matters that don't interest you, and handle the matters that do interest you personally.
The part of this intrigues me is not the increased level of bureaucracy, but what this could mean for court intrigues. After all, how can you manage your kingdom when your ministers and officials are all plotting to stab each other (and the king) in the back? This would relate, of course, to in-fort factions, cults, and whatever.
Will there eventually be automatically generated embark profiles relative to the current world situation? Refugees from a border town that got sacked by goblins, royally funded military expansion, pilgrims on a missing to construct a shrine at a perceived holy site etc. Dwarves with appropriate skills assigned, preset goods. Just so when I find a nice location I don't have to spend another half an hour fiddling with my embark. As an added benefit one's initial dwarves would not be taken out of thin air but have an established place in the world. One might even receive highly skilled individuals same as current immigrants.
Fortress Starting Scenarios
* Starting scenarios giving a back story for your fortress, often related to current world situation
o Reclaim mechanics should be folded into this
* Ability to bring extra dwarves along depending on scenario
* Entity populations surrounding your fortress in appropriate environments, both above and below ground
* Ability to move dwarves in and out of surroundings
* Relationship with surrounding dwarves
* Ability to trade/demand food in depot or similar place with surrounding dwarves
* Changes to caravans/diplomatic relationships based on starting scenario
Toady, are there any plans on making the other races playable, and different, anytime soon?I can't seem to find the quote, but Toady has said there are no such plans at the moment. With a few exceptions like adventurer medical skills and plant gathering, the Dev page encompasses "anytime soon".
I like playing as humans, but they're really just tall dwarves, at the moment.
I don't get it. 7000 kills for one demon leader sounds perfectly reasonable.
He's a freakin' demon!
He's not just any demon either, he's a leader of a civilization and allegedly the God of Misery. It makes sense that he would indulge in some glorious slaughter from time to time.I don't get it. 7000 kills for one demon leader sounds perfectly reasonable.
He's a freakin' demon!
Agreed. :P
Toady, are there any plans on making the other races playable, and different, anytime soon?
I like playing as humans, but they're really just tall dwarves, at the moment.
Well, all the near-future stuff that would be save-breaking. Certainly not all of the cores require breaking save compatibility (I think there was a core added during the "40d era" where it went from 0.27 to 0.28, but that might not be necessarily the case).
(The guy Telkoth links to basically says 180 farmers fit in 3 square miles, while no more than 2 hunter gatherers can fit in a square mile... that's a ratio of 30 to 1 in favor of farmers, even if only 3 of those 30 farmers can be in the standing army, or even anything but a farmer.) And that larger concentration meant standing armies.Not to mention that all of the other 27 farmers could be combat trained and act as a form of (what we would call today) militia. That's what "Vikings" were, after all - farmers with a warfare tradition. They were not nearly as disciplined, or as well trained as a standing, "professional" army would have been, but every able man were still expected to arm himself and fight whenever battle commenced. After all, the term "huscarl", (which is nearly synonymous with "viking raider/warrior" in popular culture these days), means nothing else than "house man", and less directly translated would mean something akin to "farmhand".
AFAIK when the new core(s) is(are) implemented, the older saves won't be compatible anymore. Is it true? The bugs should end someday (so the bugfixes won't be needed), and then new cores will be added. Is there no way to add new cores and make saves compatible?I do not understand why some people are THAT hung up on save compatibility. This preference was actually detrimental to developing DF - one of reasons of so long period between 40d and .31.x was mythical "save compatibility" (done as merely not releasing anything... some compatibility, indeed!). Results are known very well. Good grief, this is ALPHA version, for Armok sake. Toady could release each version totally incompatibile and everyone would suck it up. It is not like old version would stop working one second after next release.
Well, all the near-future stuff that would be save-breaking. Certainly not all of the cores require breaking save compatibility (I think there was a core added during the "40d era" where it went from 0.27 to 0.28, but that might not be necessarily the case).
Yeah, saves from 0.27.169.32a were compatible all the way up to 0.28.181.40d. (http://bay12games.com/dwarves/older_versions.html)
Except for hunter-gatherers not having as much free time as farming cultures - the reverse is actually true, as hunter-gatherers actually spent less than half as much time obtaining food as farming cultures did. Hunter-gatherers actually spent most of their time on leisure, since they largely just relied upon simply using whatever was at hand to solve their problems rather than having to organize or work... it's just that they faced the problem that drought or famine would occasionally come and kill off all the young, weak, and elderly because not enough food would be on hand.
Hunter-gatherers could be a serious threat... but again, like the Mongols, that only happened when those hunter-gatherers were forced out of their lands by starvation, or they were forced to defend their lands for their own survival. Things like raising standing armies that could conquer neighboring lands just didn't happen without a serious food supply.
The reason that farmers end up with more free time than hunter gatherers is due to the fact that the hunter gatherers need to keep moving and hunting during the winter, whereas the hard working farmer just sits on his duff and invents wheels and scrimshaw and metallurgy and the like during the winter because he has a large stockpile of food to sustain him.
The reason that farmers end up with more free time than hunter gatherers is due to the fact that the hunter gatherers need to keep moving and hunting during the winter, whereas the hard working farmer just sits on his duff and invents wheels and scrimshaw and metallurgy and the like during the winter because he has a large stockpile of food to sustain him.
Wheels and scrimshaw and metallurgy aren't necessarily the end-all, be-all. The Mongols defeated everyone with bone-tipped arrows and wheel-less horses.
Also, another drawback for agricultural societies and their armies is that when your army is fed the majority of its calories as carbohydrates, they have worse performance than an army running on a primarily protein diet. Not in the sense that the protein-eaters are more muscular, but that they deal with privation better. Toady should definitely model diet, that seems to fit right in with the sorts of things he's been modeling.
The reason that farmers end up with more free time than hunter gatherers is due to the fact that the hunter gatherers need to keep moving and hunting during the winter, whereas the hard working farmer just sits on his duff and invents wheels and scrimshaw and metallurgy and the like during the winter because he has a large stockpile of food to sustain him.
Mongols weren't hunter-gatherers, they were pastoralists. ...
Wasn't saying that agrarian societies are always more militarily capable than nomadic ones, merely that agrarian societies have the leisure time to do things other than hunt/gather/war. Although it is worth noting that the many nations that fell before the Mongols did so by, as you noted, having surplus population to form professional armies, which were roughly equal to the numbers of the entire mobilized Mongol people. If the Mongols had suffered a few serious defeats, then entire tribes would be decimated and would take generations to recover from, whereas the agrarians could have immediately drawn more soldiers from the citizenry. History is full of instances where entire nomadic peoples were eradicated because they lost one too many battles in their campaigns; the Mongols are special because they are an exception to the rule.
Toady, what is your plan for the goblins from a world-politics view? Given a goblin-led civ, how do you see them acting as opposed to a Demon-lead civ?
Right now, NPC buildings and farms look very sterile blocky and mass produced. And with some very reasonable assumptions on tile size the buildings are VERY large for a mideval civ. Toady, are you planing on at some point make things look more organic, dramatic, and homely?
Will you code in the ability to create our own raw-defined building types for worldgen? Using the Arena Mode and Custom Workshops as a model, we already have most of the pieces to create both custom buildings and define functions for them.
Will there be any interactions between wanderers and your fort? The ability to set up an inn for them to stay in would be cool. Maybe expand thieves to pretend to be travelers at first?
Toady, are there any plans on making the other races playable, and different, anytime soon?
how are the larger towns going to be handled this release? Will they just be a bunch of scrambled together cottages and shops, or can we expect a bit more structure?
Regarding save compatibility, how much effort goes to maintain it? How much does it effect code overall?
Basically, do elves farm?
Quote from: NW_KohakuWill you code in the ability to create our own raw-defined building types for worldgen? Using the Arena Mode and Custom Workshops as a model, we already have most of the pieces to create both custom buildings and define functions for them.
I'm not eager to get into this right now, since I'm not sure what the overall specs need to be and I don't want to tie myself to a raw format early. One of the main things is that I'm not sure I'd be satisfied with static maps of buildings, rather than buildings that are a bit more adaptable. For instance, I'm not sure what raws would look like for the existing temples, which adapt portions of their architecture to the spheres associated to their deities. The raw format would inevitable restrict my ability to do things like that, unless it were really complicated. At the same time, I can see how a modder would want to be able to deviate wildly from what is currently available. It might be most simple to allow static building maps to be used by custom races, but since I won't be using that in vanilla it's difficult to prioritize.
Basically, do elves farm? /color]
Quote from: NW_KohakuBasically, do elves farm?
Whatever they end up doing, there won't be fields of crops. They've had a supernatural relationship with plants in the stories, and the "orchard" from one of Zach's stories had an unclear nature. We haven't decided yet. It'll come to a head when we start tracking site supplies most likely.
My take on this would be the pruning of the forest to allow enough light through for undergrowth. Make all the trees fruit or nut bearing (where pruning can increase harvest as well), and you might have something workable.
This would functionally replicate the situation talked about in the blog a page or so ago - forest dwellers with plenty of fruit on hand all year have no reason to organize or advance their technology.
On the subject of powerful beings:
Demons and Devils are probably safe to assume are evil powermongers. What about the other forgotten beasts that end up taking important positions in Human Civs? Are they necessarily an evil influence on the civ? Are we going to see benign Lizard monsters and the like? How do you see these creatures ultimately influencing how the human civs act?
If they consider trees to have rights, then it might not be far off to just call them entity members, in terms of having deforestation equate to razing villages in their eyes.
Though at that point it becomes less of a civilization of Elves and more of a civilization of The Forest, of which Elves are simply the most notable of potentially many different species and social castes, led by powerful natural forces/spirits/deities that the Elves act as representatives of.
Something of this nature (har) would line up pretty well with some of ThreeToe's stories, actually.
(Though at that point, the original thought of paying the Elves tribute ceases to make sense, and they'd most likely just eat whatever is allotted to them or provided for them by said spirit's guiding hand of sustainable eco-diversity...)
The guy Telkoth links to basically says 180 farmers fit in 3 square miles, while no more than 2 hunter gatherers can fit in a square mile...
With the entity pop rewrite, Humans (and presumably Dwarves) are getting massive increases in the size of their civilizations; Given Elven lifespans, a lower population (of actual Elves) would make sense, though how they'd survive worldgen and other wars is always of some question when discussing their finer details.
Well the elves and the trees.
I can see a totally semi "industrialized" way of tree farming here that mimicks a Forrest to some extend like a permaculture (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Permaculture). Said permaculture can by nuts roots etc. produce enough stockpile able stuff. Even if the tree tops alone dont produce enough food you still have multiple forrest layers that can net you some stuff. Like mushrooms on the ground etc. With actual tree growing ala Bonsai the elves could even introduce new layers and minibiomes by forming platforms on which leaves and wood rot to soil for more traditional farming or creating basins from roots etc. in which you could grow algae. Heck you find this stuff in natural forms in old Redwoods.
With the entity pop rewrite, Humans (and presumably Dwarves) are getting massive increases in the size of their civilizations; Given Elven lifespans, a lower population (of actual Elves) would make sense, though how they'd survive worldgen and other wars is always of some question when discussing their finer details.i view elves as highy mobile and master jungle/woodland and all over Guerrilla warfare masters,think Predator but with an elf.
People forget that one of the most major issues elves don't win battles is because the game, to my knowledge, treats a battle like a series of duels.
You know how, in bad action movies, when twelve mooks fight the good guy, they do it one at a time? That's what elves (and really everyone) ends up doing. Strength in numbers doesn't really exist.
For evil civs is there going to be a tag that allows them to commit cannabalism?
I read on the front page that story about how that demon took over and committed elfacide of 7,000. The whole tone of what you were writing about seemed like that is a bad thing.Well, it is supposed to be demon (thus 7k kills). but to get kills, demon must deserve it. Player should think on sight of 7k kill demon "oh
For evil civs is there going to be a tag that allows them to commit cannabalism?
There are already tags to handle that in the ETHICS section of the raws. Goblins currently have it set as a PERSONAL_MATTER, so I imagine they do eat people occasionally.
Currently IIRC abandoned sites are just empty, not ruined or anything. With your focus on adventure-mode and sites, will actual ruins be viable sites for adventures soon?Also, sites abandoned in worldgen will already have furniture at least mostly removed and random walls destroyed.
Cycles of decay similar to erosion could degrade abandoned sites over the years.
The world map in DF is a thing of beauty. Toady even uses it as the background for the website. I'm concerned that covering it all up with villages is a bad change. Would it be possible to only display villages over a certain importance threshold? I think atmosphere is a really important thing in DF. It's the map that draws you in and makes you want to explore the world.
Otherwise, the DF site background would be forever out of date and not replacable because a whole map filled with # is kinda ugly and not suitable for use as decoration.
I interpreted that as that he'd let the game display them in order specifically to highlight the situation to us, without the implication that we'd have access to that sort of display in the release version.The world map in DF is a thing of beauty. Toady even uses it as the background for the website. I'm concerned that covering it all up with villages is a bad change. Would it be possible to only display villages over a certain importance threshold? I think atmosphere is a really important thing in DF. It's the map that draws you in and makes you want to explore the world.
Otherwise, the DF site background would be forever out of date and not replacable because a whole map filled with # is kinda ugly and not suitable for use as decoration.
In a previous devlog, he mentioned them as being highlighted, so I think you'll be able to turn them off.
I interpreted that as that he'd let the game display them in order specifically to highlight the situation to us, without the implication that we'd have access to that sort of display in the release version.The world map in DF is a thing of beauty. Toady even uses it as the background for the website. I'm concerned that covering it all up with villages is a bad change. Would it be possible to only display villages over a certain importance threshold? I think atmosphere is a really important thing in DF. It's the map that draws you in and makes you want to explore the world.
Otherwise, the DF site background would be forever out of date and not replacable because a whole map filled with # is kinda ugly and not suitable for use as decoration.
In a previous devlog, he mentioned them as being highlighted, so I think you'll be able to turn them off.
there's not much to discuss here.
The world map in DF is a thing of beauty. Toady even uses it as the background for the website. I'm concerned that covering it all up with villages is a bad change. Would it be possible to only display villages over a certain importance threshold? I think atmosphere is a really important thing in DF. It's the map that draws you in and makes you want to explore the world.The new symbols of today's dev log are certainly much better. They blend in nicely and still make sense.
Otherwise, the DF site background would be forever out of date and not replacable because a whole map filled with # is kinda ugly and not suitable for use as decoration.
Hey Toady, do you think we'll have some proper towns to visit in the release after this upcoming one?
I guess that most roads don't need to be printed, like streams, certainly when most of it will be overlain with farms.Yeah, came in here to post about the roads. They look really jarring.
On the maps you just posed it looks like the goblins have expanded out to swamps and rivers.
On the maps you just posed it looks like the goblins have expanded out to swamps and rivers.
I think those are conquered human sites.
Toady, for the rivers issue, would it be possible to simply turn the field markers blue in the areas where they cover up rivers?
That would let you know that there was water there while still allowing you to see that it was developed.
is the RSS feed broken for anyone else? opera says it can't parse the XML and thunderbird says it's an invalid RSS feed......
I suppose you're going to fix the accented characters?Naturally. That's just a matter of finding a font that has them.
Before you look at this, allow me to emphasize that
- You can change the font.
- This is still glitchy. The real thing might look better in many ways.
- If you don't like it at all, you can turn it off and get the old behaviour.
That said, a sneak peek:Spoiler (click to show/hide)
The interresting thing is that baugn lists dwarven children (you forgot btw. the e in children) in this Picture explicitly.But that part's not different from the current screen, missing e and all. I did think that part of the advantage with true-type fonts would be that such contractions wouldn't need to happen, but that may be work in progress - or the childrn thing is because that screen works differently.
Capntastic: So what about herbs and plants being turned into potions?
Toady: I guess hopefully it would all fall under the same umbrella; it's not chemistry per se, you're not trying to give names to the things, but stuff turning into other stuff that has effects ... We've got the poisons now which are the only example of a material having an effect, and the effects are all over the place even know; they can make you cough blood, give you blisters, cause your body parts to swell up and get compartment syndrome, give you fevers, make you dizzy, and that's a material effect that effects a creature through contract, injection or inhaling the object and so if you start to give beneficial effects or more neutral effects, maybe give it a few more ways that cause the syndrome to trigger - it could just be something that's nearby rather than something that's inhaled or injected - and then all of a sudden what was a really practical grounded real world poison system becomes a system for doing all kinds of fantastic things. So if your herbs, if you say one plump helmet and one newt eyeball is a reaction that you can do in a workshop with an empty flask, and then you use the to container thing that we've got now for reactions to say all that stuff goes into a new liquid in that container called plump helmet newt eyeball juice or something. Then you can define a new material and that material could have whatever properties you want. So the pieces are in place now to make poisons, but you wouldn't be able to do anything with them unless you somehow found a way to get the poison out of the container ... which you could do, if you find a way to heat the thing up, like dropping it in magma and then it turns into a gas you could have creatures nearby inhale. So you could actually set up some kind of poison gas traps, even in the new version. But just in general things like a potion that makes you happy ... there are two obstacles there now in the current system. One of them is that you'd need to have the effect, you'd need to give the modder or vanilla modding control to change the happiness of a dwarf, so it's not just giving blisters or whatever but there's a new effect, and that list is just going to increase over time and hopefully cover the basis. The other problem is to get a dwarf to actually use the thing; to recognise that there's now this flask filled with this juice that when you drink it it makes your happiness one hundred and fifty percent for a week, and having the dwarf know that that's something that needs to be used is a large problem, especially for a modding situation where you make happiness juice that gives you blisters and makes you fly ... when do you drink it? I don't know, it sounds like an adventure mode thing; the adventurer would take that journey, but not necessarily a dwarf craftsman that's feeling a little bummed out. So that's another issue with modding, but it's not that far away now, you can mod in your own poisons and create them and boil them to make them work now and we just need to expand the effects and give things a few more uses.
Before you look at this, allow me to emphasize that
- You can change the font.
- This is still glitchy. The real thing might look better in many ways.
- If you don't like it at all, you can turn it off and get the old behaviour.
That said, a sneak peek:Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Wow
You may not be able to tell, but for once I'm not being sarcastic.
Well, if we are going to have, say, poisons we apply to weapons, we need to have a way to tell our soldiers when it's appropriate to use them or not. Same with drinking a strength potion, what enemies are worth using it on? Having an alert status you can trigger fairly easily that says "big enemy coming, use all your expendables" would be a relatively quick, painless way to make all your soldiers start poisoning their blades and downing elixers of maddened boars.
Also, if we are going to have alchemical concoctions that are difficult to make, and not just candy dwarves can pop whenever the way that they currently go through alcohol, we need to have ways of restricting when they use an item. Maybe some alchemical drugs are just coffee, but many should be fairly costly to create.
Further, if dwarves "just know how to use them", that means that the burden of when a dwarf uses an item needs to have a specific set of lines for it hardcoded, with raws that declare what set of lines to use - this can dramatically reduce how much ability modders have with the raws if alchemy can only be used in a specific set of pre-defined conditions for a specific set of pre-defined effects.
As for AI and potions, having a dwarf magically know what effect it has and what he needs should shortcut it a bit. Save for impractical superspecific adventurer type magics, which are hard to make AI use in any context, simple status effects and their cures should be possible to enable.
Not advocating a strict binary poisons and anti-potions system, but rather a syndrome/statuseffect decision mechanic.
e.g. dwarf is thirsty: looks for potion that reduces thirst (eg water, booze, milk, potions of slackening)
dwarf is tired: search for coffee if he is very driven, dwarf is in pain: search morphine or tincture of willow etc. that reduces pain.
Character traits should obviously have some effect on decision making: Urist does not trust alchemy.
Wouldn't it be simpler to have the ability to just say "use this specific item/an item from this stockpile" to an individual or squad? I don't see how the alert status is much of a time saver here, since it's a concern that varies a lot from one encounter to the next. In general, I prefer to have the ability to give specific commands to my dwarves. I'm all for setting up schedules -- especially in the case of workshops -- but making them the only way of managing your dwarves is rather cumbersome, especially for infrequent or one-time requests.
Like Asterix's magic powerpotion
What about just leaving this to dwarves?
Beyond assigning items for tactical use (along with food/water in military screen), I percieve little need for overall control scheme: Military dwarves can very well decide whether to drink strength potion on their own, maybe a bit influenced by squad leader.
What about just leaving this to dwarves?
Beyond assigning items for tactical use (along with food/water in military screen), I percieve little need for overall control scheme: Military dwarves can very well decide whether to drink strength potion on their own, maybe a bit influenced by squad leader.
Well, consider what happens with, for example, bauxite in 40d, where players made elaborate airlock systems because that was the only way to ensure that ONLY the workshops you wanted to have access to bauxite would have access to bauxite.
Again, I think we should have some kind of sane ability to determine who does or doesn't get some kinds of medication, rather than just leaving them out there like candy for anyone to start downing willy-nilly.
ESPECIALLY if we have some crazy set of positive and negative effects, where you can't trust a dwarf won't chug a gallon of fromaldahyde because it has enough minor positive effects to make dwarves think it's a good idea to drink something potentially lethal, if we're using a system similar to what Heph's talking about.
(To do otherwise is actually to make the assumption - the assumption that NO potion will be important or costly or valuable to a player that they would want to control under what conditions they get used. That's a rather limiting assumption to force upon people who want to mess with alchemical effects.)
I mean, if I find a way to make a potion that gives a dwarf super speed, with the side effect that they violently explode killing everything nearby after 2 days, I want that to be well-controlled.
I mean, if I find a way to make a potion that gives a dwarf super speed, with the side effect that they violently explode killing everything nearby after 2 days, I want that to be well-controlled.
Agreed. We have to make sure every dwarf gets some. I would order it poured down the water tank.
I mean, if I find a way to make a potion that gives a dwarf super speed, with the side effect that they violently explode killing everything nearby after 2 days, I want that to be well-controlled.
Agreed. We have to make sure every dwarf gets some. I would order it poured down the water tank.
Or dumped out into the open countryside if we could aerosolize the stuff. Having exploding hoary marmots and rhesus macaques would be a fun advertising quirk for the fortress.
: The parents ended up having some vacation time, so we all went for a little hike along the Hoh River. We also ended up staying a night in a nearby hotel in Forks. I didn't know until the trip that Forks had gained some notoriety in recent years. Apparently we missed the official annual Twilight Day by about a week, but there were still plenty of things to be seen, including many shirtless dolls for sale.
Quote: The parents ended up having some vacation time, so we all went for a little hike along the Hoh River. We also ended up staying a night in a nearby hotel in Forks. I didn't know until the trip that Forks had gained some notoriety in recent years. Apparently we missed the official annual Twilight Day by about a week, but there were still plenty of things to be seen, including many shirtless dolls for sale.
OK i have to admit i am too adicted to your work. MY first impressions were:
- Cool River sites!
- Wow we get functioning inns?
- what procedural Holydays?
- Dolls? Like idols from cloth?
But hey nice to hear you had some time off toady.
Quote: The parents ended up having some vacation time, so we all went for a little hike along the Hoh River. We also ended up staying a night in a nearby hotel in Forks. I didn't know until the trip that Forks had gained some notoriety in recent years. Apparently we missed the official annual Twilight Day by about a week, but there were still plenty of things to be seen, including many shirtless dolls for sale.
OK i have to admit i am too adicted to your work. MY first impressions were:
- Cool River sites!
- Wow we get functioning inns?
- what procedural Holydays?
- Dolls? Like idols from cloth?
But hey nice to hear you had some time off toady.
Wait, what? He's talking about Forks. The town. He's not talking about anything DF-related there.
Checking if one of your 100+ dwarves have (siege operator)/(weaponsmith)/(armorer) skill at (any level above dabbling)/(high level) to start (training him up)/(producing high-quality equipment) is very time consuming...
Or choosing, which one of your dwarves is (useless enough)/(male, so he wont bring child to battlefield)/(strong, tough, agile) to list him in a squad...
Just make sure you don't open the space menu. :-[
Well, what's wrong with both?
You could have a toggle that makes a "coffee" drug open to whoever wants some, and having powerful drugs that have potentially lethal side-effects under strict control over when they are used.
You only need to restrict access to the stuff that you, personally, feel are important enough to reglate. If you just don't care, you can mass-forbid or leave totally unregulated whatever you want, while letting the control freaks micromanage to the n-th degree.
Opium and tobacco (and alcohol if you'd prefer to call it a recreational drug rather than a beverage) have been used for millenia. I think marijuana has also been used for a very long time, but that could just be a memory hiccup.
Not to mention drugs such as Salvia, Ibogaine, and Mescaline (mostly in South and Central Americas), as well as DMT (in the form of ayahuasca; Americas and parts of Africa), though admittedly these were more of a ritualised rather than recreational use. Things like Shamanistic vision quests, communing with dead ancestors, and adulthood trials.
Not to mention drugs such as Salvia, Ibogaine, and Mescaline (mostly in South and Central Americas), as well as DMT (in the form of ayahuasca; Americas and parts of Africa), though admittedly these were more of a ritualised rather than recreational use. Things like Shamanistic vision quests, communing with dead ancestors, and adulthood trials.
Well Paleogenetics and archaeology indicate that Canabis and Hop/humulus (very close related Humulus makes only sleepy thought) are among the oldest cultivated plants and drugs in the world in mayn places even older then actual aggriculture for food.
Well for one thing alcohol is the best drug for a pre-industrialised civilisation since its not to strong, is not to addictive and can be easily mass produced and stored. Natural Drugs you tend to get in late spring over the summer and if you are lucky in fall and even then many drugs cant be stored because the substances degrade. Alcohol on the other hand is stable and can be made from just a handfull grass-seeds (or anything that sports sugar/starch) and water.
edit: Also people tend to forget that the big Monotheistic and Polytheistic religions have strong "No drugs" rules. Christianity has even multiple and drugs were associated with the devil etc.. These rules might be the cause for the modern society being reduced to Tabac and Alcohol.
Eh, I don't see marijuana as the kind of thing that a society centuries-past would even bother controlling much, especially back then, when it was likely much weaker than it is today.
Come to think of it, you could add in the "medical" raws instructions to use potions that don't actually help the disease...for added historical realism, although I am not sure how fun it would be to have your doctors send off for hemlock steeped in mercury to treat goiter (or what have you).
Checking if one of your 100+ dwarves have (siege operator)/(weaponsmith)/(armorer) skill at (any level above dabbling)/(high level) to start (training him up)/(producing high-quality equipment) is very time consuming...
With a manager, you can do this from a workshop. There is a menu option called Workshop (P)rofile, used for setting minimum and maximum skill levels and allowed dwarves for any given workshop. From there, you can just set jobs for training or for producing masterworks, depending on what skill levels and dwarves you allowed
Ideally, would we want these things to be emergent behaviors? It would be nice if these sort of beliefs could be traced back in the civilizations history.Come to think of it, you could add in the "medical" raws instructions to use potions that don't actually help the disease...for added historical realism, although I am not sure how fun it would be to have your doctors send off for hemlock steeped in mercury to treat goiter (or what have you).
Pilsu had a similar idea regarding werewolf vulnerability to silver. Specifically, they aren't. Dwarves just think they are because some time in their world's history, a legendary werewolf was killed by a man with a silver sword and that image was entrenched in their myths.
It would be cool if that kind of thing made it into the game - things that your dwarves believe, but aren't actually true.
Ideally, would we want these things to be emergent behaviors? It would be nice if these sort of beliefs could be traced back in the civilizations history.Come to think of it, you could add in the "medical" raws instructions to use potions that don't actually help the disease...for added historical realism, although I am not sure how fun it would be to have your doctors send off for hemlock steeped in mercury to treat goiter (or what have you).
Pilsu had a similar idea regarding werewolf vulnerability to silver. Specifically, they aren't. Dwarves just think they are because some time in their world's history, a legendary werewolf was killed by a man with a silver sword and that image was entrenched in their myths.
It would be cool if that kind of thing made it into the game - things that your dwarves believe, but aren't actually true.
Thanks! =) it`ll help!
With a manager, you can do this from a workshop. There is a menu option called Workshop (P)rofile, used for setting minimum and maximum skill levels and allowed dwarves for any given workshop. From there, you can just set jobs for training or for producing masterworks, depending on what skill levels and dwarves you allowed.
This is just a matter of making the military page have an option to show more info about a dwarf than their highest combat skill.
Checking if one of your 100+ dwarves have (siege operator)/(weaponsmith)/(armorer) skill at (any level above dabbling)/(high level) to start (training him up)/(producing high-quality equipment) is very time consuming...
With a manager, you can do this from a workshop. There is a menu option called Workshop (P)rofile, used for setting minimum and maximum skill levels and allowed dwarves for any given workshop. From there, you can just set jobs for training or for producing masterworks, depending on what skill levels and dwarves you allowed
This works as long as you don't also use the job manager to queue your jobs. If you do, and the workshops with restricted profiles are not full of jobs, then your new jobs will be (basically) randomly assigned to them. The potential workarounds are very kludgey and outweigh the use of anything other than masonry block making on eternal repeat.
Not to mention drugs such as Salvia, Ibogaine, and Mescaline (mostly in South and Central Americas), as well as DMT (in the form of ayahuasca; Americas and parts of Africa), though admittedly these were more of a ritualised rather than recreational use. Things like Shamanistic vision quests, communing with dead ancestors, and adulthood trials.
This too. Psychoactive drugs were commonly used for these practices rather than privately, as far as I know.
At any rate, the basic thing I'm trying to get at here is that you can't really think about new features from a modern perspective too much. The appropriate thing to do is attempt to research how these things were done in a similar time in real-world history as a baseline, and then speculate based on how the DF world in particular is different.
Baughn's TrueType code is coming along nicely in the SDL version, so the next DF will have an experimental version of that. This frees up the glyphs in tilesets from most of their text display duties, so that, for example, the number zero won't generally be displayed as a coffin in custom tilesets now, and it supports variable width fonts. There are places where the TrueType fonts need to be used where they aren't currently and there are some justification issues etc. that need to be worked out, but it appears to be mostly working, so you'll be able to play with that.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=35Lt4bIXyrY
Completely ignoring the current drug debate, I have a question:
Is the current insane abundance of minerals a feature, testing tool, or bug? Are there any plans on moving back to those in 40d / make them somehow changeable by the player?
(forgive me if this has been answered somewhere else already, but I've done all I can with the search tool)
While its nice to have smelters running full-steam for years, I would prefer the abundances of 40d. It was a LOT more exciting to find ore and gems back then. Exploratory mining is completely gone (unless you count the single shaft necessary to hit cavern), which is a shame because it was one of the most fun (and dorfy) parts of the game. I realize that many players are enjoying all the ore... but when I play dwarf fortress, it is NOT because I want anything to come easy.
Furthermore, while the abundance of fuel is nice, it also precludes the need for burning trees, so cutting trees is no longer a high priority, and thus my dwarves are GETTING ALONG WITH ELVES. Which is dumb.
What?
I mentioned I was working on this quite a while ago, you can't genuinely claim to be surprised *now*.
What?
I mentioned I was working on this quite a while ago, you can't genuinely claim to be surprised *now*.
Is the reversion to the whole needing-mud-for-underground-farms thing permanent, or will that be changed in a later release?
Adventurer Role: Hero
•Villains
•Historical figures that come out of world gen and come to control segments of entity populations (bandits, etc.)
•Hideouts with some basic fortifications
•Hostile civ leaders and the new hist figs being able to harass others by sending out groups
•Need to handle seeing them depart, seeing them raid, seeing them arrive back, and running into them during travel (with or without spoils)
•Tracking information from hunting needs to apply to following these groups
•Generally, "villians" are just leaders of groups you oppose at the time, and in this way can include squabbling petty warlords in nearby towns as well, so the groups can be large armies or assassins, though the former will probably come through the dwarf mode expansions below
•Succession and succession struggles
•People that have been raided need to tell you what happened
•Megabeasts <-- Should this be subcategory color?
•Variety and randomization within constraints (e.g. various dragons)
•Reproduction
•Share any intelligent/diplomacy behavior that other hist figs have when appropriate
Yep, above ground farming doesn't need irrigation, tho it only works in soil. I havent been able to get muddied stone to grow above ground crops.Is the reversion to the whole needing-mud-for-underground-farms thing permanent, or will that be changed in a later release?
From what Toady told me shortly after release, the INTENT is that you can farm underground as long as EITHER of the following conditions is true:I'm not sure if the latter case is working. Does aboveground farming work without mud? I forget.
- The soil is muddy.
- Underneath the soil is another layer of soil.
Yep, above ground farming doesn't need irrigation, tho it only works in soil. I havent been able to get muddied stone to grow above ground crops.Is the reversion to the whole needing-mud-for-underground-farms thing permanent, or will that be changed in a later release?
From what Toady told me shortly after release, the INTENT is that you can farm underground as long as EITHER of the following conditions is true:I'm not sure if the latter case is working. Does aboveground farming work without mud? I forget.
- The soil is muddy.
- Underneath the soil is another layer of soil.
Underground farming must be muded, my current fort has 3 z-levels of soil/sand. With a farm plot on z=2 it needed irrigation to start.
but graphically, to me, it recalls the days of mid-90's games. "Colonization" in specific, for some reason, and I guess Civ 2 as well.Well, DF itself is graphically old school. Ascii, at most tileset game.
Honestly, once TrueType comes in, your interface can no longer be purely utilitarianToady will try. ;)
TrueType is going to take a LOT of UI work to look good.
Well i bet that we can exchange the font-type (also size etc.) over the initfiles so if the standart font isnt t your liking you can change it.
But yes stick to something like arial or courier.
I like the idea of changing it based on the init file. Maybe only have a view it can change to though. You know, the basics: Arial, Times New Roman...Papyrus... ;)
I, personally, would appreciate a font that was just like curses, but still a fonty font.
Which, of course, would mean that the letters could work with symbols and look nice, and that things like zeros could be replaced and text would still be text.
Yeah, I wouldn't be surprised if the default DF font were just based on the standard Windows console font. In fact, I believe it is.
Yeah, I wouldn't be surprised if the default DF font were just based on the standard Windows console font. In fact, I believe it is.
It is actually standart vga rendering of codepage 437:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Code_page_437
Windows console font might or might not be related.
Does this mean that demon diplomats won't come, or that they won't destroy your fort?
Nah, the Windows console (and DF) uses Terminal (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terminal_%28font%29). Note that the parentheses are more pointy, the "0" has a slash instead of a dot, and things generally look a bit different.
So after this release can we expect any more updates to the adventurer stuff in the next release? Like more crafting/construction stuff?
the idea is to start adding dev page items to adventure mode, probably aiming at the heroic side of things (Threetoe: "the first step toward true heroism is defending country folk from dread monsters and fiendish low lives"), coupled with continued work on dwarf mode bugs.
So I'd say the answer is clearly yes, he intends to work on Adventurer Mode features for the next release. Sounds like it may be more focused on questing than crafting, if you heed the comment from Threetoe. I'd guess he's likely to choose something that builds on the site sprawl work from this release, since that's a big piece of infrastructure that many of his plans rely on. The "fiendish low lives" quote could be taken as a hint about the "villains" dev section; other decent possibilities I can see are adventure sites and maybe tracking. Guess we'll see soon enough, though.
Possibly (basic) night creatures too, it looks like.
Bug: Bandits all have slade armor. As a result, they are impossible to kill, yet cannot give chase.
You could mod bandits as tribe like the UG animal people. Thus they will have weapons an stuff and form a real gang.
If they work (last time I tried I couldn't put them on the surface), they'll probably even be friendly towards you and can hire them to go on adventures.You could mod bandits as tribe like the UG animal people. Thus they will have weapons an stuff and form a real gang.
But will they ambush you?
I just had an odd mental image of an adventurer and a bunch of bandits, arms linked together, skipping over a field of daises, merrily laughing and smiling.
I just had an odd mental image of an adventurer and a bunch of bandits, arms linked together, skipping over a field of daises, merrily laughing and smiling.
And in MY head, they were accompanied by The Turtles "Happy Together". Quite epic.
I just had an odd mental image of an adventurer and a bunch of bandits, arms linked together, skipping over a field of daises, merrily laughing and smiling.
And in MY head, they were accompanied by The Turtles "Happy Together". Quite epic.
considering just a few posts back folks were talking about how they might be created naked...
I so want bandits. That would be really fun.
I so want bandits. That would be really fun.
I wonder if you look poor enough if Bandits should generally ignore you.
I mean... they arn't killing machines.
So, they would come in with bags, path to a stockpile full of finished goods, and then take whatever they can shove in the bag? That would be awesome! Especially if goblins started doing a similar thing in addition to their myriad other ways to bother players.
Hopefully I'll be jumping back in to catch up on all the questions now that I'm out of my pre-release bubble. Though if it is an explodey release, it might be a few days yet, he he he.
And thats worldgen time. You only do that very infrequently, so it taking even an hour or two isn't a big deal. Remember, the end goal is that you don't gen new worlds every game, but keep re-using the same one.
I doubt the current level of sprawl is intentional. Given a bit of tuning of the algorithms, we'll probably be back to something more reasonable.What's unreasonable about the current level of sprawl?
I doubt the current level of sprawl is intentional. Given a bit of tuning of the algorithms, we'll probably be back to something more reasonable.
And thats worldgen time. You only do that very infrequently, so it taking even an hour or two isn't a big deal. Remember, the end goal is that you don't gen new worlds every game, but keep re-using the same one.
That'd be great if we were at that end goal already, but in the actual world, you need to generate multiple worlds to find good sites, especially if you're picky and want something rare, like a site with easy-accessible magma and flux. The lack of a functioning site finder makes this particularly annoying.
And thats worldgen time. You only do that very infrequently, so it taking even an hour or two isn't a big deal. Remember, the end goal is that you don't gen new worlds every game, but keep re-using the same one.
It seems that humans can immigrate to your fort in 31.13. Whoa.
It seems that humans can immigrate to your fort in 31.13. Whoa.
How do I get them to do that!?
To be fair, sprawl = claimed teritory for given civilization. This is probably why embark option is turned off. Of course, if even your own civilization have unembarkable sprawl, cause of this bug must be more complicated.
[...]
While I can understand the concept of creating a new settlement on foreign land in exchange for taxes, the idea of creating a settlement on top of an existing foreign one is and has always been ridiculous. I'm glad the ability has been removed.
While I can understand the concept of creating a new settlement on foreign land in exchange for taxes, the idea of creating a settlement on top of an existing foreign one is and has always been ridiculous. I'm glad the ability has been removed.
Why does it make sense that a dwarven civ would even consider sending out an undefended 7-dwarf embark party deep into foreign territory, to have them mine out the local people's farm plots? Isn't that the kind of thing that would be met with prompt, forceful response, even before the wagon arrives at it's destination?
Why does it make sense that a dwarven civ would even consider sending out an undefended 7-dwarf embark party deep into foreign territory, to have them mine out the local people's farm plots? Isn't that the kind of thing that would be met with prompt, forceful response, even before the wagon arrives at it's destination?
Why does it make sense that a dwarven civ would even consider sending out an undefended 7-dwarf embark party deep into foreign territory, to have them mine out the local people's farm plots? Isn't that the kind of thing that would be met with prompt, forceful response, even before the wagon arrives at it's destination?
... I agree with sasQuatch.Guilty as charged.
Why must the dwarves embark above ground in the foreign nation? Maybe they traveled through the caverns to setup below them undetected. I've always thought it'd be cool to start in the caverns and dig to the surface. Even through an aquifer, now that'd be a new challenge, safely breaching an aquifer from below and building a stairway up through it hehe.
From what I recall, yes, you can actually do that. But only with fortress mode. Adventure mode supposedly doesn't work very well this way. The spawls do indeed cause a massive lag to world genning as well as waiting for things to load up. But I think I'll put my vote in as well as request for a lighter sprawl load. To allow more areas to access and quicker loading. (Not that I mind it now, it would just make things easier.)
Quote from: LemundeSo after this release can we expect any more updates to the adventurer stuff in the next release? Like more crafting/construction stuff?QuoteHey Toady, do you think we'll have some proper towns to visit in the release after this upcoming one?
Quote from: CaldfirIs the current insane abundance of minerals a feature, testing tool, or bug? Are there any plans on moving back to those in 40d / make them somehow changeable by the player?Quote from: G-FlexI know all this is bordering on suggestion (and directly involves it), but I'd like to know the answer to that question too. I mean, especially with the much higher z-level count, the absurd abundance really isn't necessary, and honestly gets kind of boring/weird after a while, since you're constantly running into things that should be rare/valuable (along with everything else).
Quote from: MephansterasDemons and Devils are probably safe to assume are evil powermongers. What about the other forgotten beasts that end up taking important positions in Human Civs? Are they necessarily an evil influence on the civ? Are we going to see benign Lizard monsters and the like? How do you see these creatures ultimately influencing how the human civs act?Quote from: QuatchAre there non-violent/evil ways for an entity to assume/use control?
Quote from: NW_KohakuAre there any plans to fix/plant a sanity check on the elven society-wide infertility problem?Quote from: MephansterasWhen are we going to see difference marriage customs come into play? I don't really see goblins as the marriage sort, and human civs could easily include polygamy and the like. Kings with a harem of a thousand, perhaps? There are certainly some interesting Adventurer quests to be had with that kind of set-up. Elves seem like the sort to bond with one person for a while and eventually move on to someone else. You know, after a few centuries and the relationship has run its course.
will world entities have the capability to claim ownership over a structure or territory, and use that information to identify trespassers or have a sense of "home" which they can defend or use as a trading good?
Would it be possible to find isolated huts or cabins of some world entity living on its own? Perhaps outcasts, hermits, or sociopaths who refuse living in populated areas?
Quote from: monk12How do you plan to change how world gen battles are fought? Will terrain and/or tactics play a role? Will civs, or even just races that are faced with a war of extinction that they cannot win attempt to flee and establish new cities elsewhere?Quote from: AreyarHow far down the pipeline are worldgen battles with actual AI tactics that can be viewed afterwards in histories like a movie of a classical board and chips wargame?Quote from: NeonivekToady in the future will we see Armies taking other towns without the total destruction of the opposition? Right now as long as one person is barely defending the town an army no matter how large cannot take it.
Toady when armies, adventurer groups, and other such organisations finally can attack single units in unison (Megabeasts for example) do you forsee Megabeasts getting stronger, weaker, the same, or will they have the ability to out manuver them so to speak?
On the maps you just posed it looks like the goblins have expanded out to swamps and rivers. Are they moving out from the mountains now? Or did you just add more start biomes for them?
Toady, where do you see the ability of players to affect AI behavior? Will we see something that goes more towards having the ability to directly script dwarven AI to use certain items or take certain actions using some logic operations or a rudimentary scripting ability? Or do you see this as being more a matter of dwarves having to somehow learn how and when to properly perform actions or use items from the properties they have in the raws alone? While I'm obviously interested in the effects this can have, I'm also interested in what sort of game design philosophy you have about what level of control you want players to be exerting over their dwarves.
Toady what is your opinion on this issue and how long would it take to get drugs and ethics for them? It would be nice for fleshing out thetribals and theyr more animistic religions and worldviews.
Can we get Overground tribes?
Were the pathing problems with (locked) doors, climbing and digging solved? (for invaders)
Toady, adamantine's impact/compression/shear/torsion/bending/tensile yield/fracture values have been changed to 5000000 from their original 4000000. This makes adamantine impossible to mine. Was this intended and if so, was there going to be another tag to make slade unminable?
Two words...and sentences: Aimed. Attacks. Come on, Great Toad, I finally want to chew on somebody's face while slashing an other person in half with an axe WHILE roundhouse kicking some biatches
Do you plan on enabling wedding in adventurer mode?Adventure mode marriage came up a few times on the old consolidated dev page, mostly in power goals, as part of the Relationships and Affiliation arcs. As such, it's probably not on the short list, but Toady sees it as relevant.
"Ability to make rough stone constructions" is on dev list. Do you plan on merging Fortess mode and Adventurer mode?Toady has described the intended function earlier in this thread, I believe. It's not meant to be a merger of the two modes in that way.
Like building your stronghold with your followers in Adventurer mode?
With ability to "zoom out" and switch to Fortess mode to build complicated constructions, manage joblist, set labours and so on.
And if your adventurer have died, you could continue playing as adventurer`s heir.
And if all heirs have died, you cannot switch back to adventurer mode and can only watch over your fortress as "guardian ancestors spirit".
Quote from: Osmosis JonesToady, what degree of finesse are you planning on giving orders to followers? I.e. would it be possible to order a group of followers to dig *this* location or collect fruit from *that* specific tree? Also, any plans on being able to force loyalty beyond acting as a guide? Oooh, and can we get other people to enforce said loyalty for us?
I want to be able to order a slave gang to excavate those ruins, while I lounge about with a platter of fresh, slave-picked, strawberries, and if anyone thinks about shirking off or running away, having my well paid slave drivers chase them down.
I wanted to stay away from getting into having the adv mode stuff be just like dwarf mode, and ease more slowly into the group/job abilities there, to keep things varied for myself as much as anything. I don't understand the forcing loyalty part -- for the people you've interrogated? Ideally, though, you'd be able to give more and more orders, so that they'd be able to guard or work or build up your place for you, even if they end up being kind of dumb about it. It would be cool to have one of your followers be able to run their own villain-style network somewhere, so that you can be a kind of criminal overlord. Once the villains are in and working, that should actually be well within range.
will now be used for something entirely outside those bounds (like coating a weapon with syrup), that action might be anything from brilliant to quirky to wasteful to tyrannical to suicidal, depending on the situation.
"Ability to make rough stone constructions" is on dev list. Do you plan to merge Fortess mode and Adventurer mode?He does not.
Like building your stronghold with your followers and/or descendants in Adventurer mode?This will be possible.
With ability to "zoom out" and switch to Fortess mode to build complicated constructions, manage joblist, set labours and so on.Nope.
And if your adventurer have died, you could continue playing as adventurer`s heir.No word on this, so far as I know. I'd like it for sure, I'm a sucker for dynastic stuff.
And if all heirs have died, you cannot switch back to adventurer mode and can only watch over your fortress as "guardian ancestors spirit".Nothing like that's going in.
I'd really like to see a feature where one can choose what race one plays as in fortress mode, similar to adventurer mode. Playing as other races is really interesting, and as long as dwarves are the default (like humans are in adventurer mode) I think it'd stay true to being dwarf fortress. Plus, you could even have a quick start function like in adventurer, where the player's given a site and a team and can just get on with it.
Manually ordering a dwarf to perform a specific series of actions that can't be presaged in the raws/code might be the only way to save your fort and might be a reasonably orderable action made by some official, but that kind of power can degrade the atmosphere we want to build. It's going to depend on the specific cases, but for the sake of guiding discussion on a wide range of future topics, I think it's best that the player feels that a dwarf's autonomy is being respected. The thing that makes dwarf mode not strictly a hands-off simulation is that you are allowed to compromise dwarves' autonomy if they hold fortress positions, to the extent that you are selecting actions that fall within their position's purview. If an order typically makes it feel like the dwarves are being controlled like marionettes, forced to do things against their will, etc., the order should probably be altered or removed. Presently, there are a ton of things that dwarves don't care about that they should care about, but this is the overall idea.
Yes, elves for the elf people
Or you could just assign weapons to be coated in whatever via the military menu.
If I remember properly, you're planning on doing villains soon, which is good, but to really work, the quest system's going to need more than JUST bandits to catch and thieve's guilds to break up.
I'd really like to see a feature where one can choose what race one plays as in fortress mode, similar to adventurer mode. Playing as other races is really interesting, and as long as dwarves are the default (like humans are in adventurer mode) I think it'd stay true to being dwarf fortress. Plus, you could even have a quick start function like in adventurer, where the player's given a site and a team and can just get on with it.
Technically you can already do this; the other races aren't fundamentally different from dwarves, though, even if you mod the hell out of them.
However, not only are other races in fort mode planned to be in the vanilla game at some point, but at that point they should be more different than dwarves and possibly even have unique game mechanics along with them. Excerpts from the old dev page:Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Among other things.
Or you could just assign weapons to be coated in whatever via the military menu.
Then to preven poisoning sparring partners, you should be able to set another weapon for training.
Or you could just assign weapons to be coated in whatever via the military menu.
Then to preven poisoning sparring partners, you should be able to set another weapon for training.
We can already tell the dwarves to use different weapons for combat and training.
Undiggable tag is nice. Doesn't really do anything new though unless you want a really hard rock that you can dig. Or a not-hard rock that you... can't.
hehe...Undiggable tag is nice. Doesn't really do anything new though unless you want a really hard rock that you can dig. Or a not-hard rock that you... can't.
On contrary!
Undiggable veins/clusters in normal layers!
Something that can harm your digging operations but also something to foil digging enemies.
I can imagine elaborate scheme where you cave-in several apropriatelly shaped veins to create trully inpenetrable room.
Core54 TRANSLATION SUPPORT (Future) though current font implementations restrict this process at the moment if non-ASCII characters are to be involved.
Undiggable tag is nice. Doesn't really do anything new though unless you want a really hard rock that you can dig. Or a not-hard rock that you... can't.
On contrary!
Undiggable veins/clusters in normal layers!
Support for translations was on the old dev pages as well, as part of the presentation arc. Specifically Core 54:The only way I can think that the TrueType implementation would make a difference would be if there was some sort of code that intercepted the text and output a translated version. Causing that to be viable would be a not insignificant amount of work for Baughn, and would have fairly poor results.QuoteCore54 TRANSLATION SUPPORT (Future) though current font implementations restrict this process at the moment if non-ASCII characters are to be involved.
Now that true-type support is in, if buggy, the mentioned hurdle could be smaller, actually.
Since most announcements are already identified by a token for the announcement init file, those tokens could be also used for translation files, though many, many other texts would need tokens as well.
So it might look like
[REACHED_PEAK:"Du hast den Gipfel des %PEAK_NAME% erklommen.]
[CREATURE_BLIZZARD_MAN_PREFSTRING_2:eiszapfenartigen Zähne]
The latter does mean that such strings would have to be definable in the raws (so rather than [PREFSTRING:terrifying features], we might have [PREFSTRING:COMMON_PREFSTRING_TERRIFYING]), and that mods would have to be able to provide additional translation files.
The only way I can think that the TrueType implementation would make a difference would be if there was some sort of code that intercepted the text and output a translated version. Causing that to be viable would be a not insignificant amount of work for Baughn, and would have fairly poor results.
The only way I can think that the TrueType implementation would make a difference would be if there was some sort of code that intercepted the text and output a translated version. Causing that to be viable would be a not insignificant amount of work for Baughn, and would have fairly poor results.
TrueType helps because it allows Unicode characters instead of just being limited to Code Page 437 characters.
Speaking of which, is anybody running the TrueType fonts normally, and if so, which fonts do you suggest?
Speaking of which, is anybody running the TrueType fonts normally, and if so, which fonts do you suggest?
I've been running with Arial - downside is that I'm missing many special characters. Upside is that text is easy to read and my wall-ends are no longer 'O's. Haven't really run into anything buggy with it - it isn't fully implemented for everything, but that's incompleteness of the project, not an issue with implementation.
Speaking of which, is anybody running the TrueType fonts normally, and if so, which fonts do you suggest?
Thanks.Speaking of which, is anybody running the TrueType fonts normally, and if so, which fonts do you suggest?
People are posting fonts they have tried here - http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=67112.0
Toady please, before you start fully on adventure mode, throw in a quick fix to the soldiers equipping only 1 boot or 1 glove and leaving the other limb unprotected, usually happens when they upgrade their shit. It's gotten so many dwarves killed in combat it's not even funny, and I bet it could be fixed pretty easily.I got this earlier today, my adamantine
Toady please, before you start fully on adventure mode, throw in a quick fix to the soldiers equipping only 1 boot or 1 glove and leaving the other limb unprotected, usually happens when they upgrade their shit. It's gotten so many dwarves killed in combat it's not even funny, and I bet it could be fixed pretty easily.
Regarding posting bug reports in this thread: if they're on the bug tracker and well-tagged, Toady will get to it when he gets to it. You don't see me complaining about liquid glob breath attacks coming out solid.
Toady please, before you start fully on adventure mode, throw in a quick fix to the soldiers equipping only 1 boot or 1 glove and leaving the other limb unprotected, usually happens when they upgrade their shit. It's gotten so many dwarves killed in combat it's not even funny, and I bet it could be fixed pretty easily.I got this earlier today, my adamantinecansdwarves were wearing one gauntlet only. One sorrycandwarf got his shield hand cut off by goblins, then got stabbed in the throat because he couldn't block the spear, because he lost his shield. He died shortly after.
Regarding posting bug reports in this thread: if they're on the bug tracker and well-tagged, Toady will get to it when he gets to it. You don't see me complaining about liquid glob breath attacks coming out solid.
Toady, your awesome, and you've created a wonderful game. Someday, when I have money and am not borderline homeless because my physics and astrophysics degrees were as useless as an English degree, I will give you lots.
Finally there are some new refuse pile options (skulls, bones, shells, horns/hooves, teeth).
QuoteFinally there are some new refuse pile options (skulls, bones, shells, horns/hooves, teeth).
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P3ALwKeSEYs
Finally there are some new refuse pile options (skulls, bones, shells, horns/hooves, teeth).
Now that 31.x has been out awhile, what should we call this new version level?
I ask, because 2010 is coming to an end, and the wiki still refers to DF2010 as the current version as a placeholder until such time as Toady decides on a name for the current version.
(Personally, I prefer and use DF31, and prepending DF to the older 28a and 40d, but I can understand the confusion that would come from random numbers. Not that one more bit of uncommon confusion would kill the average DF player.)
Now that 31.x has been out awhile, what should we call this new version level?
I ask, because 2010 is coming to an end, and the wiki still refers to DF2010 as the current version as a placeholder until such time as Toady decides on a name for the current version.
(Personally, I prefer and use DF31, and prepending DF to the older 28a and 40d, but I can understand the confusion that would come from random numbers. Not that one more bit of uncommon confusion would kill the average DF player.)
It may be a minor thing but I share your query. Maybe just 31.x like most people call it?
Why not call it DF2010? That was the date of the first 31 release, after all.
I just noticed that curses_800x600.png is back to regular size, with 10x12 tiles instead of 10x24. Yay.
Can you remove the below ground condition on items designated to dump?Go to your (o)rders screen and enable outdoor refuse collection.
People should be able to responsibly dump and undump items, even above ground, which is currently not working.
Many thanks.You need to have outdoors refuse collecting enabled in order to be able to dump outdoors stuff.
Edit: Wait, that was not what I meant. I need dwarves to dump (not refuse-stockpile) outdoor stuff.
Please?
There will also be some night creature additions for dwarf mode which might work better as surprises, he he he
Yep work on it get a bit more manic with a teaspoon of madness and then add this to the next df-talk :PThat's unlikely, unfortunately. Toady mentioned the possibility of random dragons in the raws (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=59642.msg1387951#msg1387951), but it would be more scripts than tags.
Will randomisation tags make it into the Raws with next version? Half-random nasties would actually be neat.
Yep work on it get a bit more manic with a teaspoon of madness and then add this to the next df-talk :P
Will randomisation tags make it into the Raws with next version? Half-random nasties would actually be neat.
Because dwarves seeing imaginary fiends of crystal glass is so much fun in the middle of an HFS invasion.Wait a moment, I just got a fantastic idea regarding hallucinations:
I understand the difficulty of transferring wounds after transformation, but transferring equipment seems like it should be a simple matter of "Does the new creature have the part this was equipped on? If not, drop the item, if so, equip it." Is there some intricacy I'm missing here?
I understand the difficulty of transferring wounds after transformation, but transferring equipment seems like it should be a simple matter of "Does the new creature have the part this was equipped on? If not, drop the item, if so, equip it." Is there some intricacy I'm missing here?
What if the part is bigger/smaller, or has different parts coming off of it, or isn't shaped the same?
Also could we get non-monstrous stuff to create Monsters like this? It would be fitting around spherical lands where people can get "lost".Toady did mention that we'd get tags for night creature behaviors. I kind of wonder if, and if so, how, they might work for entity creatures.
This has also lead to our first remarriages as the partner left behind in the village can move on, and the trolls themselves dump their transformed spouse once their troll child reaches adulthood.I am excited for the prospects of more complex dwarf mode relationships being built on this.
Also could we get non-monstrous stuff to create Monsters like this? It would be fitting around spherical lands where people can get "lost".Toady did mention that we'd get tags for night creature behaviors. I kind of wonder if, and if so, how, they might work for entity creatures.
Btw can FB and demonwebs be harvested for silk? If yes how much are they worth?Yes, value 1.
Toady; please don't have Trolls as one of the names of the new night creatures, these creatures don't fit the modern definition of trolls, and instead seem more like changelings. Or will it be possibke to modify the name myself?
Allow me to entertain and educate you! Edutainment!I'd call you a monster for posting that, but I've already read that one, so, meh.
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/AllTrollsAreDifferent
QuoteBtw can FB and demonwebs be harvested for silk? If yes how much are they worth?Yes, value 1.
Also who else thought on "The beauty and the beast" as you were reading the dev-blog?
Toady; please don't have Trolls as one of the names of the new night creatures, these creatures don't fit the modern definition of trolls, and instead seem more like changelings. Or will it be possibke to modify the name myself?The modern definition of a troll is a person who posts things on the internet to cause trouble. Either that, or just some sort of roughly humanoid critter that's mostly solitary and doesn't look like normal folks. Often they eat people or kidnap children or both. Often they're evil or mischievous. Often they have some form of magic.
The modern definition of a trollThanks for the laugh :).
Hah, the new "night creature transformation", if there's an ability to make more than one "mate" through modding, will bring us a long-wanted ability to make real zombie mods! :D
I suppose that in order to have night creatures, you have to first have night. Is it yet possible to determine when 'night' is in DF?
I would be very pleased to see the fair folk and their kin in Dwarf Fortress
I would be very pleased to see the fair folk and their kin in Dwarf FortressWith "fair folk", you surely mean
is it planned for it to be possible for Nightcreatures to sometimes retain a connection to their original lives beyond just history trivia? Perhaps enough to allow conversation, perhaps just enough to bias its actions regarding people or civilizations it used to know?
Elves may be cannibalistic forest-dwellers, but when it comes right down to it, they're just an odd sort of folks. Fairies would have their rules and pacts and stories, and would have all sorts of forms based on thought and they'd go into folks' dreams and all that. They'd also have their palaces and lodges and kingdoms, which you can only enter by going through a certain door at a certain time, and all that other fun stuff.I would be very pleased to see the fair folk and their kin in Dwarf Fortress
How are the elves not this? Admittedly, they don't do any babysnatching nor try to mind control dwarves with their charm, but they are still thin, prissy, wood-using cannibals (who try to mind control players with their charm).
As long as all three types of memory are supported, I'll be happy. Let hags/trolls forget entirely, werewolves remember and devour, and something else remember and regret.
Elves may be cannibalistic forest-dwellers, but when it comes right down to it, they're just an odd sort of folks. Fairies would have their rules and pacts and stories, and would have all sorts of forms based on thought and they'd go into folks' dreams and all that. They'd also have their palaces and lodges and kingdoms, which you can only enter by going through a certain door at a certain time, and all that other fun stuff.
Some people might even choose to become night creatures for one reason or another.
The distinction between fairies and elves is pretty vague in the first place. Elves, when they're not the skinny woodsy folks we hear about these days, are basically just fae things of a certain physical shape and a tendency to value beauty. "Fairies" is just a etymological variant of "Fair folk", when it's not used to mean those little flower people with butterfly wings. I think we should eventually have all sorts of fae beings, regardless of their physical build. Of course, physical build is pretty significant in DF, but fairies can be generated randomly. Actually, come to think of it, most of their behaviors should be pretty easy to model; they could be in the game in a very limited fashion pretty soon. But hidden places and dream stuff might be incompatible with the way the worlds are modeled for the foreseeable future.Elves may be cannibalistic forest-dwellers, but when it comes right down to it, they're just an odd sort of folks. Fairies would have their rules and pacts and stories, and would have all sorts of forms based on thought and they'd go into folks' dreams and all that. They'd also have their palaces and lodges and kingdoms, which you can only enter by going through a certain door at a certain time, and all that other fun stuff.
Okay, fair enough. I typically associate the term fair folk with elves, and not so much fairies, but I see your point.
Some people might even choose to become night creatures for one reason or another.
Depending on what the transformation does, I expect some players out to genocide the world will seek it out. Though with my luck, if I tried, I would end up in a relationship with a creature that feeds its mate to its child. Wouldn't that be !!FUN!!
Hah, the new "night creature transformation", if there's an ability to make more than one "mate" through modding, will bring us a long-wanted ability to make real zombie mods!
I love you. Will we see "Deon's Zombie Madness Mod" in the future?
*Goes off to think about zombies in DF*
Yeah, I suspected that the night creatures arc might even see some of the first few forays into the good/evil region expansion.
It seems unlikely to me, at least at first. That's not what Night Creatures are for, thematically. Though the possible link between night creatures and goblins (just based on the old stories) might indicate some sort of potential there.Yeah, I suspected that the night creatures arc might even see some of the first few forays into the good/evil region expansion.
Hopefully with the potential where entire cities and civilisations can be converted to monsterism.
sadly that happen atm only in wg.
Trying to have a mythologically correct setting in just about ANY setting is practically impossible.Not really. You underestimate the resilience of sanity, and the degree to which people care about inconsistency. Also, with Toady's randomness, everything can be consistent with any of the stories, though each set of general themes requires its own work.
Heck get Greek mythology alone and the inconsistancies will be so great you might go insane.
Hmm, didn't DF have trolls already as goblin's minions tho? I'm sure I saw these during sieges and wild ones in underground.Yep. Perhaps they will be replaced by night creatures. I'd not be sad to see it happen.
Not really. You underestimate the resilience of sanity, and the degree to which people care about inconsistency
Conveying something accurately would maintain inconsistencies. Accuracy is not inherently mutually inclusive with consistency. In this particular instance (that is, with regards to mythology) people who are heavily interested in the base subject are clearly okay with some amount of inconsistency.QuoteNot really. You underestimate the resilience of sanity, and the degree to which people care about inconsistency
What not really? Your not making any sense given the scenario not only requires someone to care about the inconsistancies but attempt to do something accurately.
So in what way isn't attempting to accurately put something together that in it of its very nature cannot be put together accurately not a sign of insanity?
Sheesh man :P
Don't go messin with my statements Cruxador :P
(which of course is possibly the most polite way for me to respond to someone who basically just up and went "No one cares")
dwarf mode has received its first night creature blessing as well. Proper burial is now somewhat more encouraged.Now that's just plain ominous.
I actually thought on eggs (Df talk 10 - go listen to it guys and maids) a bit. Make them a "living" creature but unmoving creature. You start with yolk, white and shell. Reduce the the white and yolk and substitute that by outgrowing bones etc. over time. After all squishi stuff is gone detach the shell and let the Creature break free like big creatures from a cage. The detach mechanism might also be usefull for antlers etc. A egg shouldnt though turn into egg corpse if its not fertilized, cooked or whatever.That would be a good groundwork for life cycles in general, for proper insects and all, but I feel it might be better if eggs were items. Otherwise we're kind of creating exceptions to certain rules that probably don't need to exist. For example, an egg item would be immediately cookable and eatable, no need to butcher. If we're treating eggs as vermin, then the vermin eating code might get in the way again.
Quote from: Dev Logdwarf mode has received its first night creature blessing as well. Proper burial is now somewhat more encouraged.Now that's just plain ominous.
On the other hand, some life cycle states like cocoons are kind of like eggs too - would that involve creatures turning into items, and then back into creatures?With separate "souls" existing and being tieable to items, it's not as bad as it sounds.
It's more likely than you'd thAAAAAARGH MY SKULL OH GOD ITS GOT MY EYEBALLS . . .Quote from: Dev Logdwarf mode has received its first night creature blessing as well. Proper burial is now somewhat more encouraged.Now that's just plain ominous.
Zombies? In MY dwarf fortress?
My apologies if my statement seemed offensive to you
Also each little village has a warlord? Goodness DF is secretly the world of Xena
Pffft, a village shouldn't be able to support more than a squabble-chief at most :PAlso each little village has a warlord? Goodness DF is secretly the world of Xena
Makes sense to me. If a village doesn't have a warlord, it's just going to get steamrolled by a neighbor that does.
Pffft, a village shouldn't be able to support more than a squabble-chief at most :PAlso each little village has a warlord? Goodness DF is secretly the world of Xena
Makes sense to me. If a village doesn't have a warlord, it's just going to get steamrolled by a neighbor that does.
Do you plan on enabling wedding in adventurer mode?
As I believe one of the goals you have mentioned was multi-tile/z-level trees, what is the chance that such trees could be major geographical features, such as (elven?) sites, or even entire biomes, if you go with Pryan's mountain-high trees?
Toady right now the game doesn't handle variety well. Both in variety in Civilisations and especially in variety in animals (Probably one of the major contributors to the collapse of the Arc project). Is there any plans/ideas to rectify this problem so Dwarf Fortress can handle expansive lists of creatures, races, and civilisation types in a way that is pleasing and functional?
When can we expect to get wilderness populations to regenerate? I want to attempt to a fortress heavily based on hunting but one eventually runs out of game.
When a justice system is put into the game, will the town's religion have impact on the justice? I could imagine a religion of love letting you off with a warning but a religion of chaos burying you waste deep in a murky pool so the rain would drown you.
Are invasion forces now drawn from the invading nation's entity populations, or are they still spawned ex nihilo? Assuming the later, how soon is this expected to be rectified?
Now that 31.x has been out awhile, what should we call this new version level?
Will there be a reputation system put in?
Hey Toady, are you planning on removing the superhuman attributes for adventurers any time soon? Since we're going to have some less fearsome opponents in the near future, it would be cool if they were still a challenge.
Will randomisation tags make it into the Raws with next version? Half-random nasties would actually be neat.
There have been suggestions for a CE_HALLUCINATIONS syndrome effect that sporadically causes dwarves to be interrupted by nonexistant creatures. Is this going to happen at some point, and if so, will this be used by phantom spiders, which currently lack venom?
Also could we get non-monstrous stuff to create Monsters like this? It would be fitting around spherical lands where people can get "lost".
...
I was thinking more along the lines of curses onto a specific spot (say from a witch which was burned out of superstition) that turns a entire village in Nightcreaturish things or certain certain circumstances in a spherical land turning you into one - say Rorec McHuman tuning into a Bear after eating the wrong fruit/animal.
Quote from: FieariToady, this is important to know: You said that the transformed creature no longer cares about their former lives, and ignore previous familiar relationships. Does the still human spouse care? They better...
I'm thinking it would also be fantastic if people had different ways of mourning the loss of a loved one to transformation, and how that would effect the quests you'd be given. Some would want their transformed spouse killed (That's not my husband, that's the thing that killed my husband. Kill it for me!") while some might be unable to let go and long to be reunited, probably to the point of getting killed, while others might insist on setting you on a quest to find some cure (that probably won't actually work)...Quote from: Bryan DerksenToady, is it planned for it to be possible for Nightcreatures to sometimes retain a connection to their original lives beyond just history trivia? Perhaps enough to allow conversation, perhaps just enough to bias its actions regarding people or civilizations it used to know?
Are Night-creatures influenced by spherical places? Like a dusk-ogres that happens to be in a fertility sphere being more lusty and fertile?
Since you're adding night creatures and other adventure mode-focused stuff, do you think it would be possible to throw a bone to the adventurers exploring abandoned fortresses? It would be cool if some various night creatures automatically took up residence in abandoned fortresses and accosted any adventurers who dared to enter. Bands of kobolds or animal people living in the old dining room, etc. would also be really cool. The sky is the limit, really, but even something simple and hacky could be great!
Also who else thought on "The beauty and the beast" as you were reading the dev-blog?
Some people might even choose to become night creatures for one reason or another.Personally, I was imagining catgirl night-creatures, and situations where their existing relationships wouldn't even change at all (at least, not in ways that we're privy to).
That opens up a whole new sociological can of worms, with transhumanism and stuff like that. I'd not recommend delving into it for thematic reasons.Also who else thought on "The beauty and the beast" as you were reading the dev-blog?Some people might even choose to become night creatures for one reason or another.Personally, I was imagining catgirl night-creatures, and situations where their existing relationships wouldn't even change at all (at least, not in ways that we're privy to).
Diversified the dwarf mode troubles a bit, he he he.
after world gen the world is ecstatic apart from the player actions:P
Wait, we don't have zombie giant eagles anymore ?
after world gen the world is ecstatic apart from the player actions:P
It does make sense... you, the player coming in to screw up everything. no wonder goblins attack you.after world gen the world is ecstatic apart from the player actions:P
I mean static! Damned false cognates.
Oh god, now we'll haveflyingdigging zombies.
Oh god, now we'll haveflyingdigging zombies.
Maybe some legendary ancestor could pop in and start making an artifact..
In regards to 'proper burial', I was thinking that if you do a particularly good job with a dwarfs burial, it would be fun if something good might actually happen ever so rarely. Maybe some legendary ancestor could pop in and start making an artifact, or some ancient warrior could warp in and save some fisherman who's been ambushed.I don't think we need any more bonuses in DF mode, game is too easy as is.
In regards to 'proper burial', I was thinking that if you do a particularly good job with a dwarfs burial, it would be fun if something good might actually happen ever so rarely. Maybe some legendary ancestor could pop in and start making an artifact, or some ancient warrior could warp in and save some fisherman who's been ambushed.I don't think we need any more bonuses in DF mode, game is too easy as is.
Toady you promised something more "postable" :-[ i some how cant find it.
But then it doesn't show up in the "Show new replies to your posts" function of the forum, does it?
I just realized that Rutherers are actually "r u there? rs"And now I will never look at them quite the same way again... Thanks! :D
:-[ hopefully modders can solve part of the problemQuote from: NeonivekQuote from: Askot Bokbondelerwill other jobs in fortress mode requires or benefit from tools? like smithing require a hammer, carpenting require a saw, farming requiring...the farming thingie, etc?I think, if I remember correctly.
That Fortress mode will still be extrapolated when it comes to tools, while Adventurer mode will still require them.
Yeah, the idea now is just to leave it the same, and explore various things in adventure mode where book-keeping and general catastropic meltdown won't be as much of a problem. If reasonable unannoying alterations can be made to dwarf mode, that'll be cool, but it's not crucial.
How do you know that they do all that stuff with their bare hands? I just assume that the tools are part of the workshop, and masons and engravers and the like hide their tools in their not-pants when I look at them. Besides, I like not having to make sure I have a decent supply of engraving scalpels or whatever they use. 'course if that sort of thing DOES go in, like a lot of other contraversial things that we discuss (diggers, for instance) there'd likely be an init option for it.Congratulations for you being able to abstract. :p
How do you know that they do all that stuff with their bare hands? I just assume that the tools are part of the workshop, and masons and engravers and the like hide their tools in their not-pants when I look at them. Besides, I like not having to make sure I have a decent supply of engraving scalpels or whatever they use. 'course if that sort of thing DOES go in, like a lot of other contraversial things that we discuss (diggers, for instance) there'd likely be an init option for it.Congratulations for you being able to abstract. :p
But seriously, the matter about tools is not of abstraction, but of consistency. Why there is picks and axes but not fishing rods for fishing or knives for butchering?
IIrc toady mentioned a better repuatation system where you can get stuff like a place to sleep free food and so on.
When will at least some of the world gen events happen after proper world gen is finished?
Since you're adding night creatures and other adventure mode-focused stuff, do you think it would be possible to throw a bone to the adventurers exploring abandoned fortresses? It would be cool if some various night creatures automatically took up residence in abandoned fortresses and accosted any adventurers who dared to enter. Bands of kobolds or animal people living in the old dining room, etc. would also be really cool. The sky is the limit, really, but even something simple and hacky could be great!
Toady, are there any plans to have long term (as in, more than just seasonal) variations in temperature/climate? So you might have a year where the temperatures are on average 5 dorf units cooler (with thusly differing melting/freezing times), or a decade where rainfall is half what it normally is?
So, the reference about 'cauldrons of blood.' Is that just a poetic way of saying that this release will involve great violence and terror? Or are there actual, real cauldrons now, that are filled/can be filled with blood?
Will be nigh creatures be tied in into religions stuff. I mean stuff like the old european "Hexenhammer" or that the people start to ascribe certain forms of nightcreatures to certain Entitys like (staying at sowelus example) Catgirls being seen gifted by the "forrest-spirit" etc. ?
About the burials, will dwarves visit the tombs of their loved ones?
Do night creatures use the items in their lair - that is, if one got a hold on armor from a victim, would the creature wear it if it's the right size? Or will they act like dragons and only scatter it about?
If they use the things, are night creatures something of micro-entities, or could other creatures with a den (if the den creation is one of the new behaviors that'll be available as tags) get equipment this way?
Now that we'll be getting quests from villagers to go save the town from chaos trolls and werehippos and whatnot, are quest rewards going to be implemented?
Quote from: SundaySo, the reference about 'cauldrons of blood.' Is that just a poetic way of saying that this release will involve great violence and terror? Or are there actual, real cauldrons now, that are filled/can be filled with blood?
Ah, yeah, I guess that's ambiguous, isn't it? I hadn't thought about that.
Will the new night creatures be accessible through arena mode?
He he he.
Because picks and axes are too big to hide in their not-pants, obviously.
Quote from: thvazWhen will at least some of the world gen events happen after proper world gen is finished?
This is the main thing we are aiming for, pretty much, of all the features in the game. It has just been tricky to start without entity populations, and to a lesser extent site resources. We've got entity populations now as of the September releases. This time we wanted to get an adventure mode game to play, so that something is happening there, especially since it degenerated even more with the villages. Tentatively, we are thinking about November for site resources, caravan and town stuff, and December for other groups moving around, which'll finally mean something is happening. If we can get the economy up in November, then that should impact dwarf mode quite a bit as well, and it would be at that point perhaps that armies can also start coming from places, though we still have some depopulation concerns until things are ironed out.
Because attempting to be funny is not allowed in any shape or form in this thread.
In any case, I'd prefer that actual, physical tools (aside from picks and axes, because seriously those things are HUGE) not be required in either fortress or adventure mode. If it were an init option (I think this has also been the proposed solution to the digging enemies controversy), that'd be fine.
that's awfully hostile of you, thvaz. the guy is just explaining the means by wich he "willingly suspends disbelief", he added to the discussion, he stated his opinion, and addressed the problem you posed to his opinion with a simple but sensible explanation and a humorous wink at a bug, it's customary on these forums, get used to it.
EDIT:perhaps i should also give my opinion. hoes and pitchforks are huge too, and many tools of the trades, like smith hammers and butcher knives are usable as weapons, making them very useful, why are picks more pertinent than any of these? one could state that they are dwarvenly, but so are blacksmith hammers.
that's awfully hostile of you, thvaz. the guy is just explaining the means by wich he "willingly suspends disbelief", he added to the discussion, he stated his opinion, and addressed the problem you posed to his opinion with a simple but sensible explanation and a humorous wink at a bug, it's customary on these forums, get used to it.The distinction is that mining and chopping don't require anything but the tool. Farming requires a farm plot, smithing requires a forge and anvil and tongs. Butchery doesn't require any single thing, but it's a complicated process, and a workshop is not unmerited even if it is possible to clean carcasses and chop them up and all that in the field.
EDIT:perhaps i should also give my opinion. hoes and pitchforks are huge too, and many tools of the trades, like smith hammers and butcher knives are usable as weapons, making them very useful, why are picks more pertinent than any of these? one could state that they are dwarvenly, but so are blacksmith hammers.
The distinction is that mining and chopping don't require anything but the tool. Farming requires a farm plot, smithing requires a forge and anvil and tongs. Butchery doesn't require any single thing, but it's a complicated process, and a workshop is not unmerited even if it is possible to clean carcasses and chop them up and all that in the field.
Way I've been thinking of it is that the tools are made with the workshop. And that in general the dwarves bring with them a small supply of the simple tools that wouldn't be easily made out of ambient stone.
Or just have generic tools item. One piece of iron would create many, like "Tools [10]".
But yeah, any more complexity would only add micromanagement to no benefit at all.
I think generic tools could go in if they add to the quality or speed of the production. Say a plow allowing faster planting. This way the player can produce tools if wants them but does not need to use them. The generic tool[10] might work for stuff like needles and other small things. Using a cage as "fish trap" might work for fishers but a fisher can also catch fish by his bare hands.
If you had a choice, what kinds of things would you want the long and common magic discussions to figure out? There are so many of them, and so many people thinking and speculating over the same things again and again. It seems like during the time it takes to reach the magic arc, many near-perfect theories about it's possible structure could be laid out for you cleanly and clearly. But do you want that?
When the economy/site resources go in, are we going to see more logical equipment for guards, invaders, and the like? Also, how well is the game going to handle in modded-in materials and the like?
Will Nightcreature dens have theyr own crude (weapon)-traps at some point?
Quote from: MephansterasWhen the economy/site resources go in, are we going to see more logical equipment for guards, invaders, and the like? Also, how well is the game going to handle in modded-in materials and the like?
You mean stuff they could reasonably afford or some other bug? Or you mean equipment based on more AI and siege planning? I'm not sure what angle you meant by more logical. For materials, it depends on how they are modded in. The current materials are all in the raws, and presumably anything people put in will be used in the same way. It has trouble following arbitrary reactions now if there are materials hidden down a production chain, but stuff in the ground and smelted metals should be handled whether it is stock or modded.
Can natural skills be trained further or are they static?
Hmm, natural skills could be very interesting if paired with castes. You could create a caste of dwarves with a natural aptitude for combat or craftsmanship, for instance.Already have high strength and high recuperation castes in Genesis mod. Craftmanship caste in Genesis... the high-learning-speed one.
RELEASE NOWI'd prefer if adventurer mode got a bit more flushed out before the release. Some bandits would certainly be nice to have.
RELEASE NOWI'd prefer if adventurer mode got a bit more flushed out before the release. Some bandits would certainly be nice to have.
Could you elaborate a bit on what a labyrinth is? Is it a natural element of a cavern that minotaurs gravitate toward, something created by the minotaur, or an abandoned structure created by a civilization?
So would be the fact that crafted armor is always too large for you. I would LOVE to craft a helmet out of a minotaur skull.RELEASE NOWI'd prefer if adventurer mode got a bit more flushed out before the release. Some bandits would certainly be nice to have.
So would be the fact that crafted armor is always too large for you. I would LOVE to craft a helmet out of a minotaur skull.The reverse seems more likely from the devlog, however.
God behavior is supposed to eventually be procedurally generated. Having them always punish an entire race of beings sort of detracts pretty significantly from that. Also, in Greek myth, the Minotaur was put in the labyrinth by Minos and Daedalus. Though Minos was a demigod, his measure of divinity was not related to the imprisonment, he was merely Daedalus' patron.Could you elaborate a bit on what a labyrinth is? Is it a natural element of a cavern that minotaurs gravitate toward, something created by the minotaur, or an abandoned structure created by a civilization?
Maybe they could be a punishement from the gods? A bit like they were in the greek mithology.
you can assign natural starting skills by type and level in the raws now
Quote from: Toady OneQuote from: MephansterasWhen the economy/site resources go in, are we going to see more logical equipment for guards, invaders, and the like? Also, how well is the game going to handle in modded-in materials and the like?
You mean stuff they could reasonably afford or some other bug? Or you mean equipment based on more AI and siege planning? I'm not sure what angle you meant by more logical. [...]
Sorry for not being specific. I'll elaborate a bit. [...]
Quote from: zweiCan natural skills be trained further or are they static?Most likely depends on whether the creature has CAN_LEARN, just like the current skills.
Quote from: tfaalCould you elaborate a bit on what a labyrinth is? Is it a natural element of a cavern that minotaurs gravitate toward, something created by the minotaur, or an abandoned structure created by a civilization?Quote from: CruxadorGod behavior is supposed to eventually be procedurally generated. Having them always punish an entire race of beings sort of detracts pretty significantly from that. Also, in Greek myth, the Minotaur was put in the labyrinth by Minos and Daedalus. Though Minos was a demigod, his measure of divinity was not related to the imprisonment, he was merely Daedalus' patron.Quote from: FieariWhat type of labyrinth generator are you using? Will it be a true labyrinth (just a single path, typically boring), or actually a maze? There are circular maze types that look like labyrinths at first, after all...
How will labyrinths interact with rural sprawl? Will there be farms directly surrounding the labyrinth walls, or will there be a "protected" area around it where humans just won't go near willingly? How large? Night Creature lairs in general might be a good way of keeping sprawl down, especially if they keep normal civs away, but don't prevent embarking in DF mode... maybe using the underground fog of war system to cover their territory up.
Will the reimplementation of shops mean races in sites other than cities will build them, or is it only a return to the previous behavior? Will humanoid (semi-)megabeasts like giants and cyclopes have equipment naturally, or only if they steal it?
You could mod David Bowie to exist in the game, if you wanted. Nothing stopping you.
You could mod David Bowie to exist in the game, if you wanted. Nothing stopping you.Beware Its Deadly Hair?
The starting skill values are awesome! Is there any chance that in this version or an upcoming one, skills-per-race could be expanded further in the raws, like, goblin 'high master dodger' is better than dwarf 'high master dodger', or goblins learn dodge faster than dwarves, or some other way to represent that humans are better than dwarves at farming while dwarves are better at mining?
Reminds me to the game "Golden Sun" with the werewolf village :P . Anyway it would be awesome if we at some point get this "Creppy village with common dark secret" plot at some point since its one of the basic horror plots.I'm secretly hoping that there will be cults built around a certain group of night creatures. I'll be sure to watch out for human towns worshipping amphibic night creatures if something like this will be implemented someday.
[song]
Its beginning to look a lot like fishmen
[/song]
A smart minotaur would bathe occasionally to reduce its smell and make it harder to notice. Most predator monsters do this in one way or another. . .Indecision aid ↑. Very much like cats always lick themselves in reaction to liquid, since that liquid would naturally be blood splatter. Although I didn't think anyone had a sense of smell in DF yet, so the blood and gore will be fine.
the solution, of course, is to give creatures a sense of smell in DF.That's discussed somewhere or other, I think in a DFtalk. The problem is that each individual smell would have to be modeled the same as miasma, which would get very processor intensive very fast.
the solution, of course, is to give creatures a sense of smell in DF.
That's discussed somewhere or other, I think in a DFtalk. The problem is that each individual smell would have to be modeled the same as miasma, which would get very processor intensive very fast.
(fresh washed elf versus booze, blood and vomit soaked dwarf).
It's gonna be sooooooo cool!!! I can't wait for this release!
Will adventurer still heal during fast travel?
What about rivers? With the lower level map will we have to go around them now if we don't have swimming skill or are able to fly, or will the adventurer still be able to teleport over an otherwise uncross-able torrent of water?From the screenshots, it looks like rivers remain passable, and since impassable rivers were mentioned on the dev page, I figure Toady would mention if that was implemented. Similarly, I would assume that mountain tiles remain impassable in travel mode?
What exactly changed on the travel map, other than the day/night meter?
So minotaurs will use the weapons of their victims. Can they use shields and armors, provided they are of the right size? Other creatures will have this ability? Is it in the raws?
Toady with the possible Mythology generator is there a chance that your long list if questions (why are we here, what are dreams) could also be fed into it so the answer could differ world to world with possible real game implications? (for example how Gods revere human beings). Will we ever see such world spanning randomisation?
The starting skill values are awesome! Is there any chance that in this version or an upcoming one, skills-per-race could be expanded further in the raws, like, goblin 'high master dodger' is better than dwarf 'high master dodger', or goblins learn dodge faster than dwarves, or some other way to represent that humans are better than dwarves at farming while dwarves are better at mining?
If minotaurs are getting revamped and giants and cyclops will too at some point, what about ettins?
Werewolves are of interest to me. Can we expect them to get some love from the new night creature features? Will they be transforming and living among humans any time soon?
I like it. I'll miss the cool effects that were in the old one (like the unexplored fog sometimes dissapearing from mountaintops and such when you can see them clearly, even if your vision is blocked from seeing the lower altitudes.) But it seems to me that it would be an improvement overall.
I'm guessing the yellow gem up top is a time indicator? Will that give weather info as well or just time? What about rivers? With the lower level map will we have to go around them now if we don't have swimming skill or are able to fly, or will the adventurer still be able to teleport over an otherwise uncross-able torrent of water?
Will there be any sort of time abstraction in this release? It's not a necessity, given all the other cool stuff, but since being able to have a place to sleep at night was brought to the forefront, I was curious
Will adventurer still heal during fast travel?
Similarly, I would assume that mountain tiles remain impassable in travel mode?
Also, as a forward look when rivers are impassable and we can create adventurer sites - would we be able to create bridges that work in travel mode as well?
Do you intend to show elevation on tile maps at any stage? Such as through subtle use of slight background colour deviation?
On starting skills: if we mod, say, dwarves to have starting skills, can migrants still come with a higher skill than the starting skill? Also, if a migrant comes and his skill is at that starting level but he doesn't use it, can it rust below the starting level?
With the new travel maps, do ambushes by predatory critters still work fine?
Quote from: James.DenholmDo you intend to show elevation on tile maps at any stage? Such as through subtle use of slight background colour deviation?
No plans for now. I don't have a lot of colors available, though I could do maybe a Sentinel Worlds style blocks-within-blocks in ASCII and get sufficient resolution (with all colors and 4 inner shapes it would be 420 levels, though the ordering would look kind of arbitrary) without worrying about redoing the engine, but you'd need a separate view for that, which might not be satisfying.
Thanks for answering our questions Toady! The mythology generator sounds even more exciting, though it seems so very very far away.
Toady what are your views on lineage in terms of Great (or perhaps terrible) family lines? In as so far as having great people give birth to great people and vise versa
Yeah
Great/Terrible Lines as almost forces in it of itself
Description of Barbarossa asin the "Friderici I imperatoris"
His character is such that not even those envious of his power can belittle its praise. His person is well-proportioned. He is shorter than very tall men, but taller and more noble than men of medium height. His hair is golden, curling a little above his forehead... His eyes are sharp and piercing, his beard reddish, his lips delicate... His whole face is bright and cheerful. His teeth are even and snow-white in color... Modesty rather than anger causes him to blush frequently. His shoulders are rather broad, and he is strongly built...
Ok if we throw ancient German Emperors into the Object-Testing-Arena (your link is brocken btw.) i choose Frederick the first "Barbarossa" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frederick_I,_Holy_Roman_Emperor) because he has an awesome legend and a beard worth to be called Dwarven.
Also his description in earths legends mode goes like this:QuoteDescription of Barbarossa asin the "Friderici I imperatoris"
His character is such that not even those envious of his power can belittle its praise. His person is well-proportioned. He is shorter than very tall men, but taller and more noble than men of medium height. His hair is golden, curling a little above his forehead... His eyes are sharp and piercing, his beard reddish, his lips delicate... His whole face is bright and cheerful. His teeth are even and snow-white in color... Modesty rather than anger causes him to blush frequently. His shoulders are rather broad, and he is strongly built...
Thus it reveals that this world is just another iterarion of DF.
Yeah, that's one of the main points of the mythology generator, and the answers are intended to be different each time. It'll take a lot of work and underlying mechanics to make that meaningful, but that's the idea. We are looking forward to people being at the places they go when they die and being able to visit and so on, like those myths where people try to rescue their loved ones from the land of the dead, and all of whatever else.
4 tiles wide walls and 2 tiles wide walkways on top of those walls are definitely the right choice. Thick enough to be reasonable for a wall, a wide enough path to not have to lay down to pass someone by, and to get attacked by multiple unimpeded defenders (the way it should be) Though maybe the keep's walls could be 2 tiles thick instead of 1 and not have what looks like a natural stone roof; of course if the last image was never posted we'd have never known. :P
Though I worry about the disconnect between instantaneously instantiated worldgen building and the playerfort that takes centuries to complete.
Really liking the new castles! Much more interesting than the old giant rectangles.
Are castles just a human-only thing right now? Will other races be getting interesting places soon?
castle walls and a keepThere should also be stables at the very least, and probably some decent amount of living space outside the keep, since most castles expanded a bit in population after the construction was completed.
seems authentic to me.
castle walls and a keepThere should also be stables at the very least, and probably some decent amount of living space outside the keep, since most castles expanded a bit in population after the construction was completed.
seems authentic to me.
Otherwise, they'd be much less big, because all that empty space in the middle isn't good for anything, (a field would be a good bit smaller than that) and walls aren't cheap to build.
When will you begin to implement more seige engines, or perhaps a mini mode such as the arena where the player is in command of the defenders or attackers and has catapults, seige towers battering rams etc at there disposal?, will it also be possible to implement a feature where destroyed towers or sections of walls would cause a cave in?
With the improved sieges (sometime soon after this release, likely) will come a different and more properly supported notion of a moving vehicle (say, a siege tower), likely as a set of tiles handled something like constructions, but with the ability to move as a unit (along with any creatures or items in their tiles).
Quote from: jfsWhen stone fall traps are going to actually be stones falling from a level above, will catapults at the same time also be changed to they actually fire stones in arches and can hit multiple Z-levels? Also on the topic of siege weapons, are there plans for aimed/diagonal shots?
We want to have them fire in arcs, yeah, though I'm not sure what is going to fall out of the siege engine changes. It would of course be cool to siege a site with a bunch of crazy dwarf-built siege weapons you build up that can blow out designated sections of wall and do all kinds of horrible things to structures and soldiers alike. It relates back to how the lifts and other stuff works out. It's weird in a way to build siege engines tile by tile, and a little fussy if you just want to do something normal, but there's going to be a good system living in there somewhere.
Once sieges are up for improvement in the army arc, I'm probably going to tackle things like siege towers, which are multi-tile, multi-level constructions that can move across the map while containing critters and items (much like boats would be)
There should also be stables at the very least, and probably some decent amount of living space outside the keep, since most castles expanded a bit in population after the construction was completed.I was gonna post something similar earlier yesterday, but I restrained myself seeming as this is only the first iteration. It seems to me that such thing are most likely going in at a later state.
Otherwise, they'd be much less big, because all that empty space in the middle isn't good for anything, (a field would be a good bit smaller than that) and walls aren't cheap to build.
Indeed. I had a similar thought process, but mentioned it in response to Japa as he seemed to indicate that this would be a good finished state, while I feel otherwise. I of course do not mean to imply that it should have all these things from the instant that the first vestiges of a properly walled castle is implemented.There should also be stables at the very least, and probably some decent amount of living space outside the keep, since most castles expanded a bit in population after the construction was completed.I was gonna post something similar earlier yesterday, but I restrained myself seeming as this is only the first iteration. It seems to me that such thing are most likely going in at a later state.
Otherwise, they'd be much less big, because all that empty space in the middle isn't good for anything, (a field would be a good bit smaller than that) and walls aren't cheap to build.
Really liking the new castles! Much more interesting than the old giant rectangles.
Are castles just a human-only thing right now? Will other races be getting interesting places soon?
I just noticed something : while the keep is higher than all the towers... there's only ground level. No stairs. Then why bother making it higher ? Is that a bug ?
Why do the towers use ramps instead of stairs?
(And speaking of it, all the other adventurer mode buildings.)
Not really, I've always seen DF stairs as being like spiral staircases. Rather than 12 sets, or whatever distance corresponds to a z level
Ramps are pretty messed up too, when you think about it. They're omnidirectional (a ramp can go up to the left and right at the same time, and change on demand — neat!), they don't particularly exist at the top level, and so forth.
Sure but spiral staircases are much more interesting when they actually go in a spiral. For instance, if you stack DF stairs 10 high, you can still shoot a projectile from top to bottom because there aren't any floors to stop it.
Stairs have the equivalent weirdness of letting you move between them in any direction. Imagine what a 3x3x10 stack of spiral stairs would look like.
I'm now imagining my dwarves shooting around my fortress in pneumatic tubes. The image is not unpleasant; it seems efficient.Why do the towers use ramps instead of stairs?
(And speaking of it, all the other adventurer mode buildings.)
Probably because DF ramps are much more stairlike than DF stairs, which are more akin to antigravity tubes or something.
You can do that in a normal spiral staircase, by leaning over one of the sides. It's possible for people to take cover, sure, but a shot is still pretty feasible.Not really, I've always seen DF stairs as being like spiral staircases. Rather than 12 sets, or whatever distance corresponds to a z level
Sure but spiral staircases are much more interesting when they actually go in a spiral. For instance, if you stack DF stairs 10 high, you can still shoot a projectile from top to bottom because there aren't any floors to stop it.
Designing that would be an interesting feat of engineering for a human. For a dwarf, it is presumably something that is dealt with in the earlier classes at architecture school.Ramps are pretty messed up too, when you think about it. They're omnidirectional (a ramp can go up to the left and right at the same time, and change on demand — neat!), they don't particularly exist at the top level, and so forth.
Stairs have the equivalent weirdness of letting you move between them in any direction. Imagine what a 3x3x10 stack of spiral stairs would look like.
I would also suggest that many ramps are actually single direction staircases, such as you would find in front of your local library, or perhaps in a government building. Of course, I suggest this because I do not want to deprive my dwarves of stairs entirely, given my dislike for the aforementioned Antigravity Tubes.So you'd rather that parts of your fortress be ADA non-compliant for no reason?
All ramps are also 45 degrees. Pushing a seige engine (let alone a tower) up that would be... terribly difficult.I think this is where the line is between complaining that an abstraction is inadequate and complaining that it is an abstraction.
that's why siege engines are static1. I highly doubt that that is the reason.
can we have dungeons under castles?secret escape routes:D?Or crypts?Royal furneal chambers,of some sort?So the Urist McDeadKingDwarf can slaughter the ones that interrupt his eternal sleep?All of the above are planned, but there is no definite timetable in place.
I would also suggest that many ramps are actually single direction staircases, such as you would find in front of your local library, or perhaps in a government building. Of course, I suggest this because I do not want to deprive my dwarves of stairs entirely, given my dislike for the aforementioned Antigravity Tubes.So you'd rather that parts of your fortress be ADA non-compliant for no reason?
All ramps are also 45 degrees. Pushing a seige engine (let alone a tower) up that would be... terribly difficult.Only if we assume tiles are cubes. That isn't necessarily true. Although I suspect any attempt to deduce the actual dimensions would only lead to weirdness. As far as I know, the official size is still "large enough 100 dragons, as long as 99 are lying down".
I seem to recall Toady actually giving a size estimate for a historical building that also appears in the game. I don't remember if he actually said how big tiles generally are, but I think he mentioned it. At any rate, it isn't "large enough for 100 dragons...", it is "large enough for nigh infinite dragons, as long as all but 1 are lying down."All ramps are also 45 degrees. Pushing a seige engine (let alone a tower) up that would be... terribly difficult.Only if we assume tiles are cubes. That isn't necessarily true. Although I suspect any attempt to deduce the actual dimensions would only lead to weirdness. As far as I know, the official size is still "large enough 100 dragons, as long as 99 are lying down".
After that, I cleaned up the wrestling interface a bit
@Rip0k, I think shops have been back in for a while now.Not for a single version though :). So I hope they make it back.
It may simply be that the additions since then weren't complete enough to mark as resolved on the dev page. 13 was the entity populations, which are marked, 14 was the sprawl options, 15 and 16 were strongly bugfix releases. 17 will provide basic night creatures with a bit of the Torment the Living section, but not that much; Castles that were mentioned as one of the non-town sites, but more work remains there as well; and now bandits as mentioned in the first portion of the Villains section. The bandits do seem to be complete enough to green that portion, but otherwise, I don't think there's much call to update the page.
If you got to choose 1 thing to add in, and it would would perfectly the way you wanted it, what would it be?
Toady what are your views on lineage in terms of Great (or perhaps terrible) family lines? In as so far as having great people give birth to great people and vise versa
...
I understand the "Money" and "Genetic" aspect but usually in myth and legend there is actual power in being the son or daughter of someone who is also great.
Will this castles serve also a strategical important during worldgen in the next release? Like blocking an important pass over a mountain-range for an invading army?
Are castles just a human-only thing right now? Will other races be getting interesting places soon?
Will the unwinnable quests to kill friendly demon civ-leaders be no-more with this release?
When will you begin to implement more seige engines, or perhaps a mini mode such as the arena where the player is in command of the defenders or attackers and has catapults, seige towers battering rams etc at there disposal?, will it also be possible to implement a feature where destroyed towers or sections of walls would cause a cave in?
This somehow brings to mind the idea of player-moddable sites and structures
Is this even a consideration at the moment?
How much time it takes for a civ to build one of these castles? If they are not instantly built, can the process be interrupted? Are they built with materials available to the civilizations? Is wood one of these materials?Can they become ruins?
Why do the towers use ramps instead of stairs?
(And speaking of it, all the other adventurer mode buildings.)
Will bandits attack in fortress mode? There will be multiracial bands?
Quote from: tfaalI notice the dev page hasn't been updated to reflect the upcoming changes of the next release. Isn't that what "Done, Next Release" is for?Quote from: Knight OtuIt may simply be that the additions since then weren't complete enough to mark as resolved on the dev page.
that's a quote, not a spoiler
I know I just said I was done with features, but I was on a roll and did aimed attacks and random combat opportunities.
devlog
Aimed attacks are the best thing since...since...Well, something really good.since castles!!
Well with Aimed attacks in place do you think you could go on into basic "Martial arts" next?
EDIT: It just occurred to me, will aimed shots be in for ranged attacks as well? It'd be sweet if my legendary marksdwarf can start rattling off headshots like they're going out of style, and my hunters stop throwing three quivers of bolts into particularly stubborn deer.
Since creatures are now able to identify an opportunity to deal a decisive blow into whatever they're fighting, how will they behave when there's no special oportunities to say, hack someone's head off? Will they just fight normaly as they did, or they will try certain things, like disarming you or trying to put you off balance to achieve that opportunity for lethal damage?
how soon are there gonna be rewards,alfter finishing a mission?
like an object with moneytary value,or a bag `o gold?
people would like to have a MOTIVE to finish quests.
:)
well,how the hell are you gonna buy something,when you got no money?
Everybody in town will have something for you to do or be able to direct you somewhere definite, and you'll be remembered for what you do, which should allow you to move on to better things with more buddies, or give you a place to sleep safely at night.
Will aimed attacks and wrestling attacks be organized with submenus? Scrolling through 8 pages of possible wrestling moves (only 2 of which I ever use) becomes tiring.
Toady what are views on gods and forces manifesting or rather having physical bodies whether it being their true body, Avatar, or even a avatar tied into their being? Will they ever appear? How powerful will they be?
Some tidbits on the divine manifestation thing:The elves aren't exactly monotheistic -- they believe in a force, not a deity, so it's a bit more like the animism you want, though not precisely (it's the spirit of the forest), or Star Wars before the bacteria worship. They don't try to talk to the force, anyway, unlike the deity-worshippers in adv mode, and they'd mock anybody that tried (not that it takes much to set them off), though "feeling it" would certainly be fair game. The force concept is specifically meant to allow supernatural activity without personification, although the random names are sometimes suggestive of a personification. If the force were to manifest itself in the forest as a giant stag or something, it would be more like a deity, though when I get there, there is bound to be some fuzziness.Now, the reason gods are treated like historical figures is so that eventually they can manifest and run around in worlds where they actually exist, but that won't be done until it's done. There's nothing really preventing it from being the next thing to go in, but that's true of many, many things.
Quote from: AqizzarAnd while it's probably slated for much later, what kind of interaction is there between these physical demons and the gods civilizations come up with? Presumably, those gods will eventually stop being so imaginary all the time.
I have no idea when the gods will become more real, but theoretically yeah, they'd have something to do with something. That might be a good time to start randomizing the metaphysics and doing creation myths, instead of using the fixed model we've got now with titans + demons etc., so that the interactions can be more varied.
So... will I be able to bite people now?
in this screenshot (http://www.bay12games.com/dwarves/imgs/aim3.png) all bodyparts say "Simple strike, direct hit".
Hmm, with a long creature such as an alligator you'd expect some bodyparts to be harder to reach due to your relative position. However in this screenshot (http://www.bay12games.com/dwarves/imgs/aim3.png) all bodyparts say "Simple strike, direct hit".
This has come up before
-SNIP-
Meaning that I may have to ask the same question... again...
*sigh*
Though maybe I should take it as a sign that I should elaborate or at least not be afraid of posting huge questions.
Hmm, with a long creature such as an alligator you'd expect some bodyparts to be harder to reach due to your relative position. However in this screenshot (http://www.bay12games.com/dwarves/imgs/aim3.png) all bodyparts say "Simple strike, direct hit".
That was supposed to show how things work against an incapacitated creature. I think. Thus, since they are just lying there, you can lop any parts you want. If you decide not to lop off their head, they could theoretically wake up minus body parts.
Hmm, with a long creature such as an alligator you'd expect some bodyparts to be harder to reach due to your relative position. However in this screenshot (http://www.bay12games.com/dwarves/imgs/aim3.png) all bodyparts say "Simple strike, direct hit".
That was supposed to show how things work against an incapacitated creature. I think. Thus, since they are just lying there, you can lop any parts you want. If you decide not to lop off their head, they could theoretically wake up minus body parts.
-SNIP-
Meaning that I may have to ask the same question... again...
*sigh*
Though maybe I should take it as a sign that I should elaborate or at least not be afraid of posting huge questions.
Or maybe as Toady isn't doing nothing even nearly related to gods at the moment, he doesn't know yet what exactly he will implement when the time comes... and this is the reason most of us makes questions related to current developments.
Not that you shouldn't, just that Toady is more likely to given precise answers for questions about what he is doing.
^^I certainly hope you can't target the neck specifically, or that it's at least really hard to hit on a conscious foe (at least one with arms), because you can't really cover that. The same goes for your mouth, nose, and ears.
^^I certainly hope you can't target the neck specifically, or that it's at least really hard to hit on a conscious foe (at least one with arms), because you can't really cover that. The same goes for your mouth, nose, and ears.
Relsize for upper torso is 2000, same goes for lower torso. Head is 300.
Throat is quite a bit smaller.
Given the relsizes, it should be extremely difficult to strike the throat.
Well it isnt that indeep but calling a shot say for the brainstem trough the throat slightly angled upward (can even be done with a pen) as awesome as it is instant death. What i want to say: if somebody has the right anatomical (or martial arts) knowledge s/he could aim for inner organs especially - this would be truly awesome. This way we could learn Anatomics of different beings!
Do aimed attacks simply hit the target or miss entirely, or if they fail to hit the target might they still hit somewhere close by?
And if you do miss a strike is there a chance of it hitting a nearby bodypart instead before it misses completely?
Okay, now I can't wait for this.
NERDGASM
The next thing to be worked on is the long-heralded Caravan Arc, a particularily significant bit of development because many, many other features need framework from the Caravan Arc before they can go in.
smacking a guy in the head when you want to are cool but any additions only excite me in so much as they lead to the caravan arc being closer.The big implication is that this will also apply to fortress mode - beating up an unconscious creature for months only to starve to death first will be a thing of the past.
Oh no
The days of "And thus the demon did lift his warhammer, and the elf Lorenotomo Thistleberries was cruelly mauled; his third toe left foot was obliterated!" engravings are OVER!?
I don't know if any of you have noticed, but the interface in toady's screenshot seems alot more straightforward then the wrestling one, given each part corresponds to a letter, I doubt it has more then 2 pages of choices.
Finally, will you ever switch over to a more currency-based trade system? Bartering works to a point, but it's kind of silly to imagine a caravan working entirely on bartering in a world with currency. It'd be nice to trade a bunch of things and get a chest full of gold, silver, and copper in exchange. It'd be especially nice in adventure mode, being able to buy and sell things off of the barter system, or even to raid a caravan and take their gold.
I don't know if any of you have noticed, but the interface in toady's screenshot seems alot more straightforward then the wrestling one, given each part corresponds to a letter, I doubt it has more then 2 pages of choices.Yes, we noticed. Also Toady reported cleaning up the wrestling interface in the previous update, so presumably it uses about the same system now. Big improvement.
Quote from: Jiri PetruWhy do the towers use ramps instead of stairs?
(And speaking of it, all the other adventurer mode buildings.)
I think of the X stairs as more rickety spiral staircases, but aside from the tower, the only one I can think of is the new labyrinth, which uses stairs. I also didn't like the thought of a battle being fought up a tower with the defenders always being directly above in a row, especially if arrows work down through multiple stair tiles.
I don't know if any of you have noticed, but the interface in toady's screenshot seems alot more straightforward then the wrestling one, given each part corresponds to a letter, I doubt it has more then 2 pages of choices.
Quote from: Jiri PetruWhy do the towers use ramps instead of stairs?
(And speaking of it, all the other adventurer mode buildings.)
I think of the X stairs as more rickety spiral staircases, but aside from the tower, the only one I can think of is the new labyrinth, which uses stairs. I also didn't like the thought of a battle being fought up a tower with the defenders always being directly above in a row, especially if arrows work down through multiple stair tiles.
I'm not sure where the "rickety" comes from, as most castle spiral staircases are extremely solid.
Maybe I'm weird but I always saw constructed ramps as stairs (with the handrails designed in such a way that a wagon can line their wheels up with them and go up them unobstructed) while I saw stairs more like ladders.
All the visualizers I'm aware of never really made stairs look good anyway which seems to indicate that they are hard to explain. Stonesense gives them a generic snes era stair sprite, which isn't contiguous. DF to minecraft makes them into a sorta spiral stair, but it's awkward to travel, and you certainly couldn't fall down them or shoot through them. And the DF to Saurbraten converter makes them look more like ladders. And again you can't see, fall or shoot through them like you can in DF.
The comparison of stairs to antigrav tubes seems really apt and I'm probably going to see them like that for now on.
...reminds me of X-Com Apocalypse...
Hold on, Sheep, pigs, AND chickens? That's so crazy!
Will they be able to loose feathers in combat?
Hold on, Sheep, pigs, AND chickens?That means sheep- pig- and chickensploison!!! ::)
Hold on, Sheep, pigs, AND chickens?That means sheep- pig- and chickensploison!!! ::)
Well with Aimed attacks in place do you think you could go on into basic "Martial arts" next? It would be nice to do some Akido-like counter attacks or Karate-blows.
Apart from that some questions:
How do the kicker, dodger and related skills influence the fighting opportunities?
Are Kicking, punching considered as valid attacks if you have for example one hand free so you could punch the other guy to knock him out?
Do these aimed attacks work for Ranged weapons too? Will spitting cobras aim for your eyes?
Is Armor taken into account thus will the Ai attack an un-armored part of someones body if the rest is to hard to get through?
edit: Also thanks again for the WoT made from Answers.
How have fistfights been affected by this change, now that we can box people in the head?
I'm just wondering how the general pace of unarmed combat has been affected. If I remember correctly a solid blow to the head can cause unconsciousness, and we can aim for a headshot specifically now.
How have fistfights been affected by this change, now that we can box people in the head?
How have fistfights been affected by this change, now that we can box people in the head?
The problem with this right now is that there's no issue of minor brain damage, the type you see in an actual fistfight. In other words, punching a guy in the head in DF doesn't make them stagger around or get disoriented like it does in real life; the only damage you can do to a brain is very severe damage. In fact, I've never seen non-fatal brain damage in DF except for possibly syndromes, and also that one time I managed to get a dwarf's brain to burn slightly.
Theres also no swelling or torn skin from blunt trauma iirc thus you opponent cant be blinded byhis own blood or his eye swollen shut.Man, this post reminded me of one of those reasons why I love DF.
smacking a guy in the head when you want to are cool but any additions only excite me in so much as they lead to the caravan arc being closer.The big implication is that this will also apply to fortress mode - beating up an unconscious creature for months only to starve to death first will be a thing of the past.
Now that there is a rudimentary AI for aimed attacking: Will it be long before we can order dwarves to capture enemies rather than kill them? i.e have dwarves attempt blunt strikes to the head and then cart off the unconcious foe to an empty cage?
"EVERYONE! THE HYDRA'S THIRD LEFT RIB IS THE WEAK POINT! CONCENTRATE FIRE ON MY MARK!"
Dwarf Picard!
Yes, those kinds of attacks are much more likely to be fatal than you might think.
Not that it matters with the current civilizations all being a hive mind which will immediately all start killing you the second you steal a sock.
I am imagining that weapon skill increases the number and quality of good opportunities you get, while striker is what handles damage etc. and dodge helps reduce opportunities.
More like, they'll attack the head if they get a good shot at it. Directly ordering combat is not something slated for Dwarf Mode, at least in the near future.smacking a guy in the head when you want to are cool but any additions only excite me in so much as they lead to the caravan arc being closer.The big implication is that this will also apply to fortress mode - beating up an unconscious creature for months only to starve to death first will be a thing of the past.
Woah. So can we give our military instructions like "attack head first if possible" ?
"EVERYONE! THE HYDRA'S THIRD LEFT RIB IS THE WEAK POINT! CONCENTRATE FIRE ON MY MARK!"
Dwarf Picard!
Possibly. I would imagine that weapon skill just makes you straight up more likely to hit, regardless of opportunities, though, since that sounds simplest to implement. Am I correct in this assumption?
Yes, those kinds of attacks are much more likely to be fatal than you might think.
Not that it matters with the current civilizations all being a hive mind which will immediately all start killing you the second you steal a sock.
[sarcasm]Yes, it is a pity DF is no longer in development and things never change.[/sarcasm]
Toady_One has withdrawn from society...Today, tomorrow, sometime soon. He said he was done with new stuff and was just cleaning it up for release.
So when is this legendary update coming out?
Toady is more likely sleeping right now, and won't be up for at least four hours. I wouldn't bet on a release today.Yeah, he said (in one of the earlier df talks) that he gets up some time after noon, like 2-4 or something. Oh well, I guess I'll have to actually go do the work I should be doing.
Well, he did do a few bugfixes quite recently, which does point to a more imminent release, so I imagine a weekend release is in the cards.
All the space?
Bluh.
Ok, don't think I've seen this so I'll ask.
Can we have some info about Minotaurs? Do they build their labyrinths or are they just locked away in them by some other civ (more in line with classical mythology). Where are these Labyrinths, just in the middle of nowhere, in caves or on the edge of town? Do the minotaurs ever come out and kill the helpless peasants? Will there ever be civ relationships between them and neighboring villages (ie, offer up a child every year or something to stop the minotaur from rampaging though town.) Etc.
QuoteQuote from: tfaalCould you elaborate a bit on what a labyrinth is? Is it a natural element of a cavern that minotaurs gravitate toward, something created by the minotaur, or an abandoned structure created by a civilization?Quote from: CruxadorGod behavior is supposed to eventually be procedurally generated. Having them always punish an entire race of beings sort of detracts pretty significantly from that. Also, in Greek myth, the Minotaur was put in the labyrinth by Minos and Daedalus. Though Minos was a demigod, his measure of divinity was not related to the imprisonment, he was merely Daedalus' patron.Quote from: FieariWhat type of labyrinth generator are you using? Will it be a true labyrinth (just a single path, typically boring), or actually a maze? There are circular maze types that look like labyrinths at first, after all...
How will labyrinths interact with rural sprawl? Will there be farms directly surrounding the labyrinth walls, or will there be a "protected" area around it where humans just won't go near willingly? How large? Night Creature lairs in general might be a good way of keeping sprawl down, especially if they keep normal civs away, but don't prevent embarking in DF mode... maybe using the underground fog of war system to cover their territory up.
Right now, a labyrinth is something created by the minotaur. Ideally, the mythological method would be possible, but that requires lots of things we don't have yet, so we just hand-waved them in.
It is modeled on the Labyrinth, which is a maze, rather than a labyrinth, as far as I understand how the terms have been tortured over time, he he he. So yeah, you can get lost, though in the case of ones that span Z levels we have stayed well away from the horror possible. A 40x40x4 maze unconstrained was too much, maybe more like it should be from the myth where you have trouble escaping even when you aren't being devoured, so we are a little soft on the z level changes. I let the 2 level ones float freely in some percentage of the maps, since that isn't so bad to figure out in practice.
The labyrinths are all underground and moreover outside of the village limits to avoid the irritation. They can be close, but not within the fields themselves.
11/05/2010: I'm still working, fixing up bugs and other issues. I'm about halfway through my list of things I'd like to clean up, with the worst ones (castles occasionally being placed halfway underground, etc.) being handled. I'm just going to keep at it until it is ready. : I'm still working, fixing up bugs and other issues. I'm about halfway through my list of things I'd like to clean up, with the worst ones (castles occasionally being placed halfway underground, etc.) being handled. I'm just going to keep at it until it is ready.
toady hasleft a sign of his alife-nessWhere was this posted?Quote11/05/2010: I'm still working, fixing up bugs and other issues. I'm about halfway through my list of things I'd like to clean up, with the worst ones (castles occasionally being placed halfway underground, etc.) being handled. I'm just going to keep at it until it is ready. : I'm still working, fixing up bugs and other issues. I'm about halfway through my list of things I'd like to clean up, with the worst ones (castles occasionally being placed halfway underground, etc.) being handled. I'm just going to keep at it until it is ready.
Well for another round of bug-guessing i say that castles and/or Labyrinths start now midair. Also The inhabitants of said castle will fight each other as soon yo enter it.
Underground castles pretty much solves the "how to make dwarf fortresses" bit. Also, with dwarves around, putting your castle partly underground for better down-facing defense may not be a bad idea.I was going to say exactly this. Of course, if they go deep enough to interact with caverns, there could be some trickiness. It used to be that visiting human towns near the ocean (or embarking on them) often had them collapse into the sea. There could easily be something similar here, except with disjointed bits of cavern dropping into the fortress, or underground water features insta-drowning them.
Where was this posted?
There it goes my weekend of playing the new version.
After reading about the next update, I'm pretty sure I'll like it more than the DF2010 update.
I'll just have to remember to kill any large reptiles that manage to get a name near castles. I could just imagine you showing up a little later with the gator lounging on the throne with the crown on it's head surrounded by corpses."My Lord, what big teeth you have!"
Will there be a raw tag to make a civ able to be wandering raiders, as the goblins are now?From the earlier quote that bandits will come from human and goblin civilizations, with dwarves and elves only if conquered by humans, I imagine that bandit risings for now depend on site type of the original civilization. A tag would be nice, though.
After reading that story, I'm really curious what elements were "problems" that deserved being "fixed".
It's probably been asked a million times before: Now that individual groups can give up their entity associations, and elven prisoners can hang around castles, it sounds like those connections are a lot more malleable. How close does that bring the program to multi-species player forts?
Toady, have you managed to throw in some sort of medical support or is it for a next time ?
But this adventurer was only in the wild for 4 or 5 days if I count well, and had his hand lopped off and both his legs gored in a very bad way. It is obvious adventurers won't live a long life as it is. Toady, have you managed to throw in some sort of medical support or is it for a next time ?
Quote from: Rip0kWill adventurer still heal during fast travel?
It's the same as it has been, until there are more options. Depending on how the sleep stuff works out, you might have to sleep instead of having that go away automatically.
Epic wall of text is Epic.
But this adventurer was only in the wild for 4 or 5 days if I count well, and had his hand lopped off and both his legs gored in a very bad way. It is obvious adventurers won't live a long life as it is. Toady, have you managed to throw in some sort of medical support or is it for a next time ?
Wait.
Bronze slicing knife...
There are new weapon types n this release?
I'm pretty sure Footkerchief is right. Legends mode doesn't even show (perhaps not even record) what a world-gen historical figure makes its kills with. Attachment and naming only seems to happen in Dwarf mode currently. Depending on how the code works, your adventuring companions might be able to do it, but I believe Toady has said that he doesn't want to dictate how your adventurer feels in most situations, and thus the adventurer shouldn't become attached to weapons or name them. Historical figures naming their weapons seems to be an easy way to introduce world-gen artifacts, though.It would be nice to have the option to name our weapon in adventure mode after x number of kills. Not force us to, but just give us that opportunity. It would be pretty easy to do I think, just give us the naming screen and we can either press the random button till we find one we like or pick the parts from all the possibilities.
(Another thing in a vaguely similar way would be seeing item corpses being kept around where it makes sense, such as a statue of a bronze colossus in the town square that had been terrorizing the town before a great hero managed to kill it. Or living weapons that leave behind normal weapons used by the killer and then passed through the different hands as death claims the current wielder. But that seems farther off.)
Just remember that odd numbered releases are Extra FUN.Fixed
All hail Skinnyrends the conqueror! May his kin make it into the next release!Actually, that reminds me that I haven't seen any (non-mega) monster rampages in legends mode for a while, nor world-gen animals with names. I should check whether those were my fault or if these currently don't happen.
(I suspect that the attack of Skinnyrends was caused by the animal attack code that takes wild animals and makes them attack settlements.)
Dont take me wrong, I love these stories from the devlog... but they are making the waiting completely unbearable.
Toady what are views on gods and forces manifesting or rather having physical bodies whether it being their true body, Avatar, or even a avatar tied into their being? Will they ever appear? How powerful will they be?
my question which is more about how gods will manifest in full and how powerful Toady really expects them to be since they can be anywhere from Megabeast strength, which makes sense given that some megabeasts actually were birthed from gods in myth and legends, to even so beyond that to the point where Toady would either make them unstoppable or simply not capable of existing in a real form. Then there is what risks a god actually takes when fighting in their physical form, for example if a god manifests are they even harmed by being defeated?
Quote from: thvazDo these changes in combat occur in fortress mode too? I mean, dwarves and his enemies will choose strikes based on these new rules?Quote from: monk12Will the new combat mechanics make it into Fortress mode as well?
In regards to the new AI targeting, will dwarves (or creatures in general) that like to take risks try the harder to hit attacks more often when the payout is good enough? And if you do miss a strike is there a chance of it hitting a nearby bodypart instead before it misses completely?
Quote from: HephWell with Aimed attacks in place do you think you could go on into basic "Martial arts" next? It would be nice to do some Akido-like counter attacks or Karate-blows.
Apart from that some questions:
How do the kicker, dodger and related skills influence the fighting opportunities?
Are Kicking, punching considered as valid attacks if you have for example one hand free so you could punch the other guy to knock him out?
Do these aimed attacks work for Ranged weapons too? Will spitting cobras aim for your eyes?
Is Armor taken into account thus will the Ai attack an un-armored part of someones body if the rest is to hard to get through?Quote from: SoweluI am imagining that weapon skill increases the number and quality of good opportunities you get, while striker is what handles damage etc. and dodge helps reduce opportunities.Quote from: tfaalPossibly. I would imagine that weapon skill just makes you straight up more likely to hit, regardless of opportunities, though, since that sounds simplest to implement. Am I correct in this assumption?
Seeing as the example screenshots showed kicking as an attack of opportunity, does this mean that you could wield multiple weapons and make occasional attacks with your off hand?
Quote from: DakkSince creatures are now able to identify an opportunity to deal a decisive blow into whatever they're fighting, how will they behave when there's no special oportunities to say, hack someone's head off? Will they just fight normaly as they did, or they will try certain things, like disarming you or trying to put you off balance to achieve that opportunity for lethal damage?Quote from: FootkerchiefMaking the AI plan multi-stage maneuvers, like disarmament or putting you off balance in preparation for a strike, is probably not the kind of feature that would be implemented in a day, and it's not closely related to any of the features he did implement. He'd have mentioned it.
Will aimed attacks and wrestling attacks be organized with submenus? Scrolling through 8 pages of possible wrestling moves (only 2 of which I ever use) becomes tiring.
Will all this aimed attack stuff be optional (i.e. toggled via a menu in-game)? It's great for tough battles, but when I'm fighting a horde of crundles it might be more efficient to turn off tactical combat for a few minutes.
With the implementation of aimed attacks, will the previously mentioned aimed defending be far behind?
My assumption is that the attacks have a tendency to strike at [HEAD], [UPPERBODY] and [LOWERBODY] tagged body parts, and possibly throats as well (though this might fall under [HEAD] with the vanilla body constructs).
I presume in this case that the tendency to strike these tags will flow on into your non-aimed attacks in adventurer mode.
Since everything already has a relative size, I further assume that this also impacts the likelihood of attacks hitting.
How accurate is this?
I'll also ask, are you planning to use creature variations to help with the stock night creature type creatures?
To clarify, let me give an example - the werewolf.
Werewolves may possess a syndrome that allows them to infect on a bite.
This syndrome would trigger a creature variation (possibly even delayed by time), which would add, remove or change tags on the base creature.
This would of course cause them to gain the syndrome causing bite as well.
Is the difficulty of hitting the head hardcoded, defined in the raws, or the result of something else entirely?
Now that there is a rudimentary AI for aimed attacking: Will it be long before we can order dwarves to capture enemies rather than kill them? i.e have dwarves attempt blunt strikes to the head and then cart off the unconcious foe to an empty cage?
If I'm understanding correctly, it seems like unless you specifically choose an aimed shot against an unconscious opponent, it will take just as long to kill them as before. It would be a useful option to let us use the same automatic target selection for vulnerable opponents that the AI does; if I want to do the same headshot every time, why should I have to go digging through menus to do it
One of my big issues with caravans is that there really isn't a lot that a caravan can bring that you can't produce yourself, and better.
...
Item values are also pretty crazy; are you planning on rebalancing any of this?
How have fistfights been affected by this change, now that we can box people in the head?
Now that we have true type support, is there any chance we could get the default tileset swapped out for a square one?
Do the minotaurs ever come out and kill the helpless peasants? Will there ever be civ relationships between them and neighboring villages (ie, offer up a child every year or something to stop the minotaur from rampaging though town.) Etc.
at what point is the trader arc planned to come in? As in something non-violent to do for the town -- buying low and selling high on site resources, leading a trader caravan, etc
Are dwarf civ fortresses going to connect up to both underground roads and overground roads? Will they access the cave systems, maybe with guards posted, or even farm in them?
Quote from: freeformschoolerWill there be a raw tag to make a civ able to be wandering raiders, as the goblins are now?Quote from: DakkDo bands of bandits and patrols actualy travel the world map, are they like the encounters in the current version, o do they settle in certain places? Since site leaders are sending you after some, I would assume the first or the latter.Quote from: JiharoDoes every civilisation get them? Is it possible to encounter one that is not hostile?Quote from: kilakanWith the new travel map, how long until we should expect migrating goblin bandits and such, not just direct ambushers but potentially people just passing through like the residual HFS?
After reading that story, I'm really curious what elements were "problems" that deserved being "fixed". It wasn't Skinnyrends the Alligator of Ambition was it?
It's probably been asked a million times before: Now that individual groups can give up their entity associations, and elven prisoners can hang around castles, it sounds like those connections are a lot more malleable. How close does that bring the program to multi-species player forts?
Will there ever be a time when world gen NPC's and/or adventurers start naming their weapons?
Regarding the quests - does the quest giver only take into account if the target is a (semi)megabeast to determine if you're ready to face it, or also, say, the difficulty tag?
Quote from: Captain MaydayI'll also ask, are you planning to use creature variations to help with the stock night creature type creatures?
To clarify, let me give an example - the werewolf.
Werewolves may possess a syndrome that allows them to infect on a bite.
This syndrome would trigger a creature variation (possibly even delayed by time), which would add, remove or change tags on the base creature.
This would of course cause them to gain the syndrome causing bite as well.
I'm not sure if I'll be able to use something as broad as a creature variation, at least for things beyond the body. The ability to have a custom body has been partially supported and unused for a long time, but allowing any tag to be replaced is difficult without creating a new creature definition.
Another option would be to just refluff adventurer-mode item-naming as something that society does and not you -- "Bards now sing legends of your sword, calling it 'glosseramdung!'" Maybe only a message that you get when completing a quest or something like that. It could even be a reward.I'm pretty sure Footkerchief is right. Legends mode doesn't even show (perhaps not even record) what a world-gen historical figure makes its kills with. Attachment and naming only seems to happen in Dwarf mode currently. Depending on how the code works, your adventuring companions might be able to do it, but I believe Toady has said that he doesn't want to dictate how your adventurer feels in most situations, and thus the adventurer shouldn't become attached to weapons or name them. Historical figures naming their weapons seems to be an easy way to introduce world-gen artifacts, though.It would be nice to have the option to name our weapon in adventure mode after x number of kills. Not force us to, but just give us that opportunity. It would be pretty easy to do I think, just give us the naming screen and we can either press the random button till we find one we like or pick the parts from all the possibilities.
I see. So is adding tags fine, but removing them not currently possible?
I would have thought it would be something like a meta-caste.
Another option would be to just refluff adventurer-mode item-naming as something that society does and not you -- "Bards now sing legends of your sword, calling it 'glosseramdung!'" Maybe only a message that you get when completing a quest or something like that. It could even be a reward.
It would be nice to have the option to name our weapon in adventure mode after x number of kills. Not force us to, but just give us that opportunity. It would be pretty easy to do I think, just give us the naming screen and we can either press the random button till we find one we like or pick the parts from all the possibilities.Naming your items, certainly, but perhaps not while the named items automatically become pseudo-artifacts.
Yeah, you have a raw tag to say how many people proportionally get dumped out into bandit groups, and you have a tag to say if local sites will have bandit style patrols. ... The attacks during travel all come from proximity to sites -- it'll pull out some of the regular populations and historical figures (in the case of bandit leaders or night creatures), and then they magically get put back in their sites if they survive.Oooh, those are just about perfect. :D
...
The mega/titan/semi/night creature tags are used for those creatures to sort them into tiers, but it also uses the difficulty tags. A difficulty greater than 10 means it won't be used for quests, 10 is the top tier, then there is the 5-9 semi megabeast tier, the 2-4 tier for your first castle quest, and the lowest for peasants. Mega/semi beasts in the raws always go into their proper tier, but it respects the >10 part. These come up for wilderness predators and underground predators, which come up for burrow quests currently (the burrow thing can be improved later).
Hello everyone... sorry if this question has been asked, I did go back several pages and try to find an answer to my question, but it seems like a pretty obvious one so I won't be surprised if someone has already asked it. Anyway, my question is this: Will sneaking adv. mode characters who ambush targets that are oblivious to their presence get aimed shots? In other words, if I sneak up on an enemy goblin, it does not see me, can I get a free aimed shot with a high bonus (maybe not quite the same as if he were helpless), in essence a "back stab"?
The cool thing about DF is that while in other games they hard-code it so stabbing weapons are best for back stabbing, but in this game the damage system already models this!
There's been some discussion about studded weapons since the big update earlier this year. Specifically I'm wondering if, for example, a silver mace studded with lead would do more damage than a normal silver mace due to the added weight?
Is the eventual, long term plan to make it so most things are represented in tag form in the raws and that very little is expressly hard coded?
Like many things, I'm starting off hard-coded [with hair/beard styles] because I don't know what I need and it would be a waste to raw it before I know. The annoyances here are mainly how much I might end up allowing descriptions to be placed before or after other words and wherever in sentences -- I might not do much of it now, but the more that's mutable, the less I'm eager to raw it until I'm really happy with what I've got.
The fortress ratings are still hard coded, and the land holder levels tie to those like they used to (for example, trade, production and fortress (pop+job variety) ratings have to hit 3 to get the first land holder level. That kind of thing can be brought out over time. My main focus here was just to salvage as much of the existing system as possible without having to extend the overhaul, while getting the positions themselves all out into the raws.
Yeah, the current workshops have stayed where they have always been, in the exe. For the most part, they don't interact with the reactions at all. The main stumbling block here is the interface for the jobs, which often occurs in two steps, etc., which is something that's not supported by the custom workshops setup.
Is it possible that we'll ever get the ability to spawn the randomly gen'd fun stuff, forgotten beasts and titans in arena mode? I don't know how difficult it would be to make that work, since I don't know how the generation process for that functions or if it's possible to have it gen the creatures on the fly like that. It would be a really neat thing to have though, just to play with in the arena.
There's been some discussion about studded weapons since the big update earlier this year. Specifically I'm wondering if, for example, a silver mace studded with lead would do more damage than a normal silver mace due to the added weight?
Have you confirmed that there's an actual weight difference? As far as I know, there isn't. Decorations like studs are immaterial, or more precisely, they're nothing but a material.
Like Australia? Would be nice actually. :D
Can you add some randomness to armor penetration? Now that you're cleaning up the stuff, it would be nice to slightly randomize the current "material X always beats material Y" system. How hard would that be to add in? Maybe add a certain percentage of randomness to material strength in the hit calculation?
Fixed item values will probably disappear entirely this month or soon after.Best news in a while.
Quote from: AquillionAnother option would be to just refluff adventurer-mode item-naming as something that society does and not you -- "Bards now sing legends of your sword, calling it 'glosseramdung!'" Maybe only a message that you get when completing a quest or something like that. It could even be a reward.
I guess having your enemies do it would also work in that way. Then you'd have your nickname from the enemies, the name for your weapon, and the name for your distinctive armor, and your ferocious goblin-hunting dog.
Fixed item values will probably disappear entirely this month or soon after.Best news in a while.
Also, I'm sure this has been asked before... Are all civ's affected by the new castles or just humans?
Just humans. The other civs will be worked on later.
Quote from: MephansterasAre castles just a human-only thing right now? Will other races be getting interesting places soon?
I'm not sure exactly when the other races will get their stuffs. The obstacle for the elves is making giant trees and the obstacle for dwarves is making it generate a dwarf fortress. We'll just have to start it some time, but it might coincide with the fortress starting scenario stuff about entity pops associated to your fort since that will further specify how dwarf sprawl is going to relate to its surroundings.
The word spread around, and even the Tick of Constructs respected us for our heroic acts.
Darn, I was hoping the new version would release before I had to go off to school and sit around for hours on end. Oh well.
Just to sum myself up, the most crippling things that I really want fixed in dwarf mode:
1) Soldiers only equipping 1 boot or glove and getting their other unarmored limb injured/severed in battle, screwing up even the strongest soldiers (Toady said he wanted to fix it but couldn't reproduce, it happens to me really often ESPECIALLY when auto-upgrading equipment to ones of better quality)
2) Healthcare borking up and causing dwarves to never get their injuries healed, then dying of infection
Just to sum myself up, the most crippling things that I really want fixed in dwarf mode:
1) Soldiers only equipping 1 boot or glove and getting their other unarmored limb injured/severed in battle, screwing up even the strongest soldiers (Toady said he wanted to fix it but couldn't reproduce, it happens to me really often ESPECIALLY when auto-upgrading equipment to ones of better quality)
2) Healthcare borking up and causing dwarves to never get their injuries healed, then dying of infection
I encountered both of these in my current fort. I think I fixed the first one by ordering them to wear two of each duplicate item.
The second one has led to my expedition leader running around with bones sticking out of one of his arms for about 5 years. He was infected, but he lived through it and it went away.
Between the new health care system and the new health care system, I still think fewer dwarves are dying from battle-related injuries per battle than in 40d.
Will the numerous rock types eventually each have some sort of use, or do you plan on keeping them as they are now, with most of them being fairly identical.The raws alude to this with some of the notes that are found next to them for their direct influence on gameplay. Saltpeter (potassium nitrate) for fertilizer, presumably the peat soil layer being used as a fuel, etc.
Just to sum myself up, the most crippling things that I really want fixed in dwarf mode:
1) Soldiers only equipping 1 boot or glove and getting their other unarmored limb injured/severed in battle, screwing up even the strongest soldiers (Toady said he wanted to fix it but couldn't reproduce, it happens to me really often ESPECIALLY when auto-upgrading equipment to ones of better quality)
2) Healthcare borking up and causing dwarves to never get their injuries healed, then dying of infection
I encountered both of these in my current fort. I think I fixed the first one by ordering them to wear two of each duplicate item.
The second one has led to my expedition leader running around with bones sticking out of one of his arms for about 5 years. He was infected, but he lived through it and it went away.
Sometimes I wish there was a progress bar toward the next release. Not a release time or anything, just some visual representation of about how far along the release is.
Of course that might lead to us being stuck at 99% for a week and causing massive anticipation based hemorrhaging.
Also keeping something like that constantly updated would actualy mean toady would spend less time coding and thus making the main thing take longer :PI don't think stopping for 30 seconds to adjust a slider or enter in a number would cause considerable slowdown, especially if done once a day.
I'm overall pretty happy with how things are going, just checking the page everyday as usual :P
I don't think stopping for 30 seconds to adjust a slider or enter in a number would cause considerable slowdown, especially if done once a day.
I'd still like to do some aiming fixes, a basic companion display (since that can get really confusing), some dwarf mode testing/fixes, and more, but it is coming together nicely.
Now I'll get to the pre-release cleaning, he he he.
I'm still working, fixing up bugs and other issues. I'm about halfway through my list of things I'd like to clean up, with the worst ones (castles occasionally being placed halfway underground, etc.) being handled.
Reading this makes me think that, should he wish, Toady could raise an army with rediculous ease. I'm half expecting a post along the lines of "I have completed version 31.17, It's release shall be withheld until such a time as the coalition government has been disbanded" And we'd heed the call.
I seem to recall the "turning items green to indicate how far from release" thing was, while cool to watch, also frustrating.
I'm the first to praise Toady's many qualities, but the recent forum anxiety is his fault, like piecewise pointed.
He should be flattered by all the rabid fans. Seriously I'd turn for that man ;)
Seriously, the last dev entry was what, a week ago?
Toady works like no one.
I'm the first to praise Toady's many qualities, but the recent forum anxiety is his fault, like piecewise pointed.I'd say that no, it's the fans' fault for taking it a little too far.
And then he posts nothing for days, and people start to get upset because they are waiting for a release any day now.
-_-, I'm a girl...Don't worry about it. No matter your orientation, you can always be straight for Toady.
I know what you mean. Just a sheer glance at this picture nearly makes me reach orgasm.-_-, I'm a girl...Don't worry about it. No matter your orientation, you can always be straight for Toady.
Always remember: The first 90% of the release takes 90% of the time. The last 10% takes the other 90%. yes that's 180%
Always remember: The first 90% of the release takes 90% of the time. The last 10% takes the other 90%. yes that's 180%
Yeah, I've been having the worst little 90-90 microcosm here... it was always going to be tomorrow, so I was like "the next dev log will be the release post", but some crash or irritating problem arises. I have one rare unreproducible crash that I'll probably have to release with, and a giant wish-list which grows instead of shrinks as usual, and the current idea was to put it up 13 hours from now, but I can't promise it. If I put it off much longer, it'll just be self-indulgent, I think. The last thing I slipped in was people rolling away from strikes if they are on the ground.
Always remember: The first 90% of the release takes 90% of the time. The last 10% takes the other 90%. yes that's 180%
Yeah, I've been having the worst little 90-90 microcosm here... it was always going to be tomorrow, so I was like "the next dev log will be the release post", but some crash or irritating problem arises.
Always remember: The first 90% of the release takes 90% of the time. The last 10% takes the other 90%. yes that's 180%
Yeah, I've been having the worst little 90-90 microcosm here... it was always going to be tomorrow, so I was like "the next dev log will be the release post", but some crash or irritating problem arises. I have one rare unreproducible crash that I'll probably have to release with, and a giant wish-list which grows instead of shrinks as usual, and the current idea was to put it up 13 hours from now, but I can't promise it. If I put it off much longer, it'll just be self-indulgent, I think. The last thing I slipped in was people rolling away from strikes if they are on the ground.
Always remember: The first 90% of the release takes 90% of the time. The last 10% takes the other 90%. yes that's 180%
Yeah, I've been having the worst little 90-90 microcosm here... it was always going to be tomorrow, so I was like "the next dev log will be the release post", but some crash or irritating problem arises. I have one rare unreproducible crash that I'll probably have to release with, and a giant wish-list which grows instead of shrinks as usual, and the current idea was to put it up 13 hours from now, but I can't promise it. If I put it off much longer, it'll just be self-indulgent, I think. The last thing I slipped in was people rolling away from strikes if they are on the ground.
Yeah, I've been having the worst little 90-90 microcosm here... it was always going to be tomorrow, so I was like "the next dev log will be the release post", but some crash or irritating problem arises. I have one rare unreproducible crash that I'll probably have to release with, and a giant wish-list which grows instead of shrinks as usual, and the current idea was to put it up 13 hours from now, but I can't promise it. If I put it off much longer, it'll just be self-indulgent, I think. The last thing I slipped in was people rolling away from strikes if they are on the ground.
It's posts like this which I think will do the most to placate the rabid fans. I don't think any of us want to rush toady, we just like hearing how it's going. At least thats how I feel.
I don't really see how saying that it would be nice if toady spent 30 seconds every day or two telling us how it's going is being too needy, it's what he used to do. I'm not telling him to do it or anything, just saying I like reading the devlog and being kept up to date on things, and that doing this might satiate other people as well.Quote from: Toady OneYeah, I've been having the worst little 90-90 microcosm here... it was always going to be tomorrow, so I was like "the next dev log will be the release post", but some crash or irritating problem arises. I have one rare unreproducible crash that I'll probably have to release with, and a giant wish-list which grows instead of shrinks as usual, and the current idea was to put it up 13 hours from now, but I can't promise it. If I put it off much longer, it'll just be self-indulgent, I think. The last thing I slipped in was people rolling away from strikes if they are on the ground.
No, no! Take the time and indulge yourself, please. It will just make the update all the better.Quote from: piecewiseIt's posts like this which I think will do the most to placate the rabid fans. I don't think any of us want to rush toady, we just like hearing how it's going. At least thats how I feel.
But dude, you're being too needy. If Toady was your girlfirend you'd be dumped by now.
How does 13 hours from Wednesday night translate into Monday? Not trying to be snide or something, just curious if I missed something.Always remember: The first 90% of the release takes 90% of the time. The last 10% takes the other 90%. yes that's 180%the current idea was to put it up 13 hours from now, but I can't promise it. If I put it off much longer, it'll just be self-indulgent, I think. quote]
So Monday huh?
How does 13 hours from Wednesday night translate into Monday? Not trying to be snide or something, just curious if I missed something.Toady is using Valve Time.
You are clearly unfamiliar with how deadlines work.How does 13 hours from Wednesday night translate into Monday? Not trying to be snide or something, just curious if I missed something.Always remember: The first 90% of the release takes 90% of the time. The last 10% takes the other 90%. yes that's 180%the current idea was to put it up 13 hours from now, but I can't promise it. If I put it off much longer, it'll just be self-indulgent, I think. quote]
So Monday huh?
Each passing day fills me with hope and, at a certain point, that hope turns to wistfulness.
I think we all know why.
Hope is the first step on the road to disappointment.
Uhh, release in ~7 hours, right? ^^
Don't worry if it's a little buggy, it's .17 not .18 after all 8)
Going to be a few hours late, but we fixed that crash bug I mentioned.
Going to be a few hours late, but we fixed that crash bug I mentioned.
Going to be a few hours late, but we fixed that crash bug I mentioned.
but we fixed that crash bug I mentioned.
but we fixed
we
back on topic: is there any plan to introduce bashing damage for attacks blocked by armor?
Threetoe is a member of the development team. He generally has no involvement with the programming side of things, so he probably didn't have any interaction with the crash bug, but Toady still refers to Bay12 as "we," for reasons of inclusiveness.
back on topic: is there any plan to introduce bashing damage for attacks blocked by armor?
This already happens. It's what causes the messages like "bruising the muscle through the rope reed tunic".Threetoe is a member of the development team. He generally has no involvement with the programming side of things, so he probably didn't have any interaction with the crash bug, but Toady still refers to Bay12 as "we," for reasons of inclusiveness.
Also TT does help with playtesting.
It took me 3 hours to track down that stupid crash bug. Please!
More like we finally have proof of what I have suspected all along: Toady is actually a combined entity created from the amalgamated souls and skill of a thousand programmers.QuoteGoing to be a few hours late, but we fixed that crash bug I mentioned.Quotebut we fixed that crash bug I mentioned.Quotebut we fixedQuotewe
new coworker Toady? :)
Anyway, great news!
whoops, I just got distracted fixing bugs and slipping in more features
It took me 3 hours to track down that stupid crash bug. Please!
Indeed! Mayhaps through such valiant efforts the odd-numbered releases shall be restored to their former glory!It took me 3 hours to track down that stupid crash bug. Please!Sing a song for the unsung hero!
FFFFFFFFFFF okay I'm not studying today, thanks. Psh, I have an extra day off next week anyway, cometh the awesome release!
FFFFFFFFFFF okay I'm not studying today, thanks. Psh, I have an extra day off next week anyway, cometh the awesome release!Ehehehe, I got a 4 day weekend starting today, so I am fucking extra happy :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o:o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o:o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o:o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o:o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o:o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o:o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o:o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o:o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o:o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o:o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o:o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o:o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o:o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o:o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o
FFFFFFFFFFF okay I'm not studying today, thanks. Psh, I have an extra day off next week anyway, cometh the awesome release!Ehehehe, I got a 4 day weekend starting today, so I am fucking extra happy :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o:o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o:o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o:o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o:o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o:o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o:o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o:o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o:o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o:o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o:o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o:o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o:o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o:o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o:o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o :o
FFFFFFFFFFF okay I'm not studying today, thanks. Psh, I have an extra day off next week anyway, cometh the awesome release!
Study until release, then. :p
Right now artifacts are worth an amount of dwarfbux that is simply so large it's practically worthless. You can trade it for an entire wagon of supplies if you feel like getting .01% of it's value or you can just let it sit around gathering dust and making dwarfs sully their pants with joy.Actually, you can't trade artifacts.
Really?Right now artifacts are worth an amount of dwarfbux that is simply so large it's practically worthless. You can trade it for an entire wagon of supplies if you feel like getting .01% of it's value or you can just let it sit around gathering dust and making dwarfs sully their pants with joy.Actually, you can't trade artifacts.
I've actually never tired trading them because It would be a massive waste of money.Right now artifacts are worth an amount of dwarfbux that is simply so large it's practically worthless. You can trade it for an entire wagon of supplies if you feel like getting .01% of it's value or you can just let it sit around gathering dust and making dwarfs sully their pants with joy.Actually, you can't trade artifacts.
Right now artifacts are worth an amount of dwarfbux that is simply so large it's practically worthless. You can trade it for an entire wagon of supplies if you feel like getting .01% of it's value or you can just let it sit around gathering dust and making dwarfs sully their pants with joy. In the future, as the caravan and army arcs pick up, will artifacts see some some sort of expanded use, such as buying armies of soldiers from neighboring civs, causing armies to invade for the express purpose of stealing the artifact etc.?
# ARTIFACT ARC: Special items made by the dwarves aren't very interesting right now, and there's not much for an adventurer to do with them. These objects should have magical powers and they should have a huge influence on the actions of entities that come into contact with them. Even if your adventurer can't make use of a particular artifact, you could arrange for buyers in the nobility, and use those opportunitites to get a home or good entity standing, for instance. Related to Core79, Core80, Req395, Bloat49, Bloat173, PowerGoal13, PowerGoal60, PowerGoal68 and PowerGoal134.
# Core79, COLLECTORS AND FINDING BUYERS, (Future): As an extension of the dwarf mode system of likes and dislikes, you should be able to find people that are collecting objects, starting with simple objects like coins and bugs. It should also be an adventure unto itself to find a buyer for many valuable objects, if you want to get more than a local merchant would be able to provide, and news of your acquisition should keep your life interesting.
# Bloat173, FINDING BUYERS, (Future): Arranging for buyers for artifacts. It could be harder to access nobles, and this might be a challenge.
# PowerGoal13, ARTIFACT QUEST, (Future): You pledge to the human king that you will recover a lost artifact that is in the willful possession of a monster.
# PowerGoal134, AND WHEN YOU FIND IT, WHAT WILL YOU DO WITH IT?, (Future): The scribe Arcania writes down the last known location of the sacred skull of Aa on a map which is torn in two pieces and hidden in widely-separated regions of the world.
Quote from: DakkIs there any other uses for artifacts planned that doesn't involve the magic arc? Such as making whoever has the benefit of using an artifact weapon or owning any artifact of any kind very happy, a commander carrying a important artifact in battle increasing his/her's soldiers morale, possibly increasing their ability to go into battle trance, and more negative results of losing an artifact?
There used to be a system by which artifacts became "possessed" (as in ownership), "hidden" (as in some loser hiding it) or "dropped". The dwarves would pass along the artifact as long as it was dropped, and any dwarf that picked up the artifact and decided to get a possessed marker on it would seek to get it back, until it was hidden (at which point your adventurer could go to find it). That's obviously a little to strange to come back, but that's kind of what we are thinking in a vague way -- they don't have to be magical at all to be coveted and influence decisions overall. Dwarves aren't really autonomous enough at this point to have higher goals like this with any kind of precision, but that should come with job priorities the way we're thinking about them at this point. There was also a notion for any valuable object of having your adventurer be able to arrange for them to come into the ownership of important people, which is one way you might move up in the world, but that's also unformed.
The Artifact Arc should see the legends expanded -- artifacts were originally going to be the main focus of the game, but they faded back a bit. In the future, the power of artifacts will bring them back to the forefront. This was part of the point of Threetoe's story Heroes of the Coast (http://"http://www.bay12games.com/dwarves/dev_story.html"). In these stories, Threetoe often focused on some set of planned features. In Heroes, the idea is that dwarven artifacts which have become scattered throughout the world in many games can be quested for and then used for some purpose. Currently, it keeps track of every time an artifact changes hands, though it might be hard (impossible?) to reveal these events right now, don't remember. It also tracks the maker, and whether the artifact was destroyed, but not much more.
2 more hours to go whhheee!Yeah, don't count hours, it's pointless. Just assume that there is a good chance that the game will come out today. Check back every so often and if it doesn't come out then be patient because it's obviously close.
Has anyone noticed that you cant trade goblets? I had a few hundred of them, but the only ones I could trade were the ones that shared a bin with a sellable craft.What are you talking about? I sold countless of goblets. They just have no category in the "bring to depot"-screen so you have to search them by letter.
Lets get this back on topic shall we?
Right now artifacts are worth an amount of dwarfbux that is simply so large it's practically worthless. You can trade it for an entire wagon of supplies if you feel like getting .01% of it's value or you can just let it sit around gathering dust and making dwarfs sully their pants with joy. In the future, as the caravan and army arcs pick up, will artifacts see some some sort of expanded use, such as buying armies of soldiers from neighboring civs, causing armies to invade for the express purpose of stealing the artifact etc.?
ThanksHas anyone noticed that you cant trade goblets? I had a few hundred of them, but the only ones I could trade were the ones that shared a bin with a sellable craft.What are you talking about? I sold countless of goblets. They just have no category in the "bring to depot"-screen so you have to search them by letter.
There ain't no way to fight it. The ETA is 3:00 PMish, and by golly, I'll be checking my watch, illogical or not. Anticipation is a strange beast.2 more hours to go whhheee!Yeah, don't count hours, it's pointless. Just assume that there is a good chance that the game will come out today. Check back every so often and if it doesn't come out then be patient because it's obviously close.
ITT: People are at once joyous and annoyed at an ETA they've been asking for for several days.I don't think annoyed is the proper term
:')
I don't think annoyed is the proper termAntsy is more apt, I think.
What time EST is .17 supposed to come out???I got no idea, but it should be out by the next hour.
About 10 seconds ago........
What time EST is .17 supposed to come out???I got no idea, but it should be out by the next hour.
mean's it just came outAbout 10 seconds ago........
what does that mean?
Says there is an update to the "your first adventurer" manual. Where is this?On the help screen when you push "?".
Okay, so, a quick suggestion. The frontpage says that the world doesn't continue ledgends only history while playing, and it phrases "yet". I assume this means it's in future planning, however, if it's feasable.. What if there was a quick fix for this - once you drag your world into the age of emptiness as is enevitible from a world that doesn't regrow, you can go back to the menu screen of that region folder, and choose to gen a few extra years through an extended worldgen. This may however be more work than it's worth, since it'd only get replaced.. But if it's quick enough to add, it would partially solve the problem.
I was playing .17 and i noticed a couple of new items, the mortar and pestle, after killing a night creature. Any idea what it does?
Boogymen and night creatures are very difficult. I love this. It makes you actually want to have followers who are not just meat-shields.As stated in the update post, It's because they are small.
Also, when playing around in the arena, it seems that elves are now represented by "e". (as apposed to "E") Is there a reason for this? Not that I dislike the change.
So has anyone found out what "Burial is now more encouraged in dwarf mode" meant?
What happens?
Are boogeymen and the like always going to be this prominent? It's cool that they're spotlighted now but I can see it getting kind of annoying once the game is more complete.I think thats just your pc being slow and lagging. I've been playing since it released and that hasn't happened once. And I like boogy men and the danger at night, makes things more FUN
Also, I'm kind of annoyed. The newest version likes to move twice for every button press, which leads to a lot of really annoying issues like trying to pick up items or go in small rooms. Also, sometimes I'll stab someone and and when I go to pull it out I'll pull it out and immediately attack again, which disorients me a bit because I can't tell I pulled the sword out.
About 10 seconds ago........
what does that mean?
So has anyone found out what "Burial is now more encouraged in dwarf mode" meant?
What happens?
Sounds like the corpses might come back to life as zombies like they used to.
Also, I'm kind of annoyed. The newest version likes to move twice for every button press, which leads to a lot of really annoying issues like trying to pick up items or go in small rooms. Also, sometimes I'll stab someone and and when I go to pull it out I'll pull it out and immediately attack again, which disorients me a bit because I can't tell I pulled the sword out.
Boogymen and night creatures are very difficult. I love this. It makes you actually want to have followers who are not just meat-shields.As stated in the update post, It's because they are small.
Also, when playing around in the arena, it seems that elves are now represented by "e". (as apposed to "E") Is there a reason for this? Not that I dislike the change.
I think it's more compared to elephants really.Boogymen and night creatures are very difficult. I love this. It makes you actually want to have followers who are not just meat-shields.As stated in the update post, It's because they are small.
Also, when playing around in the arena, it seems that elves are now represented by "e". (as apposed to "E") Is there a reason for this? Not that I dislike the change.
Does that mean small as compared to humans (like Santa's elves), or small compared to dragons, colossi, and the like?
I like how the minotaurs yell taunts in their maze. I've been able to get by pretty easily thanks to a massive army of followers. We just totally gank anything that gets in our way. The aimed shots and new wrestling interface work great as well.
I like how the minotaurs yell taunts in their maze. I've been able to get by pretty easily thanks to a massive army of followers. We just totally gank anything that gets in our way. The aimed shots and new wrestling interface work great as well.
I was less lucky. I just turned around a corner, quickly followed by my 13 companions. Then the minotaur charged me, and before I could do anything, I had both my hands and my lower legs cut off.
I then proceeded to bleed to death in one round, quickly followed by my 13 companions.
Boogymen and night creatures are very difficult. I love this. It makes you actually want to have followers who are not just meat-shields.As stated in the update post, It's because they are small.
Also, when playing around in the arena, it seems that elves are now represented by "e". (as apposed to "E") Is there a reason for this? Not that I dislike the change.
It's a warning that your about to be ambushed if you hang around for a few moments. I think the chances of getting that instead of a normal attack depend on the overall strength of the ambush (Quality*Quantity) and a couple of rarely attributes. So you either somehow powerleveled observer, or you need to get the hell out of there and don't look back.
Yeah, minotaur seems a bit overpowered right now. I survived him thanks to my companions (I caught a good halberd blow to the chest and dragged myself off while they finally forced him to collapse in exhaustion, though not before he amputated a few people.) The dragon was pretty pathetic, but died so slowly that it managed to bite the hands of one of my swordsmen before said swordsman somehow killed it with a bite.
Also, has anyone been fast traveling and gotten the message "You Feel Uneasy", been tossed down to the normal screen and then just been able to leave? Seems weird.
I don't know what you're talking about. I've played weeks without seeing one, sleeping a few times in the forest and travelling by night without meeting any boogiemen.
Man, after a while those goblins practically send armies after you. I'd say over half of my companions have titles and a good dozen or more kills. Everyone is all awe struck whenever I show up and I tote around something like 20 people. Right now I'm down to 10 thanks to 3 heavily armed goblin patrols and a hydra.
Goddammit, the bogeymen are god damned untouchable, the freaking asses.
Seriously, how the heck is their evasion so high?
I got a question regarding the combination of wrestling and aimed attacks in the new release. Does anyone know if it is planned or already implemented that successfully grabbing a body part increases the chance to hit the same part while it is held? So for example I could grap the head of my opponent with my free hand and then have it easier to stab the head or adjacent body parts (throat) with my short sword in the following round.I asked that exact same thing a few pages back. I'd put it in green if you want it answered.
I tried it yesterday, I don't think it does.Not now, but eventually is that the plan?
I got a question regarding the combination of wrestling and aimed attacks in the new release. Does anyone know if it is planned or already implemented that successfully grabbing a body part increases the chance to hit the same part while it is held? So for example I could grap the head of my opponent with my free hand and then have it easier to stab the head or adjacent body parts (throat) with my short sword in the following round.I asked that exact same thing a few pages back. I'd put it in green if you want it answered.
Is it just me or do none of the NPC's have families? I've talked to like 10 people and none of them have any family to speak of. Weird. I've only tried people in castles though.
Is it just me or do none of the NPC's have families? I've talked to like 10 people and none of them have any family to speak of. Weird. I've only tried people in castles though.
I think they just don't have any historical figures in their families. One Lady in my world told me about her son's death.
It seems all settlements apart from human ones are now gone, probably due to the site sprawl not being ready for them. I can't find any fortresses or towers, and no elven settlements at all.Replace the tag DARK_FORTRESS or TREE_CITY or CAVE_DETAILED for the other races with CITY. That will give them human-like structures and site sprawl. (but don't do this for kobolds, you want those bastards to live in their stone-age caves)
The only problem is that you're likely to spawn ON THE MOUNTAIN as a dwarf civ adventurer, which means you'll have to walk to a non-mountain biome to travel AND that there will be no structures because there's no wood types for mountain biomes AND no farms because stone isn't farmable. (so basically, there's nothing if you start on the mountain) Thankfully you can look at the "Q"uest map to determine the shortest escape route from the mountain.
Really? For me, I've been starting in human villages as a dwarf adventurer. And it isn't just a display bug. If I start attacking them, they become enemies of my home civ, and I become enemies of their civ. Normally you'd just become an enemy of your own home civ.
He meant if you modded it as he previously stated.
The only problem is that you're likely to spawn ON THE MOUNTAIN as a dwarf civ adventurer, which means you'll have to walk to a non-mountain biome to travel AND that there will be no structures because there's no wood types for mountain biomes AND no farms because stone isn't farmable. (so basically, there's nothing if you start on the mountain) Thankfully you can look at the "Q"uest map to determine the shortest escape route from the mountain.
Really? For me, I've been starting in human villages as a dwarf adventurer. And it isn't just a display bug. If I start attacking them, they become enemies of my home civ, and I become enemies of their civ. Normally you'd just become an enemy of your own home civ.
Playing as a hammerer, I bashed the hydra in the guts. The Hydra Vomited. Do Hydra's vomit from all of their heads at once, or is it just one head and the other heads continue to do their thing?
Playing as a hammerer, I bashed the hydra in the guts. The Hydra Vomited. Do Hydra's vomit from all of their heads at once, or is it just one head and the other heads continue to do their thing?I'd have thought the easiest way to find out would be to 'l'ook at the Hydra just after the expulsion and see which heads are covered in vomit.
Playing as a hammerer, I bashed the hydra in the guts. The Hydra Vomited. Do Hydra's vomit from all of their heads at once, or is it just one head and the other heads continue to do their thing?I'd have thought the easiest way to find out would be to 'l'ook at the Hydra just after the expulsion and see which heads are covered in vomit.
Glad to see some input on the blog from Threetoe; Toady's posts are entertaining to read, but his prose can be a bit clinical. Plus, it's cool to see some posts by the other half of the dev team.
[EDIT]: In regards to Mayday's post, the defender was victorious because they held their position, and the attacker retreated. Not sure if you're objecting to that, or to the fact that the elves didn't retreat, but I don't see anything necessarily wrong with a Pyrrhic victory like that.
Couldn't you just assume you're hunting and drinking while travelling?
Is it just me, or are goblins having a real problem snatching children in history right now (they do it just fine in fort mode, as some newly-migrated couple with child had to find the hard way before they even entered my fort proper)? Looking through the sites of a few generated worlds, most non-empty dark fortresses - even those "owned" by non-goblin civilisations through conquest - have only goblin inhabitants, with the occasional boss demon here and there. In five worlds, I had one dark fortress with one human in it. That's it. Might be just me being a bit unlucky though ...
Toady, I have a question... I had thought it was an oversight, but it's been going on so long...
In the old dev notes, you mentioned wanting dragon attacks to be righteous, with dragons flying around torching villages from above, picking people up and dropping them from great heights, and generally being really dangerous-- because of their wings. Yet default dragons in DF have been lacking wings for quite a while. Why? I know mythology has plenty of wingless dragons too... but now we have cave dragons, which I'd imagine to be the wingless kind. So why no wings on the regular dragons?
IanFC but toady saidn one of the talks iirc that they lack the flying atm because the Ai and pathing for such an behavior is relativley hard.
Also buildings cant !!Burn!! down yet so i think even the ability would be awesome it would be rather useless.
Is it just me, or do humans really really love building forts? It's only a hundred and fifty years guys, I think you'd be better served by a few more towns and cities.There's definitely some over-the-top fortress spam, I'd say. Two fortresses next to each other may be overkill, and it isn't all that rare.
Is it just me, or do humans really really love building forts? It's only a hundred and fifty years guys, I think you'd be better served by a few more towns and cities.There's definitely some over-the-top fortress spam, I'd say. Two fortresses next to each other may be overkill, and it isn't all that rare.
Playing as a hammerer, I bashed the hydra in the guts. The Hydra Vomited. Do Hydra's vomit from all of their heads at once, or is it just one head and the other heads continue to do their thing?I'd have thought the easiest way to find out would be to 'l'ook at the Hydra just after the expulsion and see which heads are covered in vomit.
You wouldn't cover the case where one head vomits all over other heads. I'm pretty sure DF lacks a decent vomit physics engine.
Playing as a hammerer, I bashed the hydra in the guts. The Hydra Vomited. Do Hydra's vomit from all of their heads at once, or is it just one head and the other heads continue to do their thing?
I shall sig this, if you don't mind. It perfectly reflects what's happening around this forum.
i wouldn't expect that any time soon. it probably wont track individual items, more like count the number of steel swords you inject in the market, or something. then again, masterworks could be a special case, but still, invaders would probably be generated with random equipment, even if they are themselves historical figures.
So lemme get this straight. Once the Caravan Arc is complete, we won't be able to simply dump physically absurd amounts of glass goblets onto the market indefinitely?I think threetoe's saying that the rest of the world will actually have to deal with that.
So lemme get this straight. Once the Caravan Arc is complete, we won't be able to simply dump physically absurd amounts of glass goblets onto the market indefinitely?I think threetoe's saying that the rest of the world will actually have to deal with that.
I hope we get some basic diplomatics too with the caravan and army arc. I would like to have some titan/demon/fb-governed Humans as my backup before i raise taxes for silk that goes through my lands.Regen the world?
Hmmm adding a adventure-tire to the UG-tribes does not work :( .
Just how in-depth will the caravan arc be? For example, if I flood the food market for years straight, will the populations of cities I trade with skyrocket to reflect the increased availability of food? And, if I were to suddenly cut off that access, will there be mass starvation? Also, will this, and, say, poisoning the food exports be viable ways to weaken others before trying to attack, when that comes up?
Just how in-depth will the caravan arc be? For example, if I flood the food market for years straight, will the populations of cities I trade with skyrocket to reflect the increased availability of food? And, if I were to suddenly cut off that access, will there be mass starvation? Also, will this, and, say, poisoning the food exports be viable ways to weaken others before trying to attack, when that comes up?
So lemme get this straight. Once the Caravan Arc is complete, we won't be able to simply dump physically absurd amounts of glass goblets onto the market indefinitely?I think threetoe's saying that the rest of the world will actually have to deal with that.
Maybe it'll be possible. Maybe you'll just flood the market and everyone will use glass goblets and then because everyone uses them everyone will want them and you'll accumulate 90% of the world's wealth, causing an economic collapse and mass starvation until....
The dwarf caravans full of food roll out of your fortress. Then? World domination.
There's been some discussion about studded weapons since the big update earlier this year. Specifically I'm wondering if, for example, a silver mace studded with lead would do more damage than a normal silver mace due to the added weight?
Quote from: piecewiseIs it possible that we'll ever get the ability to spawn the randomly gen'd fun stuff, forgotten beasts and titans in arena mode?Quote from: FootkerchiefI'm pretty sure there's no technical reason it can't be done -- it would just be kinda crappy since the creature list would have fifty types of anonymous forgotten beast, and so on.
Will sneaking adv. mode characters who ambush targets that are oblivious to their presence get aimed shots? In other words, if I sneak up on an enemy goblin, it does not see me, can I get a free aimed shot with a high bonus (maybe not quite the same as if he were helpless), in essence a "back stab"?
Can you add some randomness to armor penetration? Now that you're cleaning up the stuff, it would be nice to slightly randomize the current "material X always beats material Y" system. How hard would that be to add in? Maybe add a certain percentage of randomness to material strength in the hit calculation?
Quote from: MephansterasIn the dev log story you got attacked by goblins who were part of their civ and not just bandits. Were you at war with them? If you'd been a goblin of that civ, would you have encountered them? I'm just curious how it handles actual civ patrols with regards to your adventurer and your reputation.Quote from: DFCan your heroic reputation affect how hostile civilizations treat you?
Cheesemakers around the world want to know: will the companion display include a way to dismiss companions?
Will the numerous rock types eventually each have some sort of use, or do you plan on keeping them as they are now, with most of them being fairly identical.
Quote from: CthulhuAre boogeymen and the like always going to be this prominent? It's cool that they're spotlighted now but I can see it getting kind of annoying once the game is more complete.Quote from: thvazThe release of 31.17 was a sucess amongst the playerbase, with few bugs and complains about the new mechanics. One of the complains is about the onipresence of bogeymen when alone at night. There will be some fine tuning about them in the future?
Does that mean [elves are] small as compared to humans (like Santa's elves), or small compared to dragons, colossi, and the like?
is the combat screen showing the attack modifier before the actual skill roll, or is it showing the actual shoot difficulty/damage?
Toady, can you please elaborate on the following?
HABIT:<habit token>:<percentage> - Obviously there are GRIND_BONE_MEAL, EAT_BONE_PORRIDGE, and USE_ANY_MELEE_WEAPON, and I assume the percentage is the likelihood of this being the case. Are there any other habit tokens I haven't listed?
HABIT_NUM:<TEST_ALL or a number> - At a guess I'd say TEST_ALL allows for all habits listed to have a chance at being added, while a number would limit it to a specific number of them being applied to a given creature.
NIGHT_CREATURE_BOGEYMAN & NIGHT_CREATURE_HUNTER - what are the effects of these, please?
Regarding castles, what tags or responsibilities would cause a historical figure to become the lord of a castle if we don't want to use VARIABLE_POSITIONS (whether ALL or CUSTOM_CASTLE_HOLDER)? It seems military responsibilities may be a good bet, as the law givers appear there as well, but that's just a quick assumption.
Playing as a hammerer, I bashed the hydra in the guts. The Hydra Vomited. Do Hydra's vomit from all of their heads at once, or is it just one head and the other heads continue to do their thing?
Will there be a way to give items to our companions? And perhaps an easier way to equip weapons? (Just had to wiki it.)
Have Lashers been fixed in this release? I seem to remember people talking about Lashers demolishing things, but the Lashers I pick up just chip the bone...over...and over...and over again.
Toady, bit of a tangent here but do you have any plans to look at worldgen battles again any time soon? Seems to me there's a weird skew towards the defender winning.
For example, utilising my modded in avari race, the following battle occurred:
A: 1243 Avari, 7 losses
D: 714 Elves, 228 Grizzly Bears, 879 losses.
Defender was victorious.
The battle didn't take place in a defended structure, so I'm not certain why they'd be judged as victors.
...
Are you suggesting that a mixture of 63 bears and elves would deter an army of over 1200 enemies who have already all but won? Or that the Elves constructed an unassailable wall from the corpses of their compatriots? Possibly the Avari merely grew bored with killing bears and Elves and went home?
As I already noted, the Elves didn't have any defenses present, it was mainly a battle in an open field. I can see the Elves fleeing, hiding away amongst the bodies, or being completely wiped out, but I think 'victory' is a bit of a stretch there.
Eggs we get eggs! Heck eggs! How are you planning to do them? I mean just outline how they work internally?
Will there be quests to retrieve at least one body part of a member of a community who was abducted and killed by a night creature to allow a proper burial?
I noticed something with the targeting system. There seem to be these things like 'opportunity shots' that are marked with a blue '!'. How are these decided over turns? Is it random, or do you send a certain algorithm depending on the situation?
Also, the bogeymen's dodging skill is a bit absurd. Are you considering to lower it a little bit in the next few releases?
In other news, are stables planned to be implemented in the next release? Going in adventure mode and saving up enough to buy/rent a horse would be pretty cool.
Quote from: iceball3When are you planning to turn hunger and thirst back on?Quote from: tfaalCouldn't you just assume you're hunting and drinking while travelling?Quote from: thvazWell, let's assume we are travelling then while we are instantly teleported across the map.
Seriously, follow this line of thought and we will end with a ASCII Oblivion.
With ThreeToe's mention of pigs and chickens in the devlog and the November report... does that mean that the domestic animals, and any other tamed animals for that matter, will actually appear in adventure mode hamlets/towns again?
Toady, I've noticed you have used the term "we" a lot more lately when referring to the development of the game, and ThreeToe now appears to be posting on the dev log page. Given the page has also received an overhaul to show which one of you is posting the update, does this mean that ThreeToe will have a larger (or, better said, a more public) role in the development of DF?
Or did something change in this release that reduced interactions like babysnatching in history?
In the old dev notes, you mentioned wanting dragon attacks to be righteous, with dragons flying around torching villages from above, picking people up and dropping them from great heights, and generally being really dangerous-- because of their wings. Yet default dragons in DF have been lacking wings for quite a while. Why? I know mythology has plenty of wingless dragons too... but now we have cave dragons, which I'd imagine to be the wingless kind. So why no wings on the regular dragons?
...
Yet we still have giant eagles with wings... not perfect, nor with all the grand AI to use it, but still there...
Toady, how close are the entities to respecting borders, and war between civilizations of the same entity definition? Human on human wars would be a nice touch here.
Is there a possibility that sooner rather then later, the fortress embark local map would be improved to show underground features and have the display alternate between displaying different features that are on the same map tile?
With the trade upgrades, will items you trade away ever return? For example, could you sell a masterwork steel sword to a human caravan, have that civ get angry with you, and have a soldier using that sword attack you?
Just how in-depth will the caravan arc be? For example, if I flood the food market for years straight, will the populations of cities I trade with skyrocket to reflect the increased availability of food? And, if I were to suddenly cut off that access, will there be mass starvation? Also, will this, and, say, poisoning the food exports be viable ways to weaken others before trying to attack, when that comes up?
We were planning to allow you to rescue the captives that are still alive after world gen, but it didn't happen. I wonder if people would want the prepare chopped liver of their relative, if you can somehow recognize it. It seems like getting the body back from a predator/cook creature might be beyond what somebody would ask for, but I dunno.
QuoteWe were planning to allow you to rescue the captives that are still alive after world gen, but it didn't happen. I wonder if people would want the prepare chopped liver of their relative, if you can somehow recognize it. It seems like getting the body back from a predator/cook creature might be beyond what somebody would ask for, but I dunno.
Well, at some point I assume that this should be covered by entity level ethics regarding somehow to their religious views of death and the importance of the body in their death rituals.
I do know that in Uganda during the reign of Idi Amin, government thugs would abduct and murder people, dump their body in a forest, and since Ugandans placed a great importance in retrieval of the dead, they'd pay government guides to "help" them "discover" the body of a loved one; it was actually one of Amin's major sources of funds for his regime. More locally, it's a well known custom in several US military branches to never leave a body of a comrade behind, even if it risks more people dying to retrieve it.
So I'd say someone sending a adventurer to recover a body would be something that even a common peasant might pay through the nose for, depending on their values.
HUNTER will place them as a world gen beast. You probably also need SPOUSE_CONVERTER on a caste for it to use it, and you'd want CONVERTED_SPOUSE on a caste as well. Somebody mentioned this not working or causing world gen crashes, but I haven't reproduced it yet.Yeah, I've mentioned that, but at least my crashes I've traced to a caste-heavy civ race, with the other testing apparently being random chance. Removing any two of the castes did resolve the crashes, though (it wasn't a problem with a specific caste as far as I can see), so maybe it was the bug mentioned on the dev page?
RULES_FROM_LOCATION should do it for any position, though they probably build extra castles even if you don't have positions for them.Actually, it seems that lords and ladies are elevated even without the random position tag.
It was kind of annoying to see the state of the Threetoe article on the wiki, so we thought we'd try to reflect the work he's been doing a bit more evenly on the log.*checks the wiki* Ugh, that horrible fan fiction accusation again? I've seen it in a comment on an interview before, but that it made it to the wiki? It's just silly. "Yeah, I like the gameplay of the recent Zelda games, and the fan fiction they put into the games is nice as well."
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Hhnng I keep refreshing the devlog page every 15 minutes hoping for a .18 release
Probably the trap bug fix.
A Zombie Goast: But really
A Zombie Goast: If the Dwarf grows attached to a weapon
A Zombie Goast: Or piece of armor
A Zombie Goast: And the Dwarf dies
A Zombie Goast: That thing should become haunted
A Zombie Goast: Or whatever they call it when an object has a ghost
Warning - while you were reading 21 new replies have been posted. You may wish to review your post.Wow.
The wiki doesn't really focus on design process too much. Really, if wiki article quality is assumed to accurately reflect the community's perception of a team member's importance, then Scamps is arguably the most important one out of everyone.Quote from: SirPenguinToady, I've noticed you have used the term "we" a lot more lately when referring to the development of the game, and ThreeToe now appears to be posting on the dev log page. Given the page has also received an overhaul to show which one of you is posting the update, does this mean that ThreeToe will have a larger (or, better said, a more public) role in the development of DF?
It was kind of annoying to see the state of the Threetoe article on the wiki, so we thought we'd try to reflect the work he's been doing a bit more evenly on the log.
I've been confused about 'worn' equipment in Adventure mode. Last time, I was running around with a Bronze Shield, Bronze Spear, Bronze Brestplate, and no less than 7 loincloths. And I had 8 more in my inv, along with a +Steel Breastplate+ that the game didn't seem to want me to wear. Is there some kind of... slot affinity chart, as pr Diablo/WoW/etc planned?You can wear as many loincloths as you want, up to some crazy level. This is true in real life, too.
Thanks for answering my questions Toady! I was going to sneak another one in, but I'll just ask it here:
Do you ever see allowing Dual-Wielding of weapons, and being able to effectively use them at the same time (as to just choosing to slash/stab/bash with Sword 1 or slash/stab/bash with Sword 2.) The bigger the creature the larger the items it could dual-wield, you could strike with both at once, etc.
Thanks for answering my questions Toady! I was going to sneak another one in, but I'll just ask it here:
Do you ever see allowing Dual-Wielding of weapons, and being able to effectively use them at the same time (as to just choosing to slash/stab/bash with Sword 1 or slash/stab/bash with Sword 2.) The bigger the creature the larger the items it could dual-wield, you could strike with both at once, etc.
i believe this is currently possible in adventure mode. When doing aimed attacks, you can select which weapon to attack with, and in certain situations one may be preferable to the other and the interface will let you know this. Dont know about striking with both at once, or bigger creatures and bigger weapons. Currently i think there are no bigger weapons. A dwarf (its bugged) wield a greatsword with one hand in the same way a human or a night creature could.
Quote from: JoRoSeeing as the example screenshots showed kicking as an attack of opportunity, does this mean that you could wield multiple weapons and make occasional attacks with your off hand?
Yeah, you can use whichever weapon you like whenever you like, and opportunities come up with either one. If you just press toward the enemy, the wielded weapon will be preferred, but it'll use your offhand item if a good opportunity comes up.
laying of objectsSweeeet. Can't wait to start making my explosive flaming eggs and minelayer monsters.
---------------------------
Dwarf Fortress.exe - Entry Point Not Found
---------------------------
The procedure entry point DecodePointer could not be located in the dynamic link library KERNEL32.dll.
---------------------------
OK
---------------------------
I don't think there's a way to strike with both at once. I did, however, sneak into a moon man mate's cave, picked up his ladle and carving fork, and alternated using them to tear him to pieces. On a related note,Thanks for answering my questions Toady! I was going to sneak another one in, but I'll just ask it here:
Do you ever see allowing Dual-Wielding of weapons, and being able to effectively use them at the same time (as to just choosing to slash/stab/bash with Sword 1 or slash/stab/bash with Sword 2.) The bigger the creature the larger the items it could dual-wield, you could strike with both at once, etc.
i believe this is currently possible in adventure mode. When doing aimed attacks, you can select which weapon to attack with, and in certain situations one may be preferable to the other and the interface will let you know this. Dont know about striking with both at once, or bigger creatures and bigger weapons.
Is three any chance of restoring compatibility with older Windows versions?
As another user mentioned (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=66142.msg1710380#msg1710380) (albeit in the wrong thread), the game now fails to launch on XP-SP1 with the following message:
edit: Guys bugs into the Bugtracker please. Toady has installed it exactly for that purpose.
When will there be a raws tag for bodyparts that should be able to be levered or popped out, e.g. eyeballs?
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Yeah, thats what I had in mind. It would also be a nice change from the "kill this - kill that" quests. Players could be send to caves of very powerful creatures, which would be much too difficult to kill yet. They just have to sneak in, get the skull and run like hell if they are discovered. Maybe leave a peasant behind as a distraction. Next quest: retrieve peasant parts.
I am loving the new addition's to adventure mode but..
are you planning on adding aimed shots for ranged weapon's anytime soon/at all?
the lack of aiming make's it hard to actually get a good shot at something with my peasant hunter, I keep shooting my prey in the foot and it gets kind of annoying after a while.
Quote from: HephDo these aimed attacks work for Ranged weapons too? Will spitting cobras aim for your eyes?
Is Armor taken into account thus will the Ai attack an un-armored part of someones body if the rest is to hard to get through?
You can't currently aim ranged attacks, though it might get in before the release. In that case the skills used will have to change again, of course, though it might be that there aren't skill influences the same way there, since opportunities and changing chances are supposed to come in part from the positioning from the ongoing fight, which can't be influenced in the same way by a distant shooter.
vomiting only occurs once before the creature starts retching instead
Quotevomiting only occurs once before the creature starts retching instead
It seem strange that every creature is now going to vomit out everything all at once. In my experience, it takes at least two or three cycles to empty out the stomach and start having dry heaves. To better emulate vomiting from a finite stomach, how about if vomiting increased the creature's hunger meter; the creature will retch instead of vomiting if the hunger meter is above some value.
Quotevomiting only occurs once before the creature starts retching instead
It seem strange that every creature is now going to vomit out everything all at once. In my experience, it takes at least two or three cycles to empty out the stomach and start having dry heaves. To better emulate vomiting from a finite stomach, how about if vomiting increased the creature's hunger meter; the creature will retch instead of vomiting if the hunger meter is above some value.
Another question for the Toady One.
When livestock are incorporated, will we be able to train war and hunting animal's. also will there only be farm animals or will we be able to purchase dog's and cat's?
Oh yes, guts popping out. They are still attached, and trail behind the creature, right? Should that be the case for eyeballs? I'd imagine that an action violent enough to extract an eyeball would generally be enough to automatically sever the optic nerve as well.When will there be a raws tag for bodyparts that should be able to be levered or popped out, e.g. eyeballs?
There's already a tag for body parts that can be popped out, UNDER_PRESSURE (http://df.magmawiki.com/index.php/DF2010:Body_token). It probably wouldn't be suitable for eyes, though. There's an extant bug report about not being able to gouge out eyes. (http://www.bay12games.com/dwarves/mantisbt/view.php?id=1292)
I think he meant in adventure mode anyway.Another question for the Toady One.
When livestock are incorporated, will we be able to train war and hunting animal's. also will there only be farm animals or will we be able to purchase dog's and cat's?
I don't see why he would remove features we already have, especially since most of the changes besides the new animals will only be in adventure mode towns.
It's not necessarily a bug though, is it? Toady could have decided not to support old OSs anymore. I hope that isn't the case, but it's possible so I thought it made sense to ask.Is three any chance of restoring compatibility with older Windows versions?
As another user mentioned (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=66142.msg1710380#msg1710380) (albeit in the wrong thread), the game now fails to launch on XP-SP1 with the following message:edit: Guys bugs into the Bugtracker please. Toady has installed it exactly for that purpose.
Yeah, this one was already reported. (http://www.bay12games.com/dwarves/mantisbt/view.php?id=3601)
It's not necessarily a bug though, is it? Toady could have decided not to support old OSs anymore. I hope that isn't the case, but it's possible so I thought it made sense to ask.Is three any chance of restoring compatibility with older Windows versions?
As another user mentioned (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=66142.msg1710380#msg1710380) (albeit in the wrong thread), the game now fails to launch on XP-SP1 with the following message:edit: Guys bugs into the Bugtracker please. Toady has installed it exactly for that purpose.
Yeah, this one was already reported. (http://www.bay12games.com/dwarves/mantisbt/view.php?id=3601)
Oh yes, guts popping out. They are still attached, and trail behind the creature, right? Should that be the case for eyeballs? I'd imagine that an action violent enough to extract an eyeball would generally be enough to automatically sever the optic nerve as well.
But XP is superior to 7 in many ways...and I won't get able to acquire an upgrade for my OS for quite a while...So at least keep your copy of XP remotely up to date. If you're still on SP1 or older, you should know that SP3 has been released quite some time ago and it is of course a free update. If you also consider the many security fixes included in SP2 and SP3...
Quote from: ChatlogA Zombie Goast: But really
A Zombie Goast: If the Dwarf grows attached to a weapon
A Zombie Goast: Or piece of armor
A Zombie Goast: And the Dwarf dies
A Zombie Goast: That thing should become haunted
A Zombie Goast: Or whatever they call it when an object has a ghost
I think he meant in adventure mode anyway.Another question for the Toady One.
When livestock are incorporated, will we be able to train war and hunting animal's. also will there only be farm animals or will we be able to purchase dog's and cat's?
I don't see why he would remove features we already have, especially since most of the changes besides the new animals will only be in adventure mode towns.
But XP is superior to 7 in many ways..
But XP is superior to 7 in many ways..
nope
I have Ubuntu. Ha!Debian Sid. Bow before my superiority, peasant!
Hmm let me see
Toady eventually will the NPCs start to notice that anyone who rides with you essentially meets and untimely end and thus refuse your recruitment on the basis that you are probably more deadly then all the Megabeasts, Demons, and Goblins combined and actually tell you that is the reason? At that point how would you recover your reputation if possible?
I was wondering, and forgive me for reduplicating a question if that is the case here...
When the economic/caravan arc is in place, will you consider again the possibility of a non-catastrophic game ending for a fortress? IE, would be be able to quit a fortress game without abandoning the fortress, so that our adventurers can enjoy some of the things we have released on the market, and perhaps go to the fortress and buy them?
I was wondering, and forgive me for reduplicating a question if that is the case here...
When the economic/caravan arc is in place, will you consider again the possibility of a non-catastrophic game ending for a fortress? IE, would be be able to quit a fortress game without abandoning the fortress, so that our adventurers can enjoy some of the things we have released on the market, and perhaps go to the fortress and buy them?
I know there's a lot of problems with visiting a "real" fortress with an adventurer [...]
I'd rather handle this properly when I get to it instead of spending time on a half measure that won't necessarily be related to the completed feature. The adventure mode dwarf fortresses aren't completed and retired player fortresses should work with the same mechanics as these, so I have to do adv mode dwarf fortresses first. Since I'm going to do those using the mechanics in place from dwarf mode, it might be easier to see the path forward to reversing these procedures when that's done.
Next will be the consumption of the resources, meaning lots of starving peasants. Eventually you'll be able to save the day with your caravan of needed prickle berries.
You've never had a fort on the brink of starvation, with absolutely no food in store, only to be saved by a passing caravan?
It is time to repay the favour.
Anybody have details on what the Caravan Arc is? Also, if there is any place or post which shows all the arcs that are planned? It'd be cool just to check it out
Adventurer Role: Trader
* Site resources
o Track resources in quantity instead of just by type
o Should depend on trade/tribute relationships as well as available professions and sprawl sites
* World economy
o Supply/demand based on current available entity resources etc.
o Expand on trade/tribute relationships formed in world generation
o Realize trade/tribute relationships with actual caravans moving on the map
o Ability to get some supply/demand information about nearby locations from travelers and others
o Ability to get that information yourself and trade it to merchants, especially as explorer
o Replace dwarf mode generated caravans with actual caravans
o Improved dwarf mode trade agreements
* Ability to lead a trade caravan
o Ability to load stuff onto pack mules
o Ability to hire bodyguards
o Wagon/wagon teams (might do some teleportation travel with them to avoid annoyances for now)
o Being able to trade from wagons, large markets might have people to move objects more quickly
* Mansions for sale
o Might have to get information about struggling nobles
* Court
o Attaining a certain level of wealth and property should help with access to powerful people, though we have yet to decide what if anything this will grant you in the short term
# CARAVAN ARC: As a prelude to armies, we'll have caravans actually move around the world map rather than just appear at your outpost. They'll move between each city on the map, though we'll try to stay away from supporting a real economy for the time being. You should be able to find items you traded in your fortress in adventure mode, and a caravan could come to your fortress with an adventure mode item. Related to Core3, Core38, Core81, Req21, Req132, Req133, Req175, Req204, Req218, Req220, Req260, Req279, Req364, Req463, Req516, Req555, Bloat155, Bloat263, Bloat267, PowerGoal24, PowerGoal33, PowerGoal56 and PowerGoal148.
# Core3, CARAVANS, (Future): Use resource tracking and the adventurer travel infrastructure to set up groups of traders that go between sites. Make sure to respect the current flow of the dwarf game, though caravans will no longer be 'generated' when needed. Related to entity knowledge transfer if we are there by this time. The trading done by caravans would interface with the resource tracking system and thus be immediately available to adventurers. This includes items traded away by your dwarf fortress, although it's possible they could be abstracted a bit if they are too numerous. Requires Core38.
# Core38, SITE RESOURCES, (Future): The objects at a site need to be tracked in an abstract form so that the world can use them without loading up the site files. The different profession holders working at a town in world-gen and then during play should be able to produce and use resources based on these stockpiles and local map propertioes. Any changes could be applied to existing site files retroactively when they are loaded. Stores should restock their inventories. The objects need to be separated based on the entity that owns them, since several entities can potentially operate at one site.
# Core81, TRIBUTE, (Future): The tribute relationships established during world generation should be fleshed out there and then brought into regular play with tribute being transported across the map. These could also occur as part of dwarf mode diplomacy and dwarf mode world map play.
He got a job working for google recently and that has had him tied up a bitWell that makes sense, then. Good for him!
Speaking of the old devs, did Toady ever elaborate on the "And more, and worse" stuff? Regardless of how bad it was, it can't be any worse than the random poetry generator he threatened us with.
Speaking of the old devs, did Toady ever elaborate on the "And more, and worse" stuff? Regardless of how bad it was, it can't be any worse than the random poetry generator he threatened us with.
that would be perfect for the philosopher return
10 Barnards Star -> sell luxury goods -> Buy Robots -> travel to Sol -> check bulletin board - > sell robots -> buy luxury goods -> travel to Barnards Star
20 GOTO 10
10 Barnards Star -> sell luxury goods -> Buy Robots -> travel to Sol -> check bulletin board - > sell robots -> buy luxury goods -> travel to Barnards StarIf I'm reading the dev notes correctly, it may get more complex:
20 GOTO 10
Are we to expect such depth of gameplay early in the Caravan Arc? I reckon I spent weeks all in carrying out the above, just to get myself a bigger and badder ship.
Regarding tools, they are currently not native to Dwarf mode, probably only appearing there with custom reactions. Do you think that the pick and similar things (shovels, felling axes, two-man saws...) will move over to the tool format with a tag to make them applicable for dwarf mode to allow some tool use there without it becoming overwhelming?
Did i get that right (since the question came up on the forum) That creature lairs behave as "Player created side" and stuff in there does in fact not scatter around?
Will trading a material to a civ give them limited access to that material in the same manner that it currently does for the player? For example, Vanilla Elves don't use metal. If I traded away large amounts of coke and steel bars to the elves, would they later show up with low quality steel equipment made from those bars? Similarly, will resource deposits become more important in worldgen, for example humans fighting elves to gain a tin deposit (once tin is properly rare again)?
Quote from: OrkelWill this be possible in future versions?
Quote from: Chatlog
A Zombie Goast: But really
A Zombie Goast: If the Dwarf grows attached to a weapon
A Zombie Goast: Or piece of armor
A Zombie Goast: And the Dwarf dies
A Zombie Goast: That thing should become haunted
A Zombie Goast: Or whatever they call it when an object has a ghostQuote from: James.DenholmGiven that bodies and souls are now separate, I'd say that this kind of thing is an eventual goal.
Any plans for adventurers being able to contract specific armour/weapons with specific improvements in the next development arc?
Is there a Month of Bugfixes planned?
Is three any chance of restoring compatibility with older Windows versions?
When will there be a raws tag for bodyparts that should be able to be levered or popped out, e.g. eyeballs?
What are your plans for integrating retired adventurers into Fortress mode, e.g. by having them lead founding parties?
Will Companion Acquiring be streamlined anytime soon? With the new version, it seems much easier to haul around 20 companions but it's kind of a nuisance to go door to door looking for soldiers and having to repeat the same conversation 20 times whenever you need to stock up again
also, are the delay's between shot's supposed to simulate reloading, and if so will there be a option to not reload automatically afer each shot, like a combat preference?
To better emulate vomiting from a finite stomach, how about if vomiting increased the creature's hunger meter; the creature will retch instead of vomiting if the hunger meter is above some value.
When livestock are incorporated, will we be able to train war and hunting animal's. also will there only be farm animals or will we be able to purchase dog's and cat's?
Toady, do you have plans to give more information in the sites and populations export?
things like location?
Will attributes like social awareness, empathy or linguistic sense have any influence on how successful meat shield hiring attemps or quest requests are? Will we see social skills for adventure mode soon?
Toady eventually will the NPCs start to notice that anyone who rides with you essentially meets and untimely end and thus refuse your recruitment on the basis that you are probably more deadly then all the Megabeasts, Demons, and Goblins combined and actually tell you that is the reason? At that point how would you recover your reputation if possible?
Will it ever be possible for nobles to give your adventurer quests that involve raiding/sieging goblins/warring entities? Would that ever affect the world (ie they appear in Legends as sieges, winning results in the target location to be owned by your parent civilization, etc)? If so, how long do you think this would take to implement.
So whats the deal with the military tactics skill...you have plans for that? is it already a working skill that affects things or just something thats there for late?
So now that the Dev Log is a more general thing and not a single-contributor thingy, might others (Baughn, for example) also end up with the ability to post there?
10 Barnards Star -> sell luxury goods -> Buy Robots -> travel to Sol -> check bulletin board - > sell robots -> buy luxury goods -> travel to Barnards Star
20 GOTO 10
Are we to expect such depth of gameplay early in the Caravan Arc?
Yeah, I can't wait to send a 100-man-strong caravan to an elf civilization on the brink of starvation, pull up in the depot, and say "Behold! CLOTH!"
if caravans are going to show up in fortress mode, and then the armies, and then the !!wars!!, can we expect some enhancement in the number of dwarves a fortress could maintain before fps death?Toady's said in the past that when your fortress becomes a barony, it should start to have some control over dwarves outside your fortress, like drafting them for an invasion force or having them pay you taxes.
a couple of 15 dwarves caravan active, a 75 dwarves army for defence, a 100 dwarves for attacking and you'll need a lot of other dwarves to produce weapons, food, booze and generally maintain all of that stuff.
To expand on that point, the lands surrounding your embark point will build dwarf settlements. So your fortress will end up surrounded by villages and outposts that you cannot directly interact with, but you can order them to send some dwarves for some project beyond the borders of your embark site. After you return from that trade/invasion/whatever, they'll go back to their homes so you cannot bring them back with you to your fortress directly. Think of the many civilians and soldiers in adventure mode now who have no name until you speak with them - you'd have these 'faceless mooks' to fill in the roles you require. Afterall in a battle, do you realllllly care what kind of personality Urist McGoon#213 has and whether Urist McGoon#148 slept in a good bed recently?if caravans are going to show up in fortress mode, and then the armies, and then the !!wars!!, can we expect some enhancement in the number of dwarves a fortress could maintain before fps death?Toady's said in the past that when your fortress becomes a barony, it should start to have some control over dwarves outside your fortress, like drafting them for an invasion force or having them pay you taxes.
a couple of 15 dwarves caravan active, a 75 dwarves army for defence, a 100 dwarves for attacking and you'll need a lot of other dwarves to produce weapons, food, booze and generally maintain all of that stuff.
To expand on that point, the lands surrounding your embark point will build dwarf settlements. So your fortress will end up surrounded by villages and outposts that you cannot directly interact with, but you can order them to send some dwarves for some project beyond the borders of your embark site. After you return from that trade/invasion/whatever, they'll go back to their homes so you cannot bring them back with you to your fortress directly. Think of the many civilians and soldiers in adventure mode now who have no name until you speak with them - you'd have these 'faceless mooks' to fill in the roles you require. Afterall in a battle, do you realllllly care what kind of personality Urist McGoon#213 has and whether Urist McGoon#148 slept in a good bed recently?if caravans are going to show up in fortress mode, and then the armies, and then the !!wars!!, can we expect some enhancement in the number of dwarves a fortress could maintain before fps death?Toady's said in the past that when your fortress becomes a barony, it should start to have some control over dwarves outside your fortress, like drafting them for an invasion force or having them pay you taxes.
a couple of 15 dwarves caravan active, a 75 dwarves army for defence, a 100 dwarves for attacking and you'll need a lot of other dwarves to produce weapons, food, booze and generally maintain all of that stuff.
I guess this implies you'd be fighting goblins out on the field while they're travelling to you and only if you fail to win do they siege you (with the opportunity to use weapon traps and all on them). If they're sieging you, they've already done damage to your surrounding settlements.
Yeah, it's quite possible the picks will move over to the tool format, though I'm also considering the item format in general. It should respect more dual-use stuff, and the strict item types of weapon and tool and a few others might re-disappear over time with a more versatile format (for instance, expanding the "use" idea to break weapons into several groups that would interface nicely with formations etc., and then give some weapons tool style uses as well).That's definitely something I'd love to see, along with other raw types getting similar treatmeant (materials especially).
I'd rather have both the quick export that gives an overview of the world and the slow but detailed xml export. Sometimes you just want to know whether your modded creatures actually roam the world or how successful your entities are.Quote from: JapaToady, do you have plans to give more information in the sites and populations export?
things like location?
Those files are in limbo now that the (partial) XML dump exists. I don't know if they should be continued at all or what. The restriction is that they need to have the most important information in a more human-friendly format, where the XML is giant and can be used by utilities.
That's definitely something I'd love to see, along with other raw types getting similar treatmeant (materials especially).
if caravans are going to show up in fortress mode, and then the armies, and then the !!wars!!, can we expect some enhancement in the number of dwarves a fortress could maintain before fps death?
a couple of 15 dwarves caravan active, a 75 dwarves army for defence, a 100 dwarves for attacking and you'll need a lot of other dwarves to produce weapons, food, booze and generally maintain all of that stuff.
Yeah, I can't wait to send a 100-man-strong caravan to an elf civilization on the brink of starvation, pull up in the depot, and say "Behold! CLOTH!"
Well, not quite - several material tokens are restricted to certain types of material, such as MILL, DRINK and the like being restricted to plant materials, similar to how several "item" tokens are restricted to weapons, armor, and so on. The latter might see a revision according to Toady's post to allow for more dual purpose items, something I'd like to see in other raw files as well if at all possible.That's definitely something I'd love to see, along with other raw types getting similar treatmeant (materials especially).
What do you mean about materials? Less strict material types, e.g. more robust alloying or something?
Well yes, you'd have to solve the logistics problem of "how do I equip all my soldiers" as well as "how do I get all the food they'll need to eat while travelling and fighting". But it's very easy to produce a ridiculous overabundance of items in fortress mode anyway. Maybe if we have some kind of "the Abstractor Chest" thing where you put items in and they get abstracted into generic items - these abstracted items then no longer eat away at your FPS/memory and only items put in here are then available to your army when you go waging war out there. Like, here's my vision of it (which means it's speculation and I've no idea what Toady's actual vision is):To expand on that point, the lands surrounding your embark point will build dwarf settlements. So your fortress will end up surrounded by villages and outposts that you cannot directly interact with, but you can order them to send some dwarves for some project beyond the borders of your embark site. After you return from that trade/invasion/whatever, they'll go back to their homes so you cannot bring them back with you to your fortress directly. Think of the many civilians and soldiers in adventure mode now who have no name until you speak with them - you'd have these 'faceless mooks' to fill in the roles you require. Afterall in a battle, do you realllllly care what kind of personality Urist McGoon#213 has and whether Urist McGoon#148 slept in a good bed recently?if caravans are going to show up in fortress mode, and then the armies, and then the !!wars!!, can we expect some enhancement in the number of dwarves a fortress could maintain before fps death?Toady's said in the past that when your fortress becomes a barony, it should start to have some control over dwarves outside your fortress, like drafting them for an invasion force or having them pay you taxes.
a couple of 15 dwarves caravan active, a 75 dwarves army for defence, a 100 dwarves for attacking and you'll need a lot of other dwarves to produce weapons, food, booze and generally maintain all of that stuff.
I guess this implies you'd be fighting goblins out on the field while they're travelling to you and only if you fail to win do they siege you (with the opportunity to use weapon traps and all on them). If they're sieging you, they've already done damage to your surrounding settlements.
you still need to churn out equipment for them, but that may work.
however, what would happen then when the siege comes? even if the defender are abstracted away, if the goblin attackers win and come to your fortress they will make an huge impact on frame rate.
Will we be able to get roads made on the world map, in both dwarf and adventure mode?
Quote from: DanteAre dwarf civ fortresses going to connect up to both underground roads and overground roads? Will they access the cave systems, maybe with guards posted, or even farm in them?
I'm hoping I can handle that when it comes up, yeah. There used to be crappy tunnel connections and there are still crappy roads, and those will be revisited at some point.
Quote from: Lord ShonusWill trading a material to a civ give them limited access to that material in the same manner that it currently does for the player? For example, Vanilla Elves don't use metal. If I traded away large amounts of coke and steel bars to the elves, would they later show up with low quality steel equipment made from those bars? Similarly, will resource deposits become more important in worldgen, for example humans fighting elves to gain a tin deposit (once tin is properly rare again)?
What they do with traded materials or whether they trade for them in the first place in world gen will likely depending on the professions given to them in their entity defs. Resource deposits and redistribution to localized areas are going to be key, and struggles over resources are one of the main reasons the caravan stuff is going in before the next push on army stuff. So it's quite possible that elves simply won't trade for steel, unless they can think ahead far enough to trade it to the humans or other dwarves, which may or may not be in the cards depending on how well things go -- once they see that they should accept steel in some circumstances, the rest would happen naturally, but the bump to get over is their valuation of steel during the initial trade, since it'll have to account for transport cost/storage/likelihood/value of the future trade. That's probably easier during dwarf mode rather than world gen, just because there is more time to crunch fewer numbers. Since humans don't have a restriction on making things from steel if they've got the bars at this point, that is more straightforward -- if you trade steel bars to humans, as things are currently planned, they will return with steel weapons in the event of an attack (provided the armies draw equipment from stockpiles next time, which I addressed around the last post I think).
I love this community. :) Right on commanders!10 Barnards Star -> sell luxury goods -> Buy Robots -> travel to Sol -> check bulletin board - > sell robots -> buy luxury goods -> travel to Barnards Star
20 GOTO 10
You got more money shipping between Gateway and Soholia.
Will we be able to get roads made on the world map, in both dwarf and adventure mode?
Toady touched on roads and tunnels recently:Quote from: DanteAre dwarf civ fortresses going to connect up to both underground roads and overground roads? Will they access the cave systems, maybe with guards posted, or even farm in them?
I'm hoping I can handle that when it comes up, yeah. There used to be crappy tunnel connections and there are still crappy roads, and those will be revisited at some point.
Also, I know it is a crazy question, but when you calculate distance for things like caravan travel, will you use spherical-world distance, or straight line distance? Will dragons prefer raiding along great-circle routes?
Assuming that a tile is 2.5 feet on edge
Assuming that a tile is 2.5 feet on edge, then a large world is approxamately 100 miles in each direction. At that scale, map projection issues are not significant.
Road network pathing will be interesting to see.
On the subject of maps and exploration, When we get to explore a region revealing the map as we go, will there ever be a chance of mapping error leading to strange maps? Like the original maps of north america had the shape of the continent far too wide at the top because it hadn't been circumnavigated or surveyed straight across. Small errors propagate.
On the subject of maps and exploration, When we get to explore a region revealing the map as we go, will there ever be a chance of mapping error leading to strange maps? Like the original maps of north america had the shape of the continent far too wide at the top because it hadn't been circumnavigated or surveyed straight across. Small errors propagate.
I'm afraid this would be simply too confusing. The original mappers of North America still had the real landscape in front of their eyes and could refer to it, perhaps even notice the map doesn't fit. The player, on the other hand, has no such point of reference. The map is their eyes.
...Just wanted to say I really like your ideas and hope the game ends up looking something like that, but is this kind of abstraction necessary? I thought one of the goals of the caravan arc was to track individual items after they exit your fortress. (Or is that still the case? I haven't been paying attention as much in recent months. Footkerchief?)
Your equipment is complete, you shove all your military items into the Abstractor Logistics Chest where they get remembered as "300 Exceptional Steel Axes", "300 Superior Steel Chainmails", "300 Finely-crafted Bronze High Boots" and so on. Again, decorations are forgotten or maybe they'll be kept in some abstracted way like 'they are all decorated with goblin bone' and the game will decide whether that means spikes, hanging rings or an image when the player asks to look closely at the item again.
...
Since the various civs use different coins, how will the exchange rate work? Won't mining out a gold vein and turning it to coin completely ruin world trade? If the value of a precious metal or any otherwise stable, in-demand commodity suddenly drops on the market, that would cause a crash across the board in the real world. How do you envision this working in DF? Will the civs invent fiat currency to overcome this crippling instability?
...Just wanted to say I really like your ideas and hope the game ends up looking something like that, but is this kind of abstraction necessary? I thought one of the goals of the caravan arc was to track individual items after they exit your fortress. (Or is that still the case? I haven't been paying attention as much in recent months. Footkerchief?)
Your equipment is complete, you shove all your military items into the Abstractor Logistics Chest where they get remembered as "300 Exceptional Steel Axes", "300 Superior Steel Chainmails", "300 Finely-crafted Bronze High Boots" and so on. Again, decorations are forgotten or maybe they'll be kept in some abstracted way like 'they are all decorated with goblin bone' and the game will decide whether that means spikes, hanging rings or an image when the player asks to look closely at the item again.
...
Quote from: Lord ShonusWith the trade upgrades, will items you trade away ever return? For example, could you sell a masterwork steel sword to a human caravan, have that civ get angry with you, and have a soldier using that sword attack you?
This is the eventual idea, however, it might not happen until they are pulling armies from the entity populations. So if not the next major release, then the one after that. It could be that armies are still generated but draw items from the stockpiles for the next release in a sort of hybrid approach, but I'm not sure how it is going to end up.
. . .
Right now it uses your fullness counter, which is related to when you last ate, as well as an auxiliary counter that is supposed to simulate fluids or something. Ideally this will take care of itself when we have things like . . .
. . . an auxiliary counter that is supposed to simulate fluids or something. . . .
Wait.. . .
Right now it uses your fullness counter, which is related to when you last ate, as well as an auxiliary counter that is supposed to simulate fluids or something. Ideally this will take care of itself when we have things like . . .
Wait.. . . an auxiliary counter that is supposed to simulate fluids or something. . . .
He doesn't know what it is. He just knows it makes you vomit.
--Rexfelum
The problem with that statement is that it doesn't necesarily imply any huge complexity, just inadequate commenting.Wait.. . .
Right now it uses your fullness counter, which is related to when you last ate, as well as an auxiliary counter that is supposed to simulate fluids or something. Ideally this will take care of itself when we have things like . . .
Wait.. . . an auxiliary counter that is supposed to simulate fluids or something. . . .
He doesn't know what it is. He just knows it makes you vomit.
--Rexfelum
The magic of Dwarf Fortress. It's so complex, even the Daddy/Developer/Programmer doesn't know what half of the stuff does.
I don't know what the bulletin board does. There's that dev page thing about inquiring regarding supply/demand situations, which is probably going to have some partial implementation in this release. Other than that, you'll be able to move stuff around and make ends meet, first release, though there still aren't a lot of ends. And yeah, the situation might end up complicated and a bit untidy for you.
Toady did say that tracking individual items after they exit the fortress is the ideal but whether he'll need to abstract a bit to comprompise with reality is uncertain at this point. I guess with a few thousand items in the Logistics Chest this is still feasible but what of a fort that has shipped out 100,000 prepared meals over the course of several years?...Just wanted to say I really like your ideas and hope the game ends up looking something like that, but is this kind of abstraction necessary? I thought one of the goals of the caravan arc was to track individual items after they exit your fortress. (Or is that still the case? I haven't been paying attention as much in recent months. Footkerchief?)
Your equipment is complete, you shove all your military items into the Abstractor Logistics Chest where they get remembered as "300 Exceptional Steel Axes", "300 Superior Steel Chainmails", "300 Finely-crafted Bronze High Boots" and so on. Again, decorations are forgotten or maybe they'll be kept in some abstracted way like 'they are all decorated with goblin bone' and the game will decide whether that means spikes, hanging rings or an image when the player asks to look closely at the item again.
...
In Elite 3, the BB also gave special missions that didn't fit the standard model.I don't know what the bulletin board does. There's that dev page thing about inquiring regarding supply/demand situations, which is probably going to have some partial implementation in this release. Other than that, you'll be able to move stuff around and make ends meet, first release, though there still aren't a lot of ends. And yeah, the situation might end up complicated and a bit untidy for you.
Thanks for dignifying my pseudo-question with an answer! Complicated and untidy works for me.
The bulletin board in Elite 2 was one of the options you got at any space station / starport. This listed postings from randomly generated people / charities / organisations who wanted things. Options included:
- I will buy robots / nerve gas etc. at a premium price.
- Anybody want to go and kill someone for me?
- Work for the military! Earn money and Glory!
- Give money to charity!
It was a viable option at some systems for offloading high demand goods to individuals at a premium price, rather than just offloading them at the stockmarket.
I don't know if it's viable to include something like this, perhaps a noteboard adjacent to the town trading depot, or even if it would add to gameplay. Wanted posters stuck to the town noteboard would be cool, though. Especially when you see your own description there.
Toady did say that tracking individual items after they exit the fortress is the ideal but whether he'll need to abstract a bit to comprompise with reality is uncertain at this point. I guess with a few thousand items in the Logistics Chest this is still feasible but what of a fort that has shipped out 100,000 prepared meals over the course of several years?
Instead of a bullitin board, I'd rather the player has to search out these persons who would pay extra in person.
So the easy way to make money is to
-goto the Depot of a site which has a deficit on the type of stuff you got.
but to make more money:
-talk to people and hope someone offers more.
-talk to people at location X, get a contract to deliver A goods of type B, material C and minimal quality D to location Y in Z days time.
(A compass marker for special locations/persons while on-site, would be appreciated by the way.)
Or conmen who give you fake currency or shoddy goods in exchange, which you'd need some suitable merchant skill (be it Observer or Negotiation) to spot beforehand.Instead of a bullitin board, I'd rather the player has to search out these persons who would pay extra in person.
So the easy way to make money is to
-goto the Depot of a site which has a deficit on the type of stuff you got.
but to make more money:
-talk to people and hope someone offers more.
-talk to people at location X, get a contract to deliver A goods of type B, material C and minimal quality D to location Y in Z days time.
(A compass marker for special locations/persons while on-site, would be appreciated by the way.)
or, shady dealers could approach players before they reach the city.
it could also be another class of night creature feeding on people suffer, that propose you to sell all your food to it at a premium price so that the city would remain in dire despair. or another competing civ. or a lawyer.
they could use the same intercept code that ambushes uses.
which you'd need some suitable merchant skill (be it Observer or Negotiation) to spot beforehand.
Excellent choice, but that's for picking up clues based on looking at the trader. There might be a scenario where the trader doesn't know a conman set him up beforehand so that the goods/currency he's giving is fake. Then you'd need a separate skill to recognise that you'd be ripped off if you go through with the deal.which you'd need some suitable merchant skill (be it Observer or Negotiation) to spot beforehand.
try judge of intent
appraiser then?Oh yeah I forgot that skill exists because it levelled up too easily in fortress mode. Yes, that will do fine together with judge of intent to see whether you get ripped off or not.
I'll be upfront and ask this...
Is there a limit to how many ghosts can exist at a time?
But there arn't anyas it is anyway.Spoiler (click to show/hide)
At least I don't think there is, because if they are I REALLY need to read the logs.
But there arn't any ghosts as it is anyway.
At least I don't think there is, because if they are I REALLY need to read the logs.
Try leaving a dwarf to rot for a while in the latest version. ;)
Toady doesn't put things in the logs if he doesn't want to spoil them.I'll be upfront and ask this...Spoiler (click to show/hide)Spoiler (click to show/hide)
At least I don't think there is, because if they are I REALLY need to read the logs.
To be fair, you were basically asking.Spoiler (click to show/hide)
At least I don't think there is, because if they are I REALLY need to read the logs.
Try leaving a dwarf to rot for a while in the latest version. ;)
Goodness, I feel almost like something really cool has just been spoiled and should have had a spoiler tag.
=============
||"You feel uneasy"||
=============
...
Lawyer: Howdy!
What would happen to the local meat economy if you sold the townspeople a dragon corpse?They would all die like the rest of the village before realizing that dragon meat is highly poisonous.
it became clear that the first transfer of goods we'll need is some food for the newly founded villages while they wait for their initial planting to grow"It became clear", huh. Sounds like there were some early disasters here.
If prices are generated entirely dynamically based on production and consumption, we could easily get absurd situations, maybe involving worthless diamond goblets and the highly-sought-after mule skin. Will there still be the equivalent of e.g. baseline material/item values in the raws?
... it became clear that the first transfer of goods we'll need is some food for the newly founded villages while they wait for their initial planting to grow
Quote... it became clear that the first transfer of goods we'll need is some food for the newly founded villages while they wait for their initial planting to grow
For anyone else, did this observation remind you of pre-Agricultural Revolution hunter-gatherer societies? Correct me if I am wrong but I imagine that the solution to preventing civs from starving and collapsing at the beginning of time would be to somehow have the settlements start out with initial stores of food to get them through to their very first harvest time, but I think it would be interesting to eventually see the various civilizations, as they settle after the creation of the world and wait to reap the products of their first harvest, attempt to make ends meet by having a high number of hunters/gatherers among the populace who travel into the wilderness either solo or in groups. Then, as time passes and the settlement becomes sustainable through farming, we see a number of these hunters switch from hunting to form the civilization's first military groups, and and some gatherers becoming farmers, and the rest branching off into various other occupations.
If prices are generated entirely dynamically based on production and consumption, we could easily get absurd situations, maybe involving worthless diamond goblets and the highly-sought-after mule skin. Will there still be the equivalent of e.g. baseline material/item values in the raws?
Quote from: FootkerchiefQuote from: Sean MirrsenSpeaking of which. Toady, PLEEESE add value tags for ALL materials and items! If you can't bother to do all items, do it for the weapons at least! Making new weapons balanced is such a PITA without the ability to alter their prices...
I'd prefer entity-specific value modifiers for materials and items. (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=26505)
There will be value tags for all of the materials this time around. I'm probably not going to change the item raws, as the future of the value system is up in the Caravan Arc, which is finally (partially) on dev-next though that doesn't put it exactly close. In general, the value will depending on all sorts of things like availability and usefulness and civ aesthetics (it's already been doing this last one for a while during trade, though it's still hard-coded based on some of the civ flags), and I doubt a [VALUE:#] will survive the process. It'll probably be more like the army strength calculations for creatures (without the megabeast death part), where all of the little numbers come together to define the usefulness, and they are filtered through entity ethics-style stuff to attain aesthetic value, and then availability comes up during the world gen and in-play trade sim, though I haven't really thought too much about the specifics as it's quite a way off.
Regarding material value's subjectivity:
What about value that comes from factors that aren't yet implemented, either in entity definitions or material definitions? For instance, one particular reason people have cared much for gold traditionally is the fact that it's a noble metal, never really corroding, but that sort of thing isn't implemented yet. I guess the fact that it's interesting looking counts, but would be secondary. Simply analyzing entity and material definitions as they are now, wouldn't gold actually wind up being fairly valueless, as an example of the limitation of this sort of thing? It would still be rare, I guess, if it weren't for the abundance of minerals we have now.
If things were tracked separately, it could lead to oddities like warthog leather having the value of platinum, just because there's no civilisation yet that has an access to warthogs.
Toady, as 31.19 will be the Caravan Arc, does that mean we'll get boats too?
If you cared enough about that world with the island, you'd bridge it in fortress mode. Even if it meant pumping lava across in adv. mode.
Do you think Toady's going to go the whole way and make sure to differentiate between value and price like in reality? And, how will you define value? Using the extended labor definition?If things were tracked separately, it could lead to oddities like warthog leather having the value of platinum, just because there's no civilisation yet that has an access to warthogs.Scarcity isn't the sole determinant of value. If warthog leather were not only rare but extremely beautiful or tough or whatever, it might make sense for it to have the value of platinum. It could be valued for its leatheriness as well, but I don't see a reason for that to be an overriding factor.
Proper burial is now somewhat more encouraged. An alternative form of memorial has been made available for those whose bodies you have misplaced.
QuoteProper burial is now somewhat more encouraged. An alternative form of memorial has been made available for those whose bodies you have misplaced.
Will we encouter the 'encouragements' for burial in old 31.xx forts moved to 31.18, or do we need to regen a new world?
Thanks
I'm curious about whether Toady has any plans for full-world embarks for fortress mode, similar to adventure mode. This makes sense, with the Caravan and Army Arcs coming up, but I want to be sure before jumping to any conclusions.
Man, that would be absolutely amazing if true.
I'm curious about whether Toady has any plans for full-world embarks for fortress mode, similar to adventure mode. This makes sense, with the Caravan and Army Arcs coming up, but I want to be sure before jumping to any conclusions.
Man, that would be absolutely amazing if true.
What do you mean by "full world embark"?
I'm thinking something along the lines of maybe an adventure mode map for Fortress mode. Not loading everything at once, but still allowing your Dwarves to pillage elven civilizations from accross the continent.Actually I sorta like his question. It sorta goes with being able to zoom in on other sites to direct your raids, so I'm sure much of the same system would be involved.
Toady has yet to figure out a way to make non-creature stuff able to move, and a way to make multi tile creatures.And when dragons and colossi take 4-8 squares, they can't path through narrow corridors and Finally they'll escape Cage Traps!
Toady has yet to figure out a way to make non-creature stuff able to move, and a way to make multi tile creatures.A reminder; Toady did learn things from creating the monstrosities know as wagons, and the reason he has not completely figured out such things is because he hasn't had the time. That stuff is still at least a month or two from now.
Yeah, as has been pointed out many times before, multi-tile creatures open up a family-sized can of worms in general, with pathing, corners, determining scale, item location, limb location, etc etc.Toady has yet to figure out a way to make non-creature stuff able to move, and a way to make multi tile creatures.A reminder; Toady did learn things from creating the monstrosities know as wagons, and the reason he has not completely figured out such things is because he hasn't had the time. That stuff is still at least a month or two from now.
ww
ww ww
/ \ ww ww
H H | \ ww ww
H H \ \ ww_H ww /H H
H H \H ww_H ww/ ww/H ww/H
ww_H ww\H ww\H
hmm... wagons.
will there be inertia?
eg.Code: [Select]ww
ww ww
/ \ ww ww
H H | \ ww ww
H H \ \ ww_H ww /H H
H H \H ww_H ww/ ww/H ww/H
ww_H ww\H ww\H
I think I'd try a combined vector approach and a formation-like approach where it comes to AI.
i.e. Draft animal direction dependent on will of animal caretaker/driver. when driver lacking preferably remain stationary... unless spooked.
Wagon movement as function of averaged vector of number of draft animals. wagon could have a residual vector according to movement in previous tick and possibly also a gravity vector when partially on ramps.
Will you try something like that or will wagon-and-horses be a single formation that moves like a single entity?
If mining is in for worldgen, will worldgen mines potentially awaken Forgotten Beasts... or worse? And will we be able to eventually enter and explore these mines?
hmm... wagons.At the very least, it's on the dev page regarding mounts. I think one of the DF talks did talk about the problems with combining inertia and pathfinding also.
will there be inertia?
# Mounts
* Can buy them as with livestock, handled as with livestock
* Movement speeds, turning and inertia
* Combat effects (velocity addition, body part selection, trampling)
Rarer metals, huh? I hope they're not TOO rare. I honestly couldn't handle a military wearing nothing but bone and leather.
Rarer metals, huh? I hope they're not TOO rare. I honestly couldn't handle a military wearing nothing but bone and leather.
You're not truly metal unless you're decked out in bone and leather!!
Well, 40d was to rare but .31 I think is over saturated.
Maybe we're down the middle now. We're going to need reasons to trade, and that means having fort sites having lack of hopefully critical resources.
A fort shouldn't be able to do every industry from the fort site.
Yay! I heartily approve of less metal.
But I also want them to bring more metal to trade, too. Yes, I very much look forwards to improved trading...especially when I can say "I'll pay you 500% normal rate. BRING A WHOLE LOT." Then again, they should charge a lot more for everything anyway...
Affording enough steel to deck out your squad in armor should be a major challenge! It shouldn't, however, take ten years for the traders to show up with that much.
Yay! I heartily approve of less metal.
But I also want them to bring more metal to trade, too. Yes, I very much look forwards to improved trading...especially when I can say "I'll pay you 500% normal rate. BRING A WHOLE LOT." Then again, they should charge a lot more for everything anyway...
Affording enough steel to deck out your squad in armor should be a major challenge! It shouldn't, however, take ten years for the traders to show up with that much.
I think I can agree on this point. I don't think steel should be incredibly easy to produce (though I'm sure there would be contention over the degree of difficulty). My main concern is getting enough metal, any metal, to fully equip your squads without (great) diffculty.
I dont want Caravans to bring in any more metal then what their origin sites say they can trade.
The difficulties of the various industriues should vary depending on where your fort is.
They may be more metal, but they'll also be extremely vulnerable. I'd prefer not to lose my axelords to a goblin ambush because they weren't wearing good armor.
Sure, difficulty should be a lot higher on glaciers or in the middle of a desert, but a complete lack weapons-grade metal is beyond what I'd call "reasonably difficult" and into the realm of "absurd".Which is why metals now show up on the site finder. If you want to do it anyway, that's a choice you make.
You're probably right about leather. But if goblins, humans and dwarves are supposed to be iron age civilizations, I doubt bone would occur very often. I'm not that picky, really. Even copper works for me.They may be more metal, but they'll also be extremely vulnerable. I'd prefer not to lose my axelords to a goblin ambush because they weren't wearing good armor.
You're forgetting the goblin ambush will be subject to the same rarity rules as you. If metals are rare, the ambushing goblins will probably be using leather and bone. At that point, even finding a copper vein would be a joy.
It's all relative, really. A lot of players now need to have steel because they feel they're too vulnerable otherwise. But if your enemies start using less quality equipment, even you can be more lenient about materials. At least I believe this is where the game is heading.
Yeah, I know. I'm just talking about general game balance here. Besides, if I read it right, it doesn't really tell you how much iron there will be so it could still be very limited on your map.Sure, difficulty should be a lot higher on glaciers or in the middle of a desert, but a complete lack weapons-grade metal is beyond what I'd call "reasonably difficult" and into the realm of "absurd".Which is why metals now show up on the site finder. If you want to do it anyway, that's a choice you make.
"Oh, crap, a player controlled fortress was made. Alright, all metal forging has to stop so that we can ship our metal to them instead."Depends on how much you're willing to spend.
Now that doesn't make much sense now does it.
Relying on traders for metal shouldn't be the basis of the game. Although making ores less abundant is good, I don't think that traders should bring more metal; or any if at all. They should ship finished sets of armor, at vary levels of quality. I think its more absurd that all the civilizations in the world just export raw metal to you just because you ask.
"Oh, crap, a player controlled fortress was made. Alright, all metal forging has to stop so that we can ship our metal to them instead."
Now that doesn't make much sense now does it.
"Oh, crap, a player controlled fortress was made. Alright, all metal forging has to stop so that we can ship our metal to them instead."
Now that doesn't make much sense now does it.
Still, I can imagine the world slowly advancing into an age of wealth, where people all eventually have solid gold chalices and silver doors.
the traders never really bring that much of what you ask for
Alternatively, the ability to have this sort of conversation:the traders never really bring that much of what you ask for
in that regards, I hope a finer control over requests quantity will be added in (influencing prices, of course).
Will the deep metal still be as common as it currently is? Will stuff like cave features along the lines of water, plants/trees, pits, magma pipes, cave creature civ sites, & other things homes (surface access or not) appear on the feature finder list?
Generally, if your question is "Did you implement feature X without mentioning it or hinting at it in the devlog," the answer is probably "no."In which case the first word of my sentence will be "When" :P If metals are going to be like the 40d map features and only present on specific local map squares, there needs to be feature finder setting to pick out specifically what the player wants to have on their map, wether it's just flux, or everything possible.
I dont think Magma pipes exist any more.Underground magma pipes do exist, and can be found at any cave level. They pass through the lower levels with vertically uniform obsidian walls until they reach the level they're set to stop at. If you've never encountered a magma pipe or deep pit between cave levels, this is exactly why the feature finder needs to be improved as much as possible; some people just never find cool stuff. [Which is why the site finder needs to be improved eventually]
I dont think Magma pipes exist any more.
I don't think volcanos or magma pipes are rarer than in 40d.
Elves farm. Kobolds steal. Goblins don't eat plants.Exactly. But they do need to eat, don't they? Where do they get their food then? How can they support several thousand people just by hunting wildlife or stealing food from their neighbours?
I've got another question for you toady.
Will adventurers ever be able to become a leader of a civ or group?, like becoming a bandit leader and recruiting people into the ranks of your bandit army and have them do raids and give you the goods that they looted. or become a ranking general for a civ and lead raids against enemy forces.
# AFFILIATION ARC: You should be able to rise to the top of an entity (civilization, town, etc.) in adventure mode. While the full set of responsibilities that would entail will have to wait, it should at least be possible to attain this status for the first version. You should be able to do things for individuals. This could earn you favors from sleeping in their home and food gifts all the way to a marriage offer. There can be smaller entities like bandits and cults which could offer more unsavory tasks for similar privileges (steal, kill, kidnap, etc.). Can earn right to sleep in the large hall in town if you've become affiliated with them, but vagrancy needs to be punished and the camping must be harsher before this is meaningful. Related to Core64, Core65, Core71, Req586, Req587, Bloat163, PowerGoal12, PowerGoal19, PowerGoal27, PowerGoal37, PowerGoal41, PowerGoal42, PowerGoal44, PowerGoal48 and PowerGoal54.
# Core65, ADVENTURER SITE AFFILIATIONS, (Future): When you perform a task for an entity, you currently can an affiliation with it, but that's all. This needs to be expanded greatly. Not only should you be given various positions of responsibility, but you should also become accepted by the group in question and given some way of obtaining living space, equipment, pay, etc. as appropriate. It would also be good for tasks to be appropriate for the goals of the entity, and where possible, to soften the notion of a task -- if you do something that benefits a group, even if the group didn't explicitly ask for it, this should raise your standing with them in general (to the extent that the action/benefit is detectable from a technical standpoint), and a person at an appropriate position within a group should in some circumstances be able to act under their own power with entity subordinates. The primary target entities/positions here for version 1 are soldiers (either proper ones or loosely defined mead hall groups), caravan guards, bandits and religious groups.
# Core71, BANDITS AND CULTS, (Future): It's important to have groups acting on their own or generally causing trouble without necessarily belonging to an entirely different civilization. Bandits and cults are good choices to start. Bandits could harass or make demands of an early fortress, cults could spring up in a later one, and the adventurer could end up a member or an adversary.
Well Metalmines in Worldgen could imply actual veins over multiple Z levels and lengths, maybe strip-mines. I mean more like real life veins and seams. With them i could be easier for a Ai to break into the caverns take the animal-people hostage and use them as slaves.
One thing that concerns me with trading becoming a more integral part of a stable fortress is my front gate.
<..>
the traders ask for entrance, and if you agree, you have an ingame day-long period to open your gates before they get pissed off and leave. The current "oh we saw your gates were shut from the other side of the valley yonder, so we didn't bother coming" situation does not make much sense IMO. Of course my gates were shut, that is what gates are for. Shutting.
With the new more important caravans, will we be able to keep our doors closed most of the year, and get a grace period for opening up when the caravans arrive on the edge of the map? This would allow more security whilst minimising lost trade opportunities.
Quite historically accurate.Well Metalmines in Worldgen could imply actual veins over multiple Z levels and lengths, maybe strip-mines. I mean more like real life veins and seams. With them i could be easier for a Ai to break into the caverns take the animal-people hostage and use them as slaves.
I like how Metal Mines leads directly to wholesale slavery. These forums rock.
Quite historically accurate.Well Metalmines in Worldgen could imply actual veins over multiple Z levels and lengths, maybe strip-mines. I mean more like real life veins and seams. With them i could be easier for a Ai to break into the caverns take the animal-people hostage and use them as slaves.
I like how Metal Mines leads directly to wholesale slavery. These forums rock.
Quite historically accurate.Well Metalmines in Worldgen could imply actual veins over multiple Z levels and lengths, maybe strip-mines. I mean more like real life veins and seams. With them i could be easier for a Ai to break into the caverns take the animal-people hostage and use them as slaves.
I like how Metal Mines leads directly to wholesale slavery. These forums rock.
Ah quite so...
I remember when Debris cracked into the first cave system, for their diamonds, and forced the animal men locals to continue on with the mining.
I think stealing from bandits is more likely.
One stop bandit shop! The currency of trade is pain and death though.
The prospects of the next update are making me salivate slightly.Only?
seconded.One thing that concerns me with trading becoming a more integral part of a stable fortress is my front gate.
<..>
the traders ask for entrance, and if you agree, you have an ingame day-long period to open your gates before they get pissed off and leave. The current "oh we saw your gates were shut from the other side of the valley yonder, so we didn't bother coming" situation does not make much sense IMO. Of course my gates were shut, that is what gates are for. Shutting.
With the new more important caravans, will we be able to keep our doors closed most of the year, and get a grace period for opening up when the caravans arrive on the edge of the map? This would allow more security whilst minimising lost trade opportunities.
+1
The prospects of the next update are making me salivate slightly.Only?
How about proper shield damage to make them less reusable? This is possibly coming with item damage though.
The prospects of the next update are making me salivate slightly.
Have you planned further limiting the availability of plate armour? As far as I know, it is not 'one size fits all' equipment. So if we wanted to commission a set to our measurements, it'd cost a lot and take (a lot) of time make. Adventure mode in particular would benefit, fortress mode perhaps less so.
Have you planned further limiting the availability of plate armour? As far as I know, it is not 'one size fits all' equipment. So if we wanted to commission a set to our measurements, it'd cost a lot and take (a lot) of time make. Adventure mode in particular would benefit, fortress mode perhaps less so.
having to size clothing for different dwarves [...] is a nightmare
Quote from: ArkDelgatoWill there ever be size differentiation for clothes?
There might be size differentiation for clothes later, but only when we can handle it without it being a total nightmare for the player.
There is a middle ground, There are dwarfs who are "large for a dwarf" and maybe they could wear armor for a small human.The prospects of the next update are making me salivate slightly.Only?
How about proper shield damage to make them less reusable? This is possibly coming with item damage though.
Item degradation has been spoken by the almighty Toad, for things likes weapons and armor. We see item wear for clothing, but not for tools in Fort mode. So something along those lines is planned.The prospects of the next update are making me salivate slightly.
Have you planned further limiting the availability of plate armour? As far as I know, it is not 'one size fits all' equipment. So if we wanted to commission a set to our measurements, it'd cost a lot and take (a lot) of time make. Adventure mode in particular would benefit, fortress mode perhaps less so.
I bet that would be weird to do so. Even though every creature has a unique volume and mass, but displaying that information in either mode would be awkward and for fort & adventure mode make would make it harder to get arms and equipment for your character. There is a fair bit of micro'ing in Fort mode for equipping the military. Then we have to worry about the volume of the individual dorf. @,@ I hope this is where gameplay overrides realism.
(I know in 40d, that size difference between elfs, human and dorf were psedo respected, but that system is gone.)
It does translate into more things. I've heard of some dwarves being large enough to handle weapons with one hand that most dwarves need two for, and that sort of thing.
Have you planned further limiting the availability of plate armour? As far as I know, it is not 'one size fits all' equipment. So if we wanted to commission a set to our measurements, it'd cost a lot and take (a lot) of time make. Adventure mode in particular would benefit, fortress mode perhaps less so.To get this effect without making an insane nightmare of clothes not fitting anyone, there could be "custom-fitted" gear. This would provide some benefit, or gear that is not custom-fitted could provide some penalty - perhaps interacting with speed reduction.
Have you planned further limiting the availability of plate armour? As far as I know, it is not 'one size fits all' equipment. So if we wanted to commission a set to our measurements, it'd cost a lot and take (a lot) of time make. Adventure mode in particular would benefit, fortress mode perhaps less so.To get this effect without making an insane nightmare of clothes not fitting anyone, there could be "custom-fitted" gear. This would provide some benefit, or gear that is not custom-fitted could provide some penalty - perhaps interacting with speed reduction.
Individual fitted armour may be cool as a quality or special property modifier, not so much as a basic requirement of worn items.
Species or bodytype specific armour might be a tasty expansion on the sizes as they are currently.
(centaur heavy armour, spiderman armour etc)
It would get extremely frustrating in fortress mode, though. I can't even imagine the scope of annoying micromanagement that keeping track of all the armour you have available or that you need would require. No, thank you.
I have read in the past that between the interviews, DF Talks, bug fixes, active development, and little things like sleep, you have less time to go through the Suggestions forum. Is there a plan to revitalize or refocus that aspect of the forums?
I'm already unable to reply to posts in the suggestion forum (I am still reading them, though I'm behind as usual) [...] Ideally I'd get to everything, but it's impossible now.
I have read in the past that between the interviews, DF Talks, bug fixes, active development, and little things like sleep, you have less time to go through the Suggestions forum. Is there a plan to revitalize or refocus that aspect of the forums?
This came up recently:I'm already unable to reply to posts in the suggestion forum (I am still reading them, though I'm behind as usual) [...] Ideally I'd get to everything, but it's impossible now.
Hi Toady,
Today, my query relates to BP_APPEARANCE_MODIFIERs whose values don't obviously relate to altering sizes.
For example, let's use [BP_APPEARANCE_MODIFIER:HIGH_CHEEKBONES:0:70:90:100:110:130:200]
Now, there are seven slots there, equating, basically, to Extremely Low:Very Low:Low:Average:High:Very High:Extremely High.
My first question is, roughly what are the chances of each item occurring? I've populated a lot of test subjects to check, and unsurprisingly Average seems to be pretty common, if I'm doing it right.
My second question is, what bearing on the results does the number associated with it have? Is it some likelihood of the result?
It's probable that the second question will answer this, but I'll ask anyway.
From testing, I've determined that I can do the following:
[BP_APPEARANCE_MODIFIER:HIGH_CHEEKBONES:70:70:90:100:110:130:130]
which causes Very Low:Very Low:Low:Average:High:Very High:Very High
and
[BP_APPEARANCE_MODIFIER:HIGH_CHEEKBONES:0:70:70:100:100:110:200]
which causes Extremely Low:Low:Low:Average:Average:Very High:Extremely High.
It also seems as though I can use NONE in some instances, but I haven't been able to figure out whether this is just a general thing, or whether it's just reading it as text. I've tried with alphabetical values as a test, and that didn't really work at all, but did not return an error in the errorlog.
While it's obvious that replicating the values of adjacent slots will cause the one closest to the Average to be the only one used, I'm not exactly sure on how it's doing that.
The seven numbers afterward give a distribution of ranges. Each interval has an equal chance of occurring.
New underground plants will be pressed for oil used for cooking and soap.
I wouldn't get my hopes up too high if I were you; the next release involves a major change to the architecture of the game, so it's probably gonna have the bare minimum of features required to lay the groundwork for future development, while allowing the community to help iron out the (likely numerous) bugs.
I wouldn't get my hopes up too high if I were you; the next release involves a major change to the architecture of the game, so it's probably gonna have the bare minimum of features required to lay the groundwork for future development, while allowing the community to help iron out the (likely numerous) bugs.
What is this architecture change you are talking about?
What is this architecture change you are talking about?
I wonder if plant extracts like these will also get other uses beside cooking?
Like Olive Oil.
Actually...
Since we're getting some new plant extracts, will the jobs these extra be used for extend to just beyond cooking with these release, or ever?
Olive oil comes to mine, as a plant product that has multiple uses from cooking to cleaning.
New underground plants will be pressed for oil used for cooking and soap.
Just happened to start browsing the forums and noticed the December Report went up a few minutes ago.QuoteNew underground plants will be pressed for oil used for cooking and soap.
That's cool, I don't think we've had any new plants in a long time. Unless you count the underground fungitrees, I guess.
Did you see this comment in the dwarf raws?QuoteThe seven numbers afterward give a distribution of ranges. Each interval has an equal chance of occurring.
The wiki page on probability distributions (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Probability_distribution) may be illuminating.
In your example, [BP_APPEARANCE_MODIFIER:HIGH_CHEEKBONES:0:70:90:100:110:130:200], this means that the following intervals are equally likely "buckets" for the modifier to fall into: 0-70, 70-90, 90-100, etc. Since the intervals near the average (100) are smaller (only spanning 10 rather than 20 or 70) but still equally likely, most of the creatures will be closer to the average than to the extremes.
Did you see this comment in the dwarf raws?QuoteThe seven numbers afterward give a distribution of ranges. Each interval has an equal chance of occurring.
The wiki page on probability distributions (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Probability_distribution) may be illuminating.
In your example, [BP_APPEARANCE_MODIFIER:HIGH_CHEEKBONES:0:70:90:100:110:130:200], this means that the following intervals are equally likely "buckets" for the modifier to fall into: 0-70, 70-90, 90-100, etc. Since the intervals near the average (100) are smaller (only spanning 10 rather than 20 or 70) but still equally likely, most of the creatures will be closer to the average than to the extremes.
I saw that note, yeah. And I'm familiar with standard deviations for a normal distribution on a bell curve. But on a bell curve, the steps are not equally likely to occur. If it were just a modified bell curve, I'd not be so perplexed. I suppose what I'm trying to do here is to achieve a better understanding of the effects of the values, and how the game deals with them, so I can use that more effectively.
I saw that note, yeah. And I'm familiar with standard deviations for a normal distribution on a bell curve. But on a bell curve, the steps are not equally likely to occur. If it were just a modified bell curve, I'd not be so perplexed. I suppose what I'm trying to do here is to achieve a better understanding of the effects of the values, and how the game deals with them, so I can use that more effectively.
Will there be Hydra eggs? And dragon eggs? And giant eagle eggs? And giant desert scorpion eggs? And alligator eggs? And giant cave spider eggs?
Will vermin have eggs? So we can like have fluffy fluffy wambler eggs and toad eggs.
(I love eggs)
Perhaps more exciting is the soon to be added raws for domestic animals and other raw materials. This means your dwarves will be able to collect eggs, shear sheep, and make clay pots. New underground plants will be pressed for oil used for cooking and soap.
The best part is iirc. every bird egg is eat-able for humans. Well atleast i enjoy some Duck-eggs once in a while because they have more of the yellow stuff.Since we don't have petrification effects yet, it wouldn't be much of a cockatrice even if it did hatch.
edit: Wait a sec what would happen if we get a giant toad to hetch a chicken egg?
Chicken and turkeys are great too. Finally we have meat that tastes like alligator.At first I thought this was a weird way of phrasing it, but then I realised crocodillians have been around a lot longer than poultry, and therefore were first to taste like that. So good on Heph for knowing paleontology.
Well we see other minable things, like salt anytime soon?
Halite mines in mountain sides seem reasonably common. The stuff has had a long time to be moved around. Still, it doesn't have to be in every mountain. Most rocks/gems/metals shouldn't be in most mountains in any case.
Will civs Have mining operations that present themselves as physical locations?
If mining is in for worldgen, will worldgen mines potentially awaken Forgotten Beasts... or worse? And will we be able to eventually enter and explore these mines?
Things have been gradually calming down at the tracker since April, but I was absent mostly because of IRL stuff.Its nice to have ya active on the forum again. *nods* Search function or not.
Have you planned further limiting the availability of plate armour? As far as I know, it is not 'one size fits all' equipment. So if we wanted to commission a set to our measurements, it'd cost a lot and take (a lot) of time make. Adventure mode in particular would benefit, fortress mode perhaps less so.To get this effect without making an insane nightmare of clothes not fitting anyone, there could be "custom-fitted" gear. This would provide some benefit, or gear that is not custom-fitted could provide some penalty - perhaps interacting with speed reduction.
Not scarcity, but supply and demand.
I notice some of the trade routes go over water. Will there be some kind of sea travel anytime soon?
I notice some of the trade routes go over water. Will there be some kind of sea travel anytime soon?
This is pretty much a given. It'd probably be easy enough to fudge some numbers in world gen to get world gen "trade boats", what we don't know is how boats would work in Dwarf/Adventure mode.
I assume roads will be effected by trade routs, right?
I notice some of the trade routes go over water. Will there be some kind of sea travel anytime soon?
Toady, as 31.19 will be the Caravan Arc, does that mean we'll get boats too?
so, if there are path over water and if there are no actual ship travelling and ports and such, can we assume caravans are abstracted away from the world map? if that's the case, isn't there no caravan raiding in adventure mode? (apart from abstracted away caravan raiding, that is)
Adventurer Role: Trader
[...]
* World economy
[...]
o Replace dwarf mode generated caravans with actual caravans
o Improved dwarf mode trade agreements
* Ability to lead a trade caravan
o Ability to load stuff onto pack mules
o Ability to hire bodyguards
o Wagon/wagon teams (might do some teleportation travel with them to avoid annoyances for now)
o Being able to trade from wagons, large markets might have people to move objects more quickly
[...]
Those maps are pretty interesting. The different colours seem to depict different types of civilizations.Seems to me goblins are also using sprawl of sorts to keep their fortresses fed. Also, I do hear that even back in 40d it was possible for goblins to trade. These lines represent POTENTIAL trade routes so it's more likely that most of the time they won't actually trade.
Are the purple cities dark fortresses? Does that mean the goblins actually trade this time?
Oh yeah, I also can't wait to see what the NPC dwarven hamlets and fortresses will look like now.
Some of these lines go over water, but even though the water route represents the shortest path there is a perfectly fine 'land-based route' for land-based caravans to take.
Yeah and they are perfect sources for diseases as soon we get them.Fleas on rats on boats?
Oh yeah, I also can't wait to see what the NPC dwarven hamlets and fortresses will look like now.
I'd settle for them existing at all in the game world. Mountain halls (or dwarf pits or whatever the term is) show up on the map in the current version, but there's nothing at the site.
Just a side note...
...in history, sea and river trade was preferred to land trade, not the other way around. Ships have many advantages over wagons, the two main ones being: 1) It's much safer that way, pirates tend to be less frequent and easier to run from than bandits, 2) you can ship heavy, bulk loads, something not possible with wagons (caravans bringing huge amounts of wood like in current DF are absurdly unreal). Then, to a lesser degree, 3) by going over the sea, you skip many taxation opportunities (normally taxes would be paid on "country" borders, but also bridges, ferries, city gates...). In your example, noone would bother to take the land route.
If you look at real history, coastal areas were always the richest, and the biggest cities formed next to the seas. It is no accident that the major civilisations developed in areas that have easy access to sea trade (the Mediterranean, the Sea of Japan) and that the land-locked areas (Russia...) or areas dependent on ocean waters, which are difficult to travel (Africa), staid underdeveloped.
Probably a result of the coastal correlation with elevation and the elev. correlation with plains
Quote from: Jiri Petru
EDIT: Looking over the screenshots again, it seems like humans indeed are attracted to the sea.
[/quote
Probably a result of the coastal correlation with elevation and the elev. correlation with plains
Nah. If you look at the raws humans are now much more likely to expand out to ocean and river tiles than they were before. Especially the Ocean (12 vs 2 or 3 for plains)Code: [Select][START_BIOME:ANY_GRASSLAND]
[START_BIOME:ANY_SAVANNA]
[START_BIOME:ANY_SHRUBLAND]
[BIOME_SUPPORT:ANY_WETLAND:1]
[BIOME_SUPPORT:ANY_DESERT:1]
[BIOME_SUPPORT:ANY_FOREST:2]
[BIOME_SUPPORT:ANY_OCEAN:12]
[BIOME_SUPPORT:ANY_LAKE:3]
[BIOME_SUPPORT:ANY_GRASSLAND:3]
[BIOME_SUPPORT:ANY_SAVANNA:2]
[BIOME_SUPPORT:ANY_SHRUBLAND:2]
[BIOME_SUPPORT:ANY_RIVER:4]
Some of these lines go over water, but even though the water route represents the shortest path there is a perfectly fine 'land-based route' for land-based caravans to take.
Just a side note...
...in history, sea and river trade was preferred to land trade, not the other way around. Ships have many advantages over wagons, the two main ones being: 1) It's much safer that way, pirates tend to be less frequent and easier to run from than bandits, 2) you can ship heavy, bulk loads, something not possible with wagons (caravans bringing huge amounts of wood like in current DF are absurdly unreal). Then, to a lesser degree, 3) by going over the sea, you skip many taxation opportunities (normally taxes would be paid on "country" borders, but also bridges, ferries, city gates...). In your example, noone would bother to take the land route.
If you look at real history, coastal areas were always the richest, and the biggest cities formed next to the seas. It is no accident that the major civilisations developed in areas that have easy access to sea trade (the Mediterranean, the Sea of Japan) and that the land-locked areas (Russia...) or areas dependent on ocean waters, which are difficult to travel (Africa), staid underdeveloped.
I'm wondering if Toady intends to put some emphasis on ports and coastal cities.
EDIT: Looking over the screenshots again, it seems like humans indeed are attracted to the sea.
I assume roads will be effected by trade routs, right?
If in adventure mode we kill all the farms that feed into a town will the town suffer?
Killing all the farmers is nigh impossible yeah, but there's a finite amount of land so maybe if he meant razing all the farmland, then that's a more relevant question.If in adventure mode we kill all the farms that feed into a town will the town suffer?
Before you get your hopes up, you should keep in mind that the enormous abstract entity populations means killing all the farms will be nigh-impossible
I'm not sure if I missed something but:I'm pretty certain that that's out of the question for a long time to come.
Are there plans to be able to have multiple embarks at once, and to be able to zoom from fort view to world view and back on any of these embarks? An example of this would be in the old Accolade game Deadlock, though that was provinces instead of embarks, but a similar idea.
I'm not sure if I missed something but:The problem is that when you move between levels of abstraction, information is lost. So things can get pretty messed up.
Are there plans to be able to have multiple embarks at once, and to be able to zoom from fort view to world view and back on any of these embarks? An example of this would be in the old Accolade game Deadlock, though that was provinces instead of embarks, but a similar idea.
This has been bugging me for a long time:That would be a lot less fun than having to find out about the people ingame through books, engravings and word-of-mouth. Maybe there could be some kind of log where you could check everything you learned about a historical figure yet?
Will we ever be able to access the legends mode information directly from fortress or adventurer mode? Like in: you click at the leader of the enemy siege, open his details (z) screen and click something like (h)istory? I know you are planning to do books and some other "in-game" applications of legends, but these are hardly as useful as the legends mode. And I am able to copy my safe to a different folder, abandon the fortress, and open the Legends. Why prevent me from doing it the easy way?
You can just open up another DF.exe, you know... I agree though, Legends in-game would be nice.I'm afraid that's not the case; a single save can support a fortress, an adventurer, or an active legends view, but not two or more at once. Viewing the legends of a world that has an existing adventurer or player fortress requires copying the save.
ahem. ?You can just open up another DF.exe, you know... I agree though, Legends in-game would be nice.I'm afraid that's not the case; a single save can support a fortress, an adventurer, or an active legends view, but not two or more at once. Viewing the legends of a world that has an existing adventurer or player fortress requires copying the save.
ahem. ?You can just open up another DF.exe, you know... I agree though, Legends in-game would be nice.I'm afraid that's not the case; a single save can support a fortress, an adventurer, or an active legends view, but not two or more at once. Viewing the legends of a world that has an existing adventurer or player fortress requires copying the save.
<select DFfolder>
<CTRL+C>
<CTRL+V>
<create new shortcut to exe in copied folder>
...or just copy your regionfolder and rename it.
ahem. ?
A single save can support a fortress, an adventurer, or an active legends view, but not two or more at once. Viewing the legends of a world that has an existing adventurer or player fortress requires copying the save.
two or more at once
requires copying the save.
Toady, with the advent of goods/caravans we will likely end up with alot of loot. I know you probably have no idea when you plan to do it, but how far down the list are the adventurer sites? Some of us can't carry all the dragon hides and diamonds that we would like to...
Any plans for food of desperation to be available? Boiled shoes for dinner tonight, but it beats starving.
Will we be able to get roads made on the world map, in both dwarf and adventure mode?
Quote from: MrWigglesWill you be able to finance various things in adventure mode?Quote from: JavarockWill it be possbile to hire a band of mercinaries to go over and attack our rivals caravan therefor we get more profits due to less items being in the market? In other words "Eliminating the competition"Quote from: 1freemanToady, when adventure mode caravan's are implemented, will we be able to hire someone to run our caravan for us?
Are Elves going to have any preference/dislike for trading for metal? They can't really tell if it was made using charcoal or coke, and it's generally superior to what they can do natively, so could that be something effected by the ruler's preferences?
Also, will we eventually see other civs trying to trade for your metalworking secrets? A human king offering an alliance in exchange for you teaching some human smiths how to make steel, for example?
Quote from: QuatchWhen we get to explore a region revealing the map as we go, will there ever be a chance of mapping error leading to strange maps?Quote from: SoweluThe old Microprose game "Machiavelli the Prince" started you out with an inaccurate map, which you then filled in correctly as you explored. So some of the islands were a little bit off, some of the terrain was wrong, landmasses tilted a slightly different direction, maybe a city a little further away--or maybe a city that wasn't on the original map at all!
I think it would be neat to buy maps in this, which may be inaccurate.
I'm wondering whether the testing arena will ever be expanded upon to include skill levels beyond grand master, quality modifiers for weapons/armor/shields, quivers, etc.? The testing arena has already been a great boon for players learning the game mechanics, hunting down bugs, and just generally having fun.
Toady, If the number of skills used for adventure mode go higher, will you add a scrollbar to the skill menu or will skills be sorted out between eachother in different menu's?
What would happen to the local meat economy if you sold the townspeople a dragon corpse?
Quote from: DanteIf prices are generated entirely dynamically based on production and consumption, we could easily get absurd situations, maybe involving worthless diamond goblets and the highly-sought-after mule skin. Will there still be the equivalent of e.g. baseline material/item values in the raws?Quote from: SoweluI'm guessing that material values will take a few hundred years to really settle out. If you only gen fifty years, people won't know their platinum from their copper value-wise.Quote from: G-FlexWhat about value that comes from factors that aren't yet implemented, either in entity definitions or material definitions? For instance, one particular reason people have cared much for gold traditionally is the fact that it's a noble metal, never really corroding, but that sort of thing isn't implemented yet. I guess the fact that it's interesting looking counts, but would be secondary. Simply analyzing entity and material definitions as they are now, wouldn't gold actually wind up being fairly valueless, as an example of the limitation of this sort of thing? It would still be rare, I guess, if it weren't for the abundance of minerals we have now.Quote from: penguinofhonorSo I saw the trade routes and all, and I was wondering. Do you think you'll ever invent value based off how exotic an item is? Say you've got a trinket made from the opposite corner of a large world, or from a civilization that isn't even connected with yours through trade routes. It should be rare and unique. Adventurers could get items from distant civilizations for eccentric collectors.
Quote from: BackgroundGuyToady, as 31.19 will be the Caravan Arc, does that mean we'll get boats too?Quote from: SizikI notice some of the trade routes go over water. Will there be some kind of sea travel anytime soon?Quote from: LoSboccaccso, if there are path over water and if there are no actual ship travelling and ports and such, can we assume caravans are abstracted away from the world map? if that's the case, isn't there no caravan raiding in adventure mode? (apart from abstracted away caravan raiding, that is)
Will we ever be able to choose between Region and Island in the simplified "Create New World Now!" parameters?Currently, if you wanted to gen a region; one must go into the "Advanced Parameters." This is kind of a pain, since you also have to manually change the otherwise simplified parameters. Changing even simple things like history lenght is really confusing for players unaccustomed to world gen stuff (not to mention natural savagery, civ and site numbers).
Do you think Toady's going to go the whole way and make sure to differentiate between value and price like in reality? And, how will you define value? Using the extended labor definition?
Will we encouter the 'encouragements' for burial in old 31.xx forts moved to 31.18, or do we need to regen a new world?
Shall the repercussions of not burying dead, ever expand beyond ghosts? For instance prolonged time above ground, being desecrated, or large numbers of un buried dead becoming ghouls or zombies hostile to your fort?
Quote from: 1freemanWhen adventurer's are able to purchase livestock/pet's, will the animals be inherently loyal to you or will they be able to wander off if you don't fence them in and/or keep an eye on them, and if they aren't instantly loyal will there be a skill/attribute that determines how well your character can handle animal's. also will they follow like companions do or will we have to hold/lead them around?Quote from: 1freemanwill there be adventurer made sites anytime soon?, and if so will purchased livestock respect the borders of your land,as in not wandering away while you go off to kill some bandits?
If/while we don't have adventurer made sites how will livestock management work?, will there be stables in towns that you pay to take care of and/or store any owned animals?Quote from: cakeonslaughtToady, with the advent of goods/caravans we will likely end up with alot of loot. I know you probably have no idea when you plan to do it, but how far down the list are the adventurer sites? Some of us can't carry all the dragon hides and diamonds that we would like to...
Well, dragons, titans, and such are not what the systems base will be made to handle. It's the fixed wagons that will be sometime during this arc, then siege engines next arc. Hm, will the multi-tile work you do during these two arcs lay the foundation for giant creatures expanding into more tiles?
Quote from: KillerClownsIf mining is in for worldgen, will worldgen mines potentially awaken Forgotten Beasts... or worse? And will we be able to eventually enter and explore these mines?Quote from: PsyberianHuskyWill civs Have mining operations that present themselves as physical locations?
Quote from: MechanoidWill the deep metal still be as common as it currently is? Will stuff like cave features along the lines of water, plants/trees, pits, magma pipes, cave creature civ sites, & other things homes (surface access or not) appear on the feature finder list?Quote from: diefortheswarm1. The old 40.d version had a parameter for magma pipes. Is it possible this parameter could be brought back in the current version of the game? I know that access to magma is guaranteed at any site by the magma sea. Sometimes I still find myself wanting a magma pipe for easy access to magma at the surface levels without building a 100z level pump stack.
2. Would it be possible to have site finder parameter for different categories of stone (Sedimentary, Igneous intrusive, Igneous extrusive, Metamorphic). Having a parameter for every single type of stone would be better but these broad categories would be nice.
With the new more important caravans, will we be able to keep our doors closed most of the year, and get a grace period for opening up when the caravans arrive on the edge of the map? This would allow more security whilst minimising lost trade opportunities.
Will size ever matter for trading, and will you ever get the ability to make things sized for creatures larger/smaller than yourself? For example, would a human caravan refuse (or pay less for) dwarf-sized armor because it will be harder to sell? Will you be able to make human-sized armor for trade instead?
when will item decay and item damage make it in? Will decay hit even mundane objects like chalices and doors? And will decay exist in worldgen, too, in some abstract form?
Toady will people in places with scarce vegetation turn to herding of say sheep* instead of farming? Will some regions begin to specialise theyr products like growing Mulberry for silkworms instead of delivering a certain food surplus for Cities?
Why did you use this symbol, ?, for currency in DF?
Once civs become less of a hivemind when you attack a citizen, how would the spread of word be handled if you assaulted someone who lived? Also, how far is it from now before the A.I. of someone decides you are too strong to fight in ways excluding dismemberment?
Will elf, goblin and koblin civilizations be integrated into the new economy system as well?
If yes, how will they get their food seeing that they don't do farming?
When mounts are implemented, will we be able to purchase mounts for our companion's? or will they have to slog it out on foot while the hero rides upon his valiant steed.
what's the plan from mountainhome requests? will there be only prices hints as they're now about mountainhome needs, or will the caravan arc means that the mountainhome will now also make 'mandates' for us to comply?
1. Will town structure change? Including bigger/higher buildings and concentrated shop-area (Marketplace?)
2. Will peoples have beds again? Or/and maybe food containers?
Have you planned further limiting the availability of plate armour? As far as I know, it is not 'one size fits all' equipment. So if we wanted to commission a set to our measurements, it'd cost a lot and take (a lot) of time make. Adventure mode in particular would benefit, fortress mode perhaps less so.
How about proper shield damage to make them less reusable? This is possibly coming with item damage though.
I have read in the past that between the interviews, DF Talks, bug fixes, active development, and little things like sleep, you have less time to go through the Suggestions forum. Is there a plan to revitalize or refocus that aspect of the forums?
I was wondering if [you] had had any thoughts on ways the community could do things to make it easier for [you]. Ways to group suggestions under arc, etc.
Since we're getting some new plant extracts, will the jobs these extra be used for extend to just beyond cooking with these release, or ever?
Olive oil comes to mine, as a plant product that has multiple uses from cooking to cleaning.
Well we see other minable things, like salt anytime soon?
Quote from: QuatchHow will clay be gathered for pottery production? Are we looking at the sand style ordering a patch of ground, or will clay soil now drop rock-like objects?
Is that refresh of sand gathering also coming now as a result?
How far into pottery did you go? Glazes, bisque firing vs glaze firing, high fire ware being water tight, porcelain vs stoneware vs terracotta?Quote from: Osmosis JonesTo build on Quatch's earlier question, does this mean that we will be able to collect clay like sand? If so, how raw-definable is this collectability? E.g. would I be able to add the ability to collect an entirely new resource (say, peat, or sea salt), or is it just clay mining being added?Quote from: HephDoes "Pottery" include bricks and other uses as Building material (like filling for timber-frames)? What about Pipes? Also how many pottery items per wood-log, if they get fired in the kiln, can we expect? Are fruit trees in for this release?
The mention of new raws for domestic animals got me wondering about domestic animals in general. Will we be able to define entity specific domestic animals any time soon? While most races should draw from the local surroundings some more fantastical races should be able to keep animals specific to them. Currently you have domesic, evil, and/or local animals leaving little room for modding.
The same question again but with seeds/crops instead of animals in mind?
Will there be Hydra eggs? And dragon eggs? And giant eagle eggs? And giant desert scorpion eggs? And alligator eggs? And giant cave spider eggs?
Will vermin have eggs? So we can like have fluffy fluffy wambler eggs and toad eggs.
I assume roads will be effected by trade routs, right?
Quote from: HephAny Plans to make the civ-leaders aware of this network (in parts)? Will civs or entitys try to actively search for new resources and tradepartners?Quote from: TurnpikeLadFor example, if that little country on the other side of the world has some rare kind of plant or metal, will cultures eventually set up a much longer trade route? Will cultures that trade directly to faraway lands, cutting out the middleman, get a better deal on the merchandise than cultures that rely on an extended trade network where distant goods must change hands many times?
Also, I wonder how trade routes are set up in world gen, how static they are over time. Are they recalculated every year, or every century? If a town expands its hamlets and gains access to a kind of resource, will it cease its trade with a distant town which previously was providing them that resource? Is there a concept of discovery, where a culture might have too little information about another culture and so would not be able to trade with them, or are all cultures assumed to be aware of the relative availability and value of goods all over the world?Quote from: Jiri PetruWith the coming of the caravan arc, will there be any feature that fully utilizes the world-gen time? I mean, will there be something that makes year 900 really different from year 300? I can imagine the trade routes will take some years to develop, then small markets would start popping up, then small fairs, which over the course of hundreds of years could develop into huge cities, making the late-gen worlds pretty unique. But right now, the only difference between year 1000 and year 100 seems to be the number of dead people in the legends mode.
If in adventure mode we kill all the farms that feed into a town will the town suffer?
Are the purple cities dark fortresses? Does that mean the goblins actually trade this time?
Quote from: Lord ShonusLooking over the maps posted in the devlog, I've noticed that there are many potential trade routes unused, and several of the marked sites are not connected.
With that in mind, how does the game determine the connections? Is it simple distance combined with relations? Is there something more complex going on?Quote from: MephansterasHmm. Some of the hamlets don't seem to connect to anything. Are those ruins, or just isolated hamlets?Quote from: HephI also noticed that a number of the dwarfen civs (on the middle-sized island) didnt trade at all not even between theyr own settlements. Bug/Feature?Quote from: VDOgamezWhat kind of algorithms are being used for determination of the trading patterns of cities, civilizations, and species?
Toady, will player built fortresses need to pay attention to the trade network to get caravans? As in, will the embark screen point out stuff like "no human town is close enough to you to send caravans"?
Does the simulation account for the value of the goods being traded when determining the length of trade routes? Does the simulation account for how risky the trade route would be when trading, and do trade routes that regularly lose their caravans "dry up?"
Quote from: EmeraldWindAre these trade routes literally routes or are they abstracted representation of the trade network?
More specifically, I'm asking if the caravans will follow the 'routes' as paths or are the 'routes' a simple representation of the fact the two locations are trading.Quote from: iceball3I actually think that the straight lines are more to make understanding trade connections easier, rather than actually lining out the actual route
Are there plans to be able to have multiple embarks at once, and to be able to zoom from fort view to world view and back on any of these embarks? An example of this would be in the old Accolade game Deadlock, though that was provinces instead of embarks, but a similar idea.
Will we ever be able to access the legends mode information directly from fortress or adventurer mode? Like in: you click at the leader of the enemy siege, open his details (z) screen and click something like (h)istory? I know you are planning to do books and some other "in-game" applications of legends, but these are hardly as useful as the legends mode. And I am able to copy my safe to a different folder, abandon the fortress, and open the Legends. Why prevent me from doing it the easy way?
So I saw the trade routes and all, and I was wondering. Do you think you'll ever invent value based off how exotic an item is? Say you've got a trinket made from the opposite corner of a large world, or from a civilization that isn't even connected with yours through trade routes. It should be rare and unique. Adventurers could get items from distant civilizations for eccentric collectors.
[...]So... awesome...
Quote from: Jiri PetruWill we ever be able to access the legends mode information directly from fortress or adventurer mode? Like in: you click at the leader of the enemy siege, open his details (z) screen and click something like (h)istory? I know you are planning to do books and some other "in-game" applications of legends, but these are hardly as useful as the legends mode. And I am able to copy my safe to a different folder, abandon the fortress, and open the Legends. Why prevent me from doing it the easy way?
I don't like having easily accessible histories in play, especially in adventure mode. I think it breaks immersion and it will essentially break features to be omniscient as we get a little further down the line. In fortress mode it isn't as bad, but you'd still be able to spoil for instance what sort of creatures are likely to come with an enemy leader before a siege for instance. It probably works best as a world init parameter.
Toady's future plans include a linguistics engine so it can simulate different speech styles for differnet people under different moods. I'm sure that kind of option to ask for specific information will be incorporated once it gets done, including whether the NPC feels like telling an outsider/stranger like you about it.Quote from: Jiri PetruWill we ever be able to access the legends mode information directly from fortress or adventurer mode? Like in: you click at the leader of the enemy siege, open his details (z) screen and click something like (h)istory? I know you are planning to do books and some other "in-game" applications of legends, but these are hardly as useful as the legends mode. And I am able to copy my safe to a different folder, abandon the fortress, and open the Legends. Why prevent me from doing it the easy way?
I don't like having easily accessible histories in play, especially in adventure mode. I think it breaks immersion and it will essentially break features to be omniscient as we get a little further down the line. In fortress mode it isn't as bad, but you'd still be able to spoil for instance what sort of creatures are likely to come with an enemy leader before a siege for instance. It probably works best as a world init parameter.
I agree that the player shouldn't be able to look at some book and be able to look up every single detail about his world's history, but I think there are immersive ways to allow the player to ask about history through conversation with people. For example, a "tell me more about <type in name of figure/event/place/etc>" option in the conversation menu is more informative and immersive than repeatedly asking about surroundings or telling people that they look like mighty warriors and relying on the RNG to receive useful information. It's infinitely more useful and immersive to incorporate historical information into gameplay than to have a separate game mode to look up all this information. As long as the information available is limited to what's known by the NPC you're talking to, it could also be reasonably realistic and non-game-breaking for historical information to be revealed through conversation in a natural way.
I would have greened the above, but it's more of a suggestion or even an argument than a question relevant to current development. In any case, it's more of a topic for Suggestions, I guess.
Edit: I'm talking mostly about Adventurer Mode, where you can talk to people one-on-one.
You can just open up another DF.exe, you know... I agree though, Legends in-game would be nice.I'm afraid that's not the case; a single save can support a fortress, an adventurer, or an active legends view, but not two or more at once. Viewing the legends of a world that has an existing adventurer or player fortress requires copying the save.
You can just open up another DF.exe, you know... I agree though, Legends in-game would be nice.I'm afraid that's not the case; a single save can support a fortress, an adventurer, or an active legends view, but not two or more at once. Viewing the legends of a world that has an existing adventurer or player fortress requires copying the save.
Are you sure about that? Unless I'm misunderstanding you, I'm certain that just recently I opened up another .exe file of DF, with the same save, and opened up Legends mode to check the description of a god my dwarf worshipped while the other .exe was running in the background with the fort playing.
Quote from: LoSboccaccAny plans for food of desperation to be available? Boiled shoes for dinner tonight, but it beats starving.
We haven't specifically thought about it for this time. Getting to the point of acts of cannibalism is probably inevitable in the long run though.
You might be given a significant amount of leeway if you are treated more like a fair than a market, so you can have a time where lots of traders come to visit.What does this mean? Specifically, what is a "fair" and what is a "market" in the context of Dwarf Fortress?
You might be given a significant amount of leeway if you are treated more like a fair than a market, so you can have a time where lots of traders come to visit.What does this mean? Specifically, what is a "fair" and what is a "market" in the context of Dwarf Fortress?
How long until we can see some more Dwarf Mode - Centric updates? Im not a classic rougelike fan, so dwarf fortress mode is the only mode I will really tolerate, and the latest updates seem mostly based around adventure mode.
How long until we can see some more Dwarf Mode - Centric updates? Im not a classic rougelike fan, so dwarf fortress mode is the only mode I will really tolerate, and the latest updates seem mostly based around adventure mode.Toady is doing caravans, followed by bug fixing, followed by army stuff. All of this is general world stuff which relates to Fortress mode just as strongly as it does to Adventure mode.
That would be a lot less fun than having to find out about the people ingame through books, engravings and word-of-mouth. Maybe there could be some kind of log where you could check everything you learned about a historical figure yet?
I wonder what would happen if we were to build a wall across multiple embarks, blocking off a trade rout - would the traders and their pack animals get to the wall and freak out, doing that weird crawl thing they do whenever they get attacked at your depot?Or use it to demand a toll
Because that would be freaking hilarious.
I wonder what would happen if we were to build a wall across multiple embarks, blocking off a trade rout - would the traders and their pack animals get to the wall and freak out, doing that weird crawl thing they do whenever they get attacked at your depot?Or use it to demand a toll
Because that would be freaking hilarious.
A question about the development of supply and demand in the caravan arc: will there variable currency values and systems?I think not, variable currencies are a modern economic issue, linked to the amount of gold and less traditional valuables backing the economy of the coin. (etc)
Currently, the money is all the same, just usable in different places. In the future, might the value of a civilization's currency depend on the state of it relative to the seller? For instance, money from a very far away place the seller rarely trades with would be worth less than normal, those from a collapsed civilization would only be worth the material it's made of, and money from a civilization that collapsed hundreds of years ago would cease functioning like currency and be valued as an artifact.
For that matter, would they ever have different value systems instead of the same copper/silver/gold currency system.
I didn't want to use a dollar sign next to the numbers, and the yellow turtle seemed bright and shiny.I've always referred to the dwarven unit of currency as the Shiny. 100 Shinys for a pigtail sock etc.
I didn't want to use a dollar sign next to the numbers, and the yellow turtle seemed bright and shiny.I've always referred to the dwarven unit of currency as the Shiny. 100 Shinys for a pigtail sock etc.
Quote from: AreyarMaybe kids will also play with toys to train their dexterity/ smarts/ etc depending on toy and have a preference for a certain toy type?Yeah, we've wanted kids to play with toys forever, but never found the time. Still not sure we will, he he he, but certainly having a kid bring a toy to a party would be a start.
Will dwarves be temporarily claiming or buying the instruments and such they desire/require for playing at a party?
Music at a meetingplace party, will give additional happythought (dep. on quality of music) layer?
I haven't planned out specifically how music will work. I'm not guaranteed to even get to it, but I imagine they'll just be able to claim an instrument if there's one sitting around, as there's no point wallowing in the economy for now. I put in some invisible skills for music a while ago, so the playing of the music would very likely have an impact on all of the party-goers.
AreHFS? I wasn't aware.Spoiler (click to show/hide)
And question 2:Uh, the in-game worldgen parameter editor? I have no idea why everyone looks at the raw worldgen.txt file and gets scared off when the in-game editor explains a lot of the parameters.
I like the options the new "start a new world now!" thing gives you, but I don't think they're enough. For instance, I want really shallow cave systems but I don't want to fool around in the advanced settings for ten minutes to get them. Do you think we'll ever have a medium-complexity generator or something?
I don't know if it was asked, but:A cat will do this for you. It's their innate behaviour to explore all nooks and crannies of wherever they are. Don't ask how the cat communicates back the map information to you.
Will we be able to send dwarves for a job of exploring and mapping the caverns? As in, telling the dwarves to map certain "blacked out" regions of the embark map, such as the ones in caverns?
They do? maybe I should make the doors to the caverns pet passable... hm...I don't know if it was asked, but:A cat will do this for you. It's their innate behaviour to explore all nooks and crannies of wherever they are. Don't ask how the cat communicates back the map information to you.
Will we be able to send dwarves for a job of exploring and mapping the caverns? As in, telling the dwarves to map certain "blacked out" regions of the embark map, such as the ones in caverns?
Infectious disease can be a nice controling element for populations in towns a cities, giving boost to mortality and keeping the populations down.
Infectious disease can be a nice controling element for populations in towns a cities, giving boost to mortality and keeping the populations down.
Read that as morality, and was seriously questioning yours.
Infectious disease can be a nice controling element for populations in towns a cities, giving boost to mortality and keeping the populations down.
Read that as morality, and was seriously questioning yours.
GLad I'm not the only one who read it that way. Although, we *are* talking about DF... ;)
Okay, seeeecret question under the spoiler:Spoiler (click to show/hide)
I don't know if it was asked, but:A cat will do this for you. It's their innate behaviour to explore all nooks and crannies of wherever they are. Don't ask how the cat communicates back the map information to you.
Will we be able to send dwarves for a job of exploring and mapping the caverns? As in, telling the dwarves to map certain "blacked out" regions of the embark map, such as the ones in caverns?
I think my puppies are more evolved than my cats. I have 29865(estimated number) puppies, and punny 5 kittens.I don't know if it was asked, but:A cat will do this for you. It's their innate behaviour to explore all nooks and crannies of wherever they are. Don't ask how the cat communicates back the map information to you.
Will we be able to send dwarves for a job of exploring and mapping the caverns? As in, telling the dwarves to map certain "blacked out" regions of the embark map, such as the ones in caverns?
Dwarf cats evolved from the elusive cave dolphin, and therefore have sonar, and a strange psionic power which allows them to send messages from deep in the caverns, possess dwarves completely, and secretly report back to their briny masters.
Quote from: Desdichado
when will item decay and item damage make it in? Will decay hit even mundane objects like chalices and doors? And will decay exist in worldgen, too, in some abstract form?
Decay already occurs for things like doors, although it is hard to see in practice most of the time. I'm not sure when we'll get item damage. When there's a big combat push, I imagine it'll be up there now. I don't have it yet, but I'm pretty sure we'll see some objects in stockpiles passing to debris/disappear just to make things make sense. We might not get to larger scale ruins until we get to that part officially, dev-wise.
Quote from: Desdichado
when will item decay and item damage make it in? Will decay hit even mundane objects like chalices and doors? And will decay exist in worldgen, too, in some abstract form?
Decay already occurs for things like doors, although it is hard to see in practice most of the time. I'm not sure when we'll get item damage. When there's a big combat push, I imagine it'll be up there now. I don't have it yet, but I'm pretty sure we'll see some objects in stockpiles passing to debris/disappear just to make things make sense. We might not get to larger scale ruins until we get to that part officially, dev-wise.Spoiler (click to show/hide)
(I think it's sufficiently removed.) I recall quite a bit of fiction or history, from Morrowind, China, and The King of Dragon Pass that include kinds of ancestor worship in place of god worship, thinking of them as guardians or sources of divination. Are you planning on going in that direction when you take care of religions?Okay, seeeecret question under the spoiler:Spoiler (click to show/hide)Spoiler: We already have varieties of... (click to show/hide)
Quote from: Desdichado
when will item decay and item damage make it in? Will decay hit even mundane objects like chalices and doors? And will decay exist in worldgen, too, in some abstract form?
Decay already occurs for things like doors, although it is hard to see in practice most of the time. I'm not sure when we'll get item damage. When there's a big combat push, I imagine it'll be up there now. I don't have it yet, but I'm pretty sure we'll see some objects in stockpiles passing to debris/disappear just to make things make sense. We might not get to larger scale ruins until we get to that part officially, dev-wise.
In that vein, will cotton candy items suffer from decay and battle damage? Because given how limited supply is, I would hate to have to replace 10 ada shields after every battle, or something along those lines. Steel/iron shields I wouldn't mind replacing, but the blue metal is significantly more difficult to stock up on.
With the new caravan focus on trading, will we get any improvements to the fortress mode trade screen? I'm thinking about commands like mass-select; trade all but bins; list things by type (armor/food/raw materials); don't display mandate violating items; etc.
This is more a suggestion, but hell...The "known world" thing is probably largely pointless, as there is no meaningful way to explore from Dwarf mode, nor any real reason to want to. And as far as I know, that will remain unchanged indefinitely.
In adventure mode, the part of the map visible to you depends on the civ you start from.
How about extending this 'known world' info into dwarfmode and allow only settling in the area known (or slightly beyond)?
Alternatively, with caravan roleplay being developed,
How about leading the expedition from the mountainhomes to where you strike the earth as an adventurer?
This former should probably be optional, to avoid alienating DF purists. I feel something like this would create a stronger link between dwarf and advenurer mode, as you will want to create an adventurer to explore.
Prospecting for good spots could be a quest too.
I would like the option of being able to start a colony through adventurer. Except that you would need to gather 7 dwarves actually, but you can carry anything you want. the guys come with equipment, so when dwarf sites get fixed that should DEFINITELY become an option.I would like an option to make a HUMAN fortress through adventurer, and watch it fail.
also narrative is great! those with a good eye can easily get clues for Legends
Bogeymen are the worst thing, seriously :O I am thinking of just editing my raws to make them weak little blobs that can't move because they annoy so much
might it also be possible to leave your fort in the hands of the monarch at some point? so that the dwarf civ can conquer areas, or is something like other uncontrolled fortresses springing up of the dwarf civ?That option is already available, you just need a king/queen in your fort.
also as an alternative to just abandoning the fort
the december report indicated that the "army arc is on the horizon". So I doubt the economy will be the focus all winter. And the current dev goals are focused around adv mode, so you should be fine. This caravan thing is just jointly applicable to fortress mode."the horizon" in this case means "when we're done with this other stuff", which could easily end up being spring or even summer. Although what it is for you depends on where you live, I suppose. It will probably not be winter for me because winter is very short here, for example.
the december report indicated that the "army arc is on the horizon". So I doubt the economy will be the focus all winter. And the current dev goals are focused around adv mode, so you should be fine. This caravan thing is just jointly applicable to fortress mode."the horizon" in this case means "when we're done with this other stuff", which could easily end up being spring or even summer. Although what it is for you depends on where you live, I suppose. It will probably not be winter for me because winter is very short here, for example.
Classically, animated skeletons are more powerfull (and more difficult to create) . . .
Zombies are easier because they stil have tissues that help keep the body together. . . .
This preference could be my Warhammer and D&D upbringing indoctrinating me though
This new blog post excites me because it seems to imply that a wonderful agrarian fortress could actually work. Now all we need is for Dwarves to clothe themselves properly.Why would they want to, though? It's just a waste of good cloth, as things stand.
I love how it's only two lines and yet implies so much stuff.
This new blog post excites me because it seems to imply that a wonderful agrarian fortress could actually work. Now all we need is for Dwarves to clothe themselves properly.And for cloaks and robes to stop absorbing way too much incoming slashing and blunt damage. (spread over large surface area -bug) (Try robes vs. vest&pants arena battle)
Will 'milking' be replaced by some generic animal resource gathering skill of some sort?
- I'd love a some type of herding job, for animal caretakers, who could be assisted by huntingdogs...
I think a farm plot would be the better building analogy for a (fenced) pasture. Assign animals like a cage. Really, the cage works mechanically, its just too small.
I think a farm plot would be the better building analogy for a (fenced) pasture. Assign animals like a cage. Really, the cage works mechanically, its just too small.
Quoting for emphasis.- I'd love a some type of herding job, for animal caretakers, who could be assisted by huntingdogs...
Hunting dogs don't herd. They hunt!
Quoting for emphasis.- I'd love a some type of herding job, for animal caretakers, who could be assisted by huntingdogs...
Hunting dogs don't herd. They hunt!
I wouldn't want a hunting dog to herd my sheep on the princible that hunting dogs are to scare animals out of hiding(and will bite for the kill), and you wouldn't want your flock of sheep to panic. Especcially because sheep+panic+corridors of a fortress+booze+fire = !!FUN!! like only dwarf fortress can give it to you.
[1] Especially once it's no longer possible that one wall tile near the edge can obliquely support a huge and otherwise 'floating' castle over the top of almost all of the rest of the map, without some form of dislocation/collapse at the most least reinforced stress-point!
Actually, that's wrong, the game uses ‼, not !!. Also, he wasn't talking about ‼Fun‼, he was talking about Fun. He didn't mention fire in any way.Quoting for emphasis.- I'd love a some type of herding job, for animal caretakers, who could be assisted by huntingdogs...
Hunting dogs don't herd. They hunt!
I wouldn't want a hunting dog to herd my sheep on the princible that hunting dogs are to scare animals out of hiding(and will bite for the kill), and you wouldn't want your flock of sheep to panic. Especcially because sheep+panic+corridors of a fortress+booze+fire = !!FUN!! like only dwarf fortress can give it to you.
Fixed that for you...
Hey that sounds like an awesome new trap. Spatter pigs in oil light them on fire and make sure that they panic-stampede into the directions of the goblins.:lol:
Actually, that's wrong, the game uses ‼, not !!. Also, he wasn't talking about ‼Fun‼, he was talking about Fun. He didn't mention fire in any way.Quoting for emphasis.- I'd love a some type of herding job, for animal caretakers, who could be assisted by huntingdogs...
Hunting dogs don't herd. They hunt!
I wouldn't want a hunting dog to herd my sheep on the princible that hunting dogs are to scare animals out of hiding(and will bite for the kill), and you wouldn't want your flock of sheep to panic. Especcially because sheep+panic+corridors of a fortress+booze+fire = !!FUN!! like only dwarf fortress can give it to you.
Fixed that for you...
Actually, that's wrong, the game uses ‼, not !!. Also, he wasn't talking about ‼Fun‼, he was talking about Fun. He didn't mention fire in any way.Quoting for emphasis.- I'd love a some type of herding job, for animal caretakers, who could be assisted by huntingdogs...
Hunting dogs don't herd. They hunt!
I wouldn't want a hunting dog to herd my sheep on the princible that hunting dogs are to scare animals out of hiding(and will bite for the kill), and you wouldn't want your flock of sheep to panic. Especcially because sheep+panic+corridors of a fortress+booze+fire = ‼FUN‼ like only dwarf fortress can give it to you.
Fixed that for you...
Ahem.
Sheep Fortress.
Your dwarves are sheep. They can be trimmed periodically. Consider this.
Ahem.
Sheep Fortress.
Your dwarves are sheep. They can be trimmed periodically. Consider this.
Yeah well on the other hand pigs have a tremendous amount of fat that would burn after the oil is gone. Also they are are much stronger and heavier which makes them more deadly.
... only in dwarf fortress.
Let's not go there, lest the subject of milk come up. Just...no.
How about clay pots: the alternative to wooden barrels/bins that you can sell to the elves...(Or maybe not, as it would probly involve baking and thus wood... But even then most river-clays can harden fine by themselves so baking shouldn't be required...)
Are you planing stuffs like independent civ evolution, being those based on their resources and knowledge, on the world gen? Something like tribals, then small cities, then nations... While others don't evolve because they have no resources(Like Colombo going to America). Each one evolving their own language... Something like prehistory to middle ages.
Yeah well on the other hand pigs have a tremendous amount of fat that would burn after the oil is gone. Also they are are much stronger and heavier which makes them more deadly.
... only in dwarf fortress.
Actually, the Romans used incendiary pigs fairly often. 600lbs of flaming, screaming, hoofed fat comes running at you, you get out of the way. They also have a tendency to explode, due to the fat boiling away before the skin breeches, leading to over-pressurizing.
Yeah well on the other hand pigs have a tremendous amount of fat that would burn after the oil is gone. Also they are are much stronger and heavier which makes them more deadly.
... only in dwarf fortress.
Actually, the Romans used incendiary pigs fairly often. 600lbs of flaming, screaming, hoofed fat comes running at you, you get out of the way. They also have a tendency to explode, due to the fat boiling away before the skin breeches, leading to over-pressurizing.
Source PLZ.
Are you planing stuffs like independent civ evolution, being those based on their resources and knowledge, on the world gen? Something like tribals, then small cities, then nations... While others don't evolve because they have no resources(Like Colombo going to America). Each one evolving their own language... Something like prehistory to middle ages.
Does the current combat system take into account "angles of impact"? Or does that fall under square shots? If angles were calculated somehow, it would allow stuff like steel swords to sometimes deflect off copper armor because of a glancing blow/bad angle. Would balance the "lower grade" armor metals and make them at least a little bit useful compared to now. It happens rarely if at all in the current system.I've seen it happen quite often (steel deflecting off iron) when I try a very non-square attack in adv. mode. It probably happens rarely because the creatures all choose the most square shots.
Edit:
If it is simulated in the current system, it sure doesn't show.
Will 'milking' be replaced by some generic animal resource gathering skill of some sort?
Yeah well on the other hand pigs have a tremendous amount of fat that would burn after the oil is gone. Also they are are much stronger and heavier which makes them more deadly.
... only in dwarf fortress.
Actually, the Romans used incendiary pigs fairly often. 600lbs of flaming, screaming, hoofed fat comes running at you, you get out of the way. They also have a tendency to explode, due to the fat boiling away before the skin breeches, leading to over-pressurizing.
Source PLZ.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_pig
On a similar note to the flaming pigs as noted above, I seem to recall reading somewhere about an ancient Chinese weapon involving a great wad of explosives strapped to an ox. They'd give the ox a whack and send it off in the direction of the enemy.
Will dwarves (and those poor goblins whose friends got roasted) learn a healthy fear of fire soon? At least improved sieges would require this, I think.The answer to that second question is "yes".
Now that the economy is being worked on, will adventure mode trading be improved?
I like how you focus on the fact that he used the wrong ASCII characters instead of the fact that booze doesn't burn well at all, in DF or in real life.
Will dwarves (and those poor goblins whose friends got roasted) learn a healthy fear of fire soon? At least improved sieges would require this, I think.
Now that the economy is being worked on, will adventure mode trading be improved?
Will 'milking' be replaced by some generic animal resource gathering skill of some sort?
Green'd that for yaYeah well on the other hand pigs have a tremendous amount of fat that would burn after the oil is gone. Also they are are much stronger and heavier which makes them more deadly.
... only in dwarf fortress.
Actually, the Romans used incendiary pigs fairly often. 600lbs of flaming, screaming, hoofed fat comes running at you, you get out of the way. They also have a tendency to explode, due to the fat boiling away before the skin breeches, leading to over-pressurizing.
Source PLZ.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_pig
You may have seen it in the game Rome: Total War, although that is hardly a good source.
I think I'd like to play AS a villian/night creature. You know, roaming from town to town, converting the population into horrific creatures at my command? Eventually I'd have a "Children Golem" division for extended psychological sieges.That could be doable, given these bits:Quote from: Adventurer Role: Slayer of Night Creatures
- Curses and exposure
- Can be cursed by night creatures when you put them down
- The slaves of night creatures could have extreme effects from proximity that also affect you if you make a business of hunting them
Adventurer Mode: Hero
Villains
...Generally, "villians" are just leaders of groups you oppose at the time...
Capturing people alive and interrogations
Allowing people to lie also applying to the "honest" villagers who send you out to raid the camp. (They may have been lied to by their very own Sheriff of Mukcanesepum.)
Reputation
Reputation with entity populations, site governments, families and individuals (and other Reputation items)
Adventurer Role: Thief
Bounties and being hunted
(Various, but mainly) If your identity/appearance is associated to an alert over a crime, somebody responsible in the entity should put a bounty on you if appropriate for the entity
Concealing your identity
(Various of these could be involved)
Things like wool and feather and eggs seem pretty basic to me.
I sort of had the idea that that was what ClownMetal was all about. Something HFS couldn't interact with. Either some form of their own private Kryptonite, or an Unobtanium shell impervious to their effects. (The fact that when the shell is breached they currentlyWhat would prevent the clowns from coming straight from the H.F.S. Clown Car to your wagon at embark? If they really want to Entertain (i.e., bring FunTM to) the world's children, and they can swim through rock...Spoiler: HFS rock swimming (click to show/hide)
If you shift from (a six-limbed creature with a wound to the middle left limb) to a human, I'd expect you actually shift to (a human with a significant wound on the of your lower abdomen/back). Bleeding is bleeding - you can't shift to a human and mosey off to the dang hospital.My thoughts too. Heavy laceration to a limb that you 'reabsorb' and no longer have would be damage to the skin on the side of the torso that mapped directly (not necessarily precisely in code, just in general abstraction) to the where the limb emerged. A broken bone within the limb might relate to a rib in that location, but that's a dodgier relationship.
Are you planing stuffs like independent civ evolution, being those based on their resources and knowledge, on the world gen? Something like tribals, then small cities, then nations... While others don't evolve because they have no resources(Like Colombo going to America). Each one evolving their own language... Something like prehistory to middle ages.
It's not really lack of resources, it's lack of interaction with other civilizations and cultures.
europe has a harsher climate than tropical places. that makes people have to invent shit to live better.Well... Don't know exactly why they did that, maybe I was wrong, but they needed to.
europe has a harsher climate than tropical places. that makes people have to invent shit to live better.Which is why the mainland Europe, Britain, etc. stayed barbaric until civilised from the outside (by conquering Rome, which still is an outside influence)
Does the current combat system take into account "angles of impact"? Or does that fall under square shots? If angles were calculated somehow, it would allow stuff like steel swords to sometimes deflect off copper armor because of a glancing blow/bad angle. Would balance the "lower grade" armor metals and make them at least a little bit useful compared to now. It happens rarely if at all in the current system.I've seen it happen quite often (steel deflecting off iron) when I try a very non-square attack in adv. mode. It probably happens rarely because the creatures all choose the most square shots.
Edit:
If it is simulated in the current system, it sure doesn't show.
europe has a harsher climate than tropical places. that makes people have to invent shit to live better.
Geographic determinism is quite passe now. Turned out just to be veiled racism.
Maya, Inca, Zulu, ancient Indian (not native american), Polynesian, Hawaian, Korean, etc, etc, etc. Many non-european climates have had successes.
The trade/resource availability/frequency of natural disaster, now that you could probably make an argument around. Of course it would prove your original point wrong because they did a hell of a lot with poor resources.
It occurs to me the Devlist doesn't mention any ways of managing wounds in adventure mode. An oversight?
This page doesn't represent everything we'd like to do. It just has some of the things we're thinking about doing sooner rather than later.
It occurs to me the Devlist doesn't mention any ways of managing wounds in adventure mode. An oversight?no stuff like this in on the todo list some were.
(you can get close by buffing the surface with excruciatingly fine clay)This granted me an image of a dwarf crushing clay with his knuckles against rock until it was excruciatingly fine.
There are a ridiculous number of factors determining a civilization's failure or success . . .
Same for curses and such, pay a priest to get rid of the curse at a temple.
There are a ridiculous number of factors determining a civilization's failure or success . . .
Your post confuzzles me. I feel like you're scoffing at someone's arguments, but I'm not sure whose.
In any case, to synthesize from the a couple of Jared Diamond books, a civilization's success generally has to do with its geographic and other resources rather than its human intellectual capital (since human ingenuity and capability are pretty well distributed across our entire species). I'm not sure that your assertion of luck holds true at all, except in-so-far-as a civilization is lucky enough to start out in an area that is organized in an east-to-west rather than north-to-south manner and which has a lot of convoluted coastlines.
I'm not sure that it's completely out or necessarily racist. Guns, Germs, and Steel did a good job of saying, basically, that the ground you're standing on is the primary factor in your ability to build a kick-ass civilization (which often proceeds to ass-kick other civilizations). That humans of all sorts are capable of building incredible stuff for a while even under the most unfavorable conditions speaks to the incredible tenacity and ingenuity that we all share as a species.
It would be great to be able to go to one of the surgeons in a town and pay to get healed.
Same for curses and such, pay a priest to get rid of the curse at a temple.
I'm not sure that it's completely out or necessarily racist. Guns, Germs, and Steel did a good job of saying, basically, that the ground you're standing on is the primary factor in your ability to build a kick-ass civilization (which often proceeds to ass-kick other civilizations). That humans of all sorts are capable of building incredible stuff for a while even under the most unfavorable conditions speaks to the incredible tenacity and ingenuity that we all share as a species.
I was considering mentioning Diamond's book in my post in support. The thing with geographic determinism is, its founded on the imperialist argument that heat makes you lazy, and thats why the tropic civilizations failed - lack of challenge.
I think we both agree that this is obviously false. However, I can see that you interpret the term differently than me. As I have discarded all of my human geography texts (I am a physical geographer) I can't refer to see if there is a better term :)
In summary, perhaps calling it resource-limited advancement rather than geographically-determined culture?
...
Define 'easilly domesticated', domesticated animals are generally descended from wild forebears that were as wild as those from other regions.
Some of our most domestic animals tend to originate in africa; cows, horses, cats. Dogs and pigs are probably eurasian.
Llamas etc are tamish, cangaroos are also pretty easilly held. iirc.
Domesticatioin in Aus/americas more likely is less because of humans getting there rather later and already having some preferred animals from Africa/europe/asia.
how they managed to domesticate wolves so easily and so early remains a mystery to me.
sharing meat, perhaps?
Felines are notably far less subservient than dogs, which suggests that they were tamed accidentally. (Rodents gather around human food stockpiles, the smaller kinds of cats move in to take advantage, man is happy that the cats are killing the rodents stealing his stored plants, so they tolerate one another.)
As for cats, you can really wonder who tamed who.
As for cats, you can really wonder who tamed who.
One wonders, until one contemplates which member of the partnership is often a.) dressed up in silly costumes, b.) relieved of his or her burdensome gonads, or (if supernumerary) c.) euthanized and packed into barrels pending incineration.
What do you wear when you leave the house? What about your cat?As for cats, you can really wonder who tamed who.
One wonders, until one contemplates which member of the partnership is often a.) dressed up in silly costumes
Reading lists of items in DF is difficult because the least important information is presented first: material then item. Could we get an init option to display the item then its' material?
eg: "gloves made of bear leather" rather than "bear leather gloves"
Reading lists of items in DF is difficult because the least important information is presented first: material then item. Could we get an init option to display the item then its' material?
eg: "gloves made of bear leather" rather than "bear leather gloves"
yes we are that altruistic
What do you wear when you leave the house? What about your cat?
Egul ... well fitting for the king of the Sky. I hope we get a Phoenix sometimes soon ;). Oh can we have a story on Egul the ROC?
:o 209.9 million cm^3!? That's more than 8 times the size of a dragon! I think Toady and/or ThreeToe have to reconsider that wingspan measure.
By all rights, it should be larger than a dragon. If anything was going to be a multi-tile creature, my money would be on Rocs. If a dragon was wagon-sized, Rocs would be depot-sized. Remember, they carry off whales to eat.
I think that volume math is a bit off since mass increases by cube while surface area increases by the square. This means that as the bird gets larger, it needs proportionally larger wings to fly. Of course, with magic, all bets are off.
Which, strangely enough, they don't. It must have been a wizard!I think that volume math is a bit off since mass increases by cube while surface area increases by the square. This means that as the bird gets larger, it needs proportionally larger wings to fly. Of course, with magic, all bets are off.
If that was necessary then animals that huge couldn't exist at all.
I approve of dragon eggs. Thank you, Threetoe, for reporting this success. For the sake of those who are dead.
I approve of dragon eggs. Thank you, Threetoe, for reporting this success. For the sake of those who are dead.
And now there's science to be done for the people who are still alive.
Sorry.
Quote from: LoSboccaccAny plans for food of desperation to be available? Boiled shoes for dinner tonight, but it beats starving.
We haven't specifically thought about it for this time. Getting to the point of acts of cannibalism is probably inevitable in the long run though.
For species that have taboos on the topic, will eating sentients of other species be more acceptable than, and thus done before, eating one's own kind? It'd make sense to snack on goblin raiders or a bunch of elven traders who brought nothing of use before devouring one's own kind.
The question about you being able to build a road in adventure mode has me wondering about the mention of the ability to pass time to grow crops in the dev blog: will we ever be able to pass years or even decades, like continuing world gen? Most likely it would be something you can only do if you don't have a fortress or active adventurer. Maybe to skip ahead a century after the HFS you tapped destroyed to see what horrors you have unleashed upon the world.
Quote from: FootkerchiefHe also mentioned (I think in that recently posted interview) wanting to do something for adventurers, like finding ways to interweave your past with history. But it would be even cooler if, when you start a new adventurer, the history generator starts back up so that your adventurer has a "real" history instead of a retconned one. As it's generating your life, the game could identify potentially pivotal moments and let you make a decision, which would not only change your character's goals but also shape their personality. Kind of like LCS character generation, but more hardcore.
The issue with restarting the generator is that you might not want the world to advance by more than a decade every time you play (especially if your characters tend to die immediately), but it would be cool as an option, and it would give you the opportunity to have more impact -- however, most of the impact should be during regular play instead of through a Q&A process, I think, so maybe it's not much different from the retconning approach in retrospect. With retconnning, you'd still be able to make decisions -- they'd just only be able to seriously affect the other new characters that have been pulled up from your abstract population. That isn't all that bad, since the populations can have attached historical events, so it can be very thorough with respect to the existing history, and you could meet the real old historical figures, just not have an effect up to the level of, say, killing them or taking their important things. It could insert new events back into the old histories though. You'd just not want those to make subsequent decisions seem odd.
An exception to the lack of impact (either desired impact in the restart-generator setup or technically feasible impact in the retcon setup) might be the start scenario, as it could involve some of the main historical figures sacrificing you by dropping you into a cave or something, but that is essentially a restart-generator scenario that has run a very short period of time.
The fact that metal seems to be somewhat more uncommon than currently left me a bit concerned about picking a good site (which already is a pain!). I wonder if different metal distributions could be used for each cavern layer, so it'd get more abundant the deeper it gets, and then civs could be limited to not being able to dig too deep (duw to low engineering hability) when it is working out the economy. Also another thing I wonder is if traders will bring more significant ammounts of metal bars when you ask, lest a bad sited fortress run into lack of metal (the horror!)
Metal isn't as easy to find, so I've added metal/soil to the site finder [...]
3) Will adventurers be able to build and use workshops so as to interact with the economy any time soon?
Quote from: Acanthus117Hey, Toady, will adventurers ever be able to use workshops, or will we be restricted to the 'buildingless' reactions?
We haven't decided what the future of workshops is in adventure mode. If the use of tools keeps up, it might be that we just keep simulating things, or that we'll throw in the workshops for things we don't get to simulating promptly. There are lots of discussions around generalizing/extending the workshop concept in dwarf mode, instead, so that it would be somewhat more like adv mode is shaping up, but we're really not sure what's going to happen there. So for now, the things that you do in adv mode will be tool-based actions. That should get us quite a way, until we start getting toward metal-working and furniture making, at which point we'll have to see if we slip back to workshops or try something more ambitious.
I like the options the new "start a new world now!" thing gives you, but I don't think they're enough. For instance, I want really shallow cave systems but I don't want to fool around in the advanced settings for ten minutes to get them. Do you think we'll ever have a medium-complexity generator or something?
I don't know if it was asked, but:
Will we be able to send dwarves for a job of exploring and mapping the caverns? As in, telling the dwarves to map certain "blacked out" regions of the embark map, such as the ones in caverns?
Will random illnesses be implemented in fortress mode anytime soon? e.g dwarves can catch a cold/get pneumonia.
Reading lists of items in DF is difficult because the least important information is presented first: material then item. Could we get an init option to display the item then its' material?
eg: "gloves made of bear leather" rather than "bear leather gloves"
I recall quite a bit of fiction or history, from Morrowind, China, and The King of Dragon Pass that include kinds of ancestor worship in place of god worship, thinking of them as guardians or sources of divination. Are you planning on going in that direction when you take care of religions?
Are you planing stuffs like independent civ evolution, being those based on their resources and knowledge, on the world gen? Something like tribals, then small cities, then nations... While others don't evolve because they have no resources(Like Colombo going to America). Each one evolving their own language... Something like prehistory to middle ages.
This raises the question of different lifestyles, architecturally and economically. Are variations of lifestyle inside a race, without regards to ethics, planned to go in, like an entire human civilisation being nomad, or building temporary cities that are destroyed every 2 years, or food/water/cattle being considered a common property and handled at the hamlet/village level instead of personnal level, or houses built in a circle instead of a square, or underground instead of aboveground ?
Quote from: Knight OtuWith entity populations, I'm assuming that the first step would be taken for overworld nomadic civilizations, but is it likely that they'll be included?
We had roaming nomadic groups in adv mode before, and then they were removed. It's true this would give them a new lease on life, but we're not really sure about any of the details. It might start out with refugees from attacked cities or something, but I'm not sure. Once we have pro-active villains, there'll also be more backing in for roving horde AI.
Quote from: HephCan we get Overground tribes?
We used to have nomadic groups, and now we've got the underground entity pops that don't really do anything outside of making camps and staging attacks. I'd like to diversify what's going on with humans and others up there, and it might start more with the bandit/roving baddies more than anything.
Will dwarves (and those poor goblins whose friends got roasted) learn a healthy fear of fire soon? At least improved sieges would require this, I think.
# Allowing constructions to burn, use of kindling/hay/etc. where reasonable
# Responding properly to personal fire issues (all modes)
# Fleeing burning buildings
# Fighting fire (all modes)
# Designation to set item or tile on fire in dwarf mode
Now that the economy is being worked on, will adventure mode trading be improved?
Fast question: Inquisition andfantasyreligions wars.
# Core63, SUCCESSION, ASSOCIATED CONFLICTS AND SCHISMS, (Future): First of all, succession for positions needs to occur in play, so that dead liaisons are replaced, as well as dead monarchs. Then the process needs to be made messier all around. Wars over succession, schisms over religious disagreements, etc., starting from world gen and coming into regular play. In dwarf mode, you might be involved on one side or the other, directly or indirectly, relying on more involved diplomacy and army code than we currently have, and adventure mode can also gain a lot from such conflicts.
# PowerGoal146, WALKING INTO THE WRONG BAR, (Future): Wearing a pendant of Imi the Owl of Hell, you enter a mead hall frequented by worshippers of Vutu the Playful Ooze of Midnight. They tie you to a post and break your fingers one by one.
# PowerGoal160, SINCE THE BEGINNING OF TIME, (Future): The Night King calls upon his vassal nation to join forces with his great army in order to cleanse the land once and for all of the brutal filth that worship the sun god.
"Assorted animals and thinking beings?" Care to elaborate on some of those?
Toady, do you plan to add any new values to the material raws in the very new future, if so, then what kind?
Anyway, will DF ever having jumping mechanics, at least for adventurers? You know, other than flying over stuff if you get a rideable dragon and/or are a flying creature? It would be a little silly to implement with the mechanics in their current state, but I was wondering if it might be a long term goal
# Bloat227, LEAPING AND PITS, (Future): Could add little open pits in the caves, respecting Z coord, and the ability to leap into any space with a confirmation, it might be a hassle to teach the path-finding of your opponents to leap after you though
it would make sense for walking on road to be easier, faster, and safer than hacking through wilderness.
Well then we might need conflict lines, where certain factions are trying to push forward down a road and are up against each other in a stalemate of sorts. If you can break the roadblock through violence or other means, then you get passage along with slight praise from the side that had most benefit.it would make sense for walking on road to be easier, faster, and safer than hacking through wilderness.
not strictly easier. I'd say road should get a different kind of troubles. like more bandit than trolls on road and vice versa on forests?
the only way to make it work is to limit the discussion to current development
Eggs claim for nests.huh?
Hey Toady, can you say what the 16 new animals will be? or do you want it to be a surprise?
I'm sorry that this could count as a suggestion, but it's very minor, and doesn't even need a long reply past Yes/No.
Will you add any of the new craftable materials (wool, clay), but also some older ones (horn, teeth, pearls, feathers) as prerequisites for artifacts? And the other way around, will any of the new items (pottery, porcelain) be artifactable?
it's supposed to be a surprise. you will have to discuss them in spoiler tags even after the game comes out.
it's supposed to be a surprise. you will have to discuss them in spoiler tags even after the game comes out.
Dragon and roc eggs imply dragons and rocs reproduce. How will inherently lonely megabeasts find mates? Will other megabeasts reproduce? And will FBs and titans be able to inherit egg laying?Maybe megabeasts reproduce now, but since the devlog didn't mention it, I wouldn't count on it, especially as reproducing megabeasts is part of the dev page. It may simply be that female rocs and dragons get inert eggs added to their lairs/nests (but it seems I'm wrong about the implementations often enough, and I would love to be wrong).
It's pretty clear that Askot is joking. And it seems that Toady doesn't really expect that even truly hidden fun stuff remains hidden for long after the release.it's supposed to be a surprise. you will have to discuss them in spoiler tags even after the game comes out.
oh god please no. it's silly enough as it is right now.
What kind of structures/towns will dwarves and elves have if they get visible settlements in the next update?That's a pretty big "if". Elves will probably take longer than dwarves and goblins to get proper sites again due to the multi-tile tree issue, and I wouldn't expect dwarf/goblin sites until after (maybe during) the army "month".
I suddenly just realized that, with the addition of dragon LAIRS, we are this much closer to simulating Dragon Warrior/Quest (NES) in DF.
Step 1. King gives quest to kill dragon and bring back princess. (About half possible?)
Step 2. Fight modded-in slimes and other creatures to level up your skills and abilities. (Don't know how much % possible)
Step 3. Find new towns, explore dungeons for equipment (pretty much possible except for elaborate dungeons which will be incredible when implemented)
Step 4. Fight bosses as you go. (megabeasts and night creatures, anyone?)
Step 5. Townsperson: Retrieveth Twenty Bear Asses. Will pay 20 gold. (probably eventually)
Step 6. With new equipment and skills, bash the dragon's head out. Complete your main quest. (Probably done except for the dragon capturing someone)
My face at this prospect is not unlike FSJAL.
I realize that we'll probably be able to raise dragons and rocs from eggs in Fortress mode, but will we be able to do so in ADVENTURE MODE? Since there will probably be horse riding, I don't think it's too far off.
Feeding to your new pet dragon. Try to keep up here.I realize that we'll probably be able to raise dragons and rocs from eggs in Fortress mode, but will we be able to do so in ADVENTURE MODE? Since there will probably be horse riding, I don't think it's too far off.
Wait, what's the horse for?
Step 2. Fight modded-in slimes and other creatures to level up your skills and abilities. (Don't know how much % possible)
I suddenly just realized that, with the addition of dragon LAIRS, we are this much closer to simulating Dragon Warrior/Quest (NES) in DF.
Step 1. King gives quest to kill dragon and bring back princess. (About half possible?)
Step 2. Fight modded-in slimes and other creatures to level up your skills and abilities. (Don't know how much % possible)
Step 3. Find new towns, explore dungeons for equipment (pretty much possible except for elaborate dungeons which will be incredible when implemented)
Step 4. Fight bosses as you go. (megabeasts and night creatures, anyone?)
Step 5. Townsperson: Retrieveth Twenty Bear Asses. Will pay 20 gold. (probably eventually)
Step 6. With new equipment and skills, bash the dragon's head out. Complete your main quest. (Probably done except for the dragon capturing someone)
My face at this prospect is not unlike FSJAL.
Fixed.
I suddenly just realized that, with the addition of dragon LAIRS, we are this much closer to simulating Dragon Warrior/Quest (NES) in DF.
Step 1. King gives quest to kill dragon and bring back princess. (About half possible?)
Step 2. Fight modded-in slimes and other creatures to level up your skills and abilities. (Don't know how much % possible)
Step 3. Find new towns, explore dungeons for equipment (pretty much possible except for elaborate dungeons which will be incredible when implemented)
Step 4. Fight bosses as you go. (megabeasts and night creatures, anyone?)
Step 5. Townsperson: Retrieveth Twenty Bear Asses. Will pay 20 gold. (probably eventually)
Step 6. With new equipment and skills, bash the dragon's head out. Complete your main quest. (Probably done except for the dragon capturing someone)
My face at this prospect is not unlike FSJAL.
Fixed.
Is that some kind of donkey/bear hybrid?
I suddenly just realized that, with the addition of dragon LAIRS, we are this much closer to simulating Dragon Warrior/Quest (NES) in DF.
Step 1. King gives quest to kill dragon and bring back princess. (About half possible?)
Step 2. Fight modded-in slimes and other creatures to level up your skills and abilities. (Don't know how much % possible)
Step 3. Find new towns, explore dungeons for equipment (pretty much possible except for elaborate dungeons which will be incredible when implemented)
Step 4. Fight bosses as you go. (megabeasts and night creatures, anyone?)
Step 5. Townsperson: Retrieveth Twenty Bear Asses. Will pay 20 gold. (probably eventually)
Step 6. With new equipment and skills, bash the dragon's head out. Complete your main quest. (Probably done except for the dragon capturing someone)
My face at this prospect is not unlike FSJAL.
Fixed.
Is that some kind of donkey/bear hybrid?
I realize that we'll probably be able to raise dragons and rocs from eggs in Fortress mode, but will we be able to do so in ADVENTURE MODE? Since there will probably be horse riding, I don't think it's too far off.
Wait, what's the horse for?
Askot is an idiot. ;)
Has anyone ever seen a cat .. dog, or any domestic animal in adventure mode? I can't ever recall seeing one at the moment. There isn't much mention pets on theThey used to roam the towns in the 2d version, and if everything goes according to plan, they'll again do so in the next version:dev_next/dev page. I'm sure is a topic that has been well explored though?
Quote from: Knight OtuWith ThreeToe's mention of pigs and chickens in the devlog and the November report... does that mean that the domestic animals, and any other tamed animals for that matter, will actually appear in adventure mode hamlets/towns again?
Yeah. We hope for a rather large collection of farm beasts wandering around villages. And perhaps pigs and chickens in the town yards as well. Everybody likes to keep pigs and chickens.
Dragon cheese for the dragon cheese throne!
There's a little discussion on cauldrons, sieges, and ladders; so will our dwarves get to make use of the former? Thoughts include pouring boiling oil over siegers climbing up on ladders (building it and loading it as a siege weapon)Liquids are items, rather than flowing fluids, right now. Unless oil is implemented as an actual fluid, like magma or water, which is completely unlikely, then it could only be dropped as a projectile.
If I throw an egg will it's shell break and spill it's insides?Toady said he considered adding eggs to require doing the different tissuelayers of eggs right, including yolk, eggwhite, shell etc. I assume that after all that trouble, he'll do the properties of those insides right as well and the insides will have liquid properties.
It occured to me ... if eggs definitions in raws are permitting enough, modders can abuse it.That's not abuse, that's just use. It's a very practical addition and there are lots of people who want that.
To introduce manure/feces for example.
also, as this is a topic that interests me, what is the latest word on it? the last time i heard of it footkerchief had found POWERGOAL 153 and we rejoiced
I was the one that posted the cauldron thread, and my original idea was more along the lines of spreading contaminants... for instance, a creature caught in a spatter of hot oil might get a number of contaminants over their body, which in turn cause damage from the heat. Or cutting more to the point, more dangerous substances might be used - like something flammable or imported venom from other civs - that causes paralysis, rotting flesh, or so on, providing the toxin works on contact. I didn't actually mention anything about cooking (since kitchens already serve that purpose fine), and vapors seem a rather roundabout way of doing things unless the toxic substance in question only causes harm when inhaled/ingested.There's a little discussion on cauldrons, sieges, and ladders; so will our dwarves get to make use of the former? Thoughts include pouring boiling oil over siegers climbing up on ladders (building it and loading it as a siege weapon)Liquids are items, rather than flowing fluids, right now. Unless oil is implemented as an actual fluid, like magma or water, which is completely unlikely, then it could only be dropped as a projectile.
As in,
"The spinning cooking oil [5] hits the goblin in the left ear, tearing the skin and bruising the fat!"
So... probably not.
also, as this is a topic that interests me, what is the latest word on it? the last time i heard of it footkerchief had found POWERGOAL 153 and we rejoiced
Nope. (http://www.bay12games.com/dwarves/dev_single.html)
Powergoal153, THE CRACKS OF DOOM, (Future): You flee into the sewer with the baron's ring, but sliding in the muck, you drop it. Try as you might, you cannot locate the precious object in the town's filth.
Eh. I've played a million sewer levels in a thousand games, and have yet to see a single solitary stool in any of them. I just assumed that "the town's filth" was going to be that generic green sludge that always seems to show up in computer game sewers. Rotting vegetables is my guess as to what it is, although DF sewers could be a disgusting tube of gristle, vermin parts, blood and vomit.
also, as this is a topic that interests me, what is the latest word on it? the last time i heard of it footkerchief had found POWERGOAL 153 and we rejoiced
Here's the collection of quotes (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=54494.msg1228547#msg1228547) (it's too long to post here). I don't think Toady has made any more recent comments.
Regarding the two of the top ten ESV items not specifically addressed on the new page, sped-up pathfinding and graphics support, the idea with the first is an upcoming date with the linux profiler now that we've got DF running over there to address the low-hanging fruit on the main grievance behind the suggestion (large, slow forts). In the case of supporting tiles for each game object, I need to figure out the deal with all the new SDL code before I can lay anything out in stark terms. The textures are stored differently (in a single atlas if it still works that way), and I'm not sure if it'll be feasible to move to full item/map texture support without altering the way that works.
Will we start to see not-death endings of adventurers any time soon? Such as adventurers thrown into dungeons, enslaved, mentally dominated by night creatures or otherwise incapacitated and able to be rescued/fought by later adventurers?
# Justice
* Surrender to those seeking you
o When you make a command that follows an order, there should be an option to skip ahead to stages of the journey (such as to a dungeon or halfway through the journey back if you want to attempt to escape from your captor)
* Punishment
o Imprisonment (until there are ways to escape, might as well retire the character, at which point rescue might be possible by a subsequent character)
Adventurer Role: Slayer of Night Creatures
* Torment the living
o Some victims can end up drained as subvillains or slaves in the same way a bandit leader has subordinates
* Curses and exposure
o The slaves of night creatures could have extreme effects from proximity that also affect you if you make a business of hunting them
Also, is the current on-map cycle of forgotten beasts, titans, dragons and so on going to become more nuanced any time soon? I'm particularly wondering about creatures interested in items (especially if they become part of the economy--I suppose that could apply more to raiding parties) and especially creatures--whether normal or mega--that leave the map in a timely manner, to carry on with their life.
# Megabeasts
* Share any intelligent/diplomacy behavior that other hist figs have when appropriate
Kind of an idle question, and not very relevant; but I was just wondering. You've mentioned that multi-tile and z-level trees will be implemented for elven settlements. Would the length of world-gen affect the size and height of the elven structures? As in, if you ceased genning at 100 years, would the trees be smaller than if you genned the whole 1000 years? Or would they work in the same way as castles, just organic.
I'd prefer to have realistically-sized root systems, including shallow roots and taproots and all of that, but it might depend a bit on how the underground plays with it. Of course, having roots breaking in through the ceiling of a cavern is cool, so maybe it's all good anyway. It'll also make things like gathering tuber-type things more fun.
Also, in regards to adventure mode, will there ever be torture/interrogation after capturing an enemy, in order to gain information about further parts in quests?
# Capturing people alive and interrogations
* Ability to disarm opponents
* Ability to hold somebody and immobilize them
* Ability to attempt to knock somebody out without killing them
* Surrendering in the face of death or death threat coupled with inability to escape or win
* Being able to ask people for the specific location of another person or place
* Allowing people to lie
* Ability to offer quick deaths to mortally wounded people to get them to talk
* Being able to force a prisoner to guide you somewhere
* Other interrogation stuff
* Making sure tracking works to the point that you could follow a released prisoner or other group back to a hideout
Please take no offense, but I don't think this sort of questions ("When will you implement XY", "How soon will this be"?) leads anywhere, they only clutter the thread and take from Toady's time. The current long-term development schedule is available at the main DF page, and Toady usually describes his short-term development plans in his monthly reports and the development blog. Aside from that, your guess is as good as Toady's, I think.
Please take no offense, but I don't think this sort of questions ("When will you implement XY", "How soon will this be"?) leads anywhere, they only clutter the thread and take from Toady's time. The current long-term development schedule is available at the main DF page, and Toady usually describes his short-term development plans in his monthly reports and the development blog. Aside from that, your guess is as good as Toady's, I think.
I kinda disagree. Our dabbling guesswork is not as good as Toady's and here is a good place to put a question you'd like to have him take a Legendary guess at.
Don't forget: this is the "Future of the Fortress: The Development Page", and I'd assume that means any and all discussion/questions about the future of Dwarf Fortress are fair game. Then again, loads of "Can you put this in?" are kind of distracting.Which is what the suggestion forum is for.
Sir Toad,
Do you find the recent trend of megathreads that unite all known suggestions on a given topic into a single post to be helpful?
If so, are there any topics that you wish had a megathread that you haven't seen one for yet?
Better yet, when will "Decorate with feathers" be added as an option to the Craftsdwarf Workshop?Building on this, when will tar-and-feathering go in?
(For the record, I'm cool with it using the Bonecrafter or Leatherworker skills.)
Better yet, when will "Decorate with feathers" be added as an option to the Craftsdwarf Workshop?Building on this, when will tar-and-feathering go in?
(For the record, I'm cool with it using the Bonecrafter or Leatherworker skills.)
Is cattle herding in for adventure mode? Will we be able to rustle cattle in the next version? Will there be organized raids on herd animals in the future? Specifically in regards to quest giving- will the important historical figures recognize the importance of stealing the enemies herds and assign quests or bounties on enemy cattle.
Basic Adventure Mode Skills
* Raising livestock
o Farms associated to entity population sprawl
o Ability to buy a livestock animal and lead it around
o Keep track of your animals as with hunted animals so they are not easily and permanently lost
o Ability to build fences (more than one fence tile per tree used, as opposed to wall)
o Ability to perform decisive attacks on unsuspecting or heavily injured opponent (a cow being slaughtered, for instance)
o Tracking livestock breeding/pregnancy information
o Grazing and drinking for livestock
o Eggs, chickens and associated objects
Holy carp, EIGHTEEN new types of grass!?!I would be genuinely surprised if Toady hadn't added at least one subterranean mold, algae or fungal ground cover that could be grazed.
Oh man the need for outdoor pastures is going to make me need to build topside again.
Is cattle herding in for adventure mode? Will we be able to rustle cattle in the next version? Will there be organized raids on herd animals in the future? Specifically in regards to quest giving- will the important historical figures recognize the importance of stealing the enemies herds and assign quests or bounties on enemy cattle.
None of that has yet been implemented for the next version (as is generally true for features not mentioned in the dev log). Herding and other livestock stuff is planned, though: (http://www.bay12games.com/dwarves/dev.html)QuoteBasic Adventure Mode Skills
* Raising livestock
o Farms associated to entity population sprawl
o Ability to buy a livestock animal and lead it around
o Keep track of your animals as with hunted animals so they are not easily and permanently lost
o Ability to build fences (more than one fence tile per tree used, as opposed to wall)
o Ability to perform decisive attacks on unsuspecting or heavily injured opponent (a cow being slaughtered, for instance)
o Tracking livestock breeding/pregnancy information
o Grazing and drinking for livestock
o Eggs, chickens and associated objects
On the horizon,
A Garden in the desert
After this long time?
Hey Bamboo is a grass too. Grass that can grow, depending on species, a meter a day up to 38 meters high and 80cm in diameter. Hehe i hope there is bamboo in this release.
Well, the panda is on the list of animals you can vote for, it would be kind of dissapointing if their presence in the game would be limited to a message in legends mode saying that they died out, because of a lack of food..
I'm quite certain that any animal implemented that only eats an obscure resource will come along with access to that resource. Toady wouldn't implement pandas and make them only eat bamboo unless they were able to do so.
I'm quite certain that any animal implemented that only eats an obscure resource will come along with access to that resource. Toady wouldn't implement pandas and make them only eat bamboo unless they were able to do so.
Keep in mind that the devlog only mentioned "bovine animals". It may not even include all ruminants, (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ruminantia) much less other herbivores.
I perceived that word choice as ThreeToe choosing to speak "colorfully" rather than a word chosen to most accurately reflect the actual circumstance.I'm quite certain that any animal implemented that only eats an obscure resource will come along with access to that resource. Toady wouldn't implement pandas and make them only eat bamboo unless they were able to do so.
Keep in mind that the devlog only mentioned "bovine animals". It may not even include all ruminants, (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ruminantia) much less other herbivores.
Although, as a bit of wild Christmas Speculation, I could see on-site animal grazing operating like the existing GrassTrample, except that animals do it at regular intervals instead of all the time. Thus, their behavior doesn't really change insomuch as they still wander around a bit and stand around a bit and interrupt all your dwarves, just now you can watch them and see some grass disappear every once in a while when they graze.
Keep in mind that the devlog only mentioned "bovine animals". It may not even include all ruminants, (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ruminantia) much less other herbivores.I perceived that word choice as ThreeToe choosing to speak "colorfully" rather than a word chosen to most accurately reflect the actual circumstance.
I'm quite certain that any animal implemented that only eats an obscure resource will come along with access to that resource. Toady wouldn't implement pandas and make them only eat bamboo unless they were able to do so.
Keep in mind that the devlog only mentioned "bovine animals". It may not even include all ruminants, (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ruminantia) much less other herbivores.
Is it planned to focus more on bugfixing?Every release sees a few bugfixes, and the release after the next one is indicated to be a major bugfix release, or at least the beginning of such:
11/17/2010 Alright. We got some bugs out the way and will make a big bug crunching push after this next release.
Is it planned to focus more on bugfixing?Every release sees a few bugfixes, and the release after the next one is indicated to be a major bugfix release, or at least the beginning of such:Quote from: ThreeToe on the dev log11/17/2010 Alright. We got some bugs out the way and will make a big bug crunching push after this next release.
Every release has on average, 18.4 bugs fixed.How do you fix .4 of the bug?
The older versions, I believe, had "canned" settlements.
hum anyone know if it's been answered that eggs will actually hatch into animals, as opposed to being a food product. Such as birds hatching from eggs, along with possibly dragons?I think its very likely. As when Toady spoke about Eggs last was in the Dwarf Talk podcast, ane he commented that eggs turning into other creatures should defiantly be going in.
I see them more having way to much wood, and need to get rid of it all, at knifepoint, if needed.I am sigging that. Mainly because it's awesome, and secondly because I'm tired of people getting pissy when i quote something with my name in it.
they just get so pissed off when they see you cutting your own wood, that they throw theirs at you.
Elves are allergic to wood, they just don't know how to live outside of the forest. Trading to elves is like when you give some hyper-Tschernobylian mutant cannibalist some plutonium and then wonder why he's suddenly barfing all over your face.Then how do they tolerate their wooden weapons?
All the towns were completely scrapped for a big, slow overhaul. As development continues, the level of complexity in towns will eventually reach and surpass the complexity of towns in older versions.
Anybody here read the Wheel of Time series by Robert Jordan? I've always imagined that elves harvest trees in a manner similar to the Ogier, giant peaceful troll-like creatures who have the ability to Treesing. Sung wood is a valuable commodity in universe, and the only time it happens "on screen" it is used to turn a sapling into a quarterstaff, presumably in a way that did not hurt the tree.
Considering how the caravan arc is coming up, are there any plans to allow the player to choose the material used for rock crafts? This'd be really nice, as you could choose to use a more/less common or more/less valuable stone in your crafts. Plus, you could fnally color coordinate things. <3
I probably should have said "are you planning to allow the player to choose the material used for rock crafts in the next release?" I'm pretty sure it's planned to be done eventually, but It'd be nice to know when it's planned to come, ie. during the caravan arc, after the bugfixing push, etc.Considering how the caravan arc is coming up, are there any plans to allow the player to choose the material used for rock crafts? This'd be really nice, as you could choose to use a more/less common or more/less valuable stone in your crafts. Plus, you could fnally color coordinate things. <3
Materiel selection was on the top ten Eternal Suggestion Vote mcjiger. In which, individual materiel choice through the manager would be keen, but simple color choice would be acceptable. So, yes there is.
I was eagerly waiting the monthly report to know what are the plans for this month, but nothing was told. Since the animal sponsorship we don't hear a thing about the caravan arc. Is it on hold? What are the plans for this month?
I'm guessing we haven't heard anything in a while because Toady was taking a Christmas-related break. Can't remember if he takes regular month-end breaks anymore. He'll probably continue working again in the next day or two, with a game-related dev log update later this week.
I don't see what the point would be in implementing color choice without implementing full choice of material. If anything, implementing color choice instead would probably be harder, not easier.I'm hoping for both, myself.
are raw material quantities going to be altered? Specifically, wood and stone. The fact that a wood earring takes as much wood as a wood bed or door seems like it would have a huge influence on item values
What does this mean? Specifically, what is a "fair" and what is a "market" in the context of Dwarf Fortress?
Quote from: nenjinSo in the flurry of the caravan and army arcs, are you going to rough out the dwarven, elven and goblin civs so there's something for people to see when they venture out to those sites? Or does that play into too much political/civ-specific design you don't want to get bogged down in yet?Quote from: metime00What kind of structures/towns will dwarves and elves have if they get visible settlements in the next update?
what sort of development hurdles do you face in trying to implement aimed ranged attacks or attacking prone enemies from a range (and thus choosing which of several targets in the same tile to attack)
will there variable currency values and systems?
Currently, the money is all the same, just usable in different places. In the future, might the value of a civilization's currency depend on the state of it relative to the seller? For instance, money from a very far away place the seller rarely trades with would be worth less than normal, those from a collapsed civilization would only be worth the material it's made of, and money from a civilization that collapsed hundreds of years ago would cease functioning like currency and be valued as an artifact.
Will you be able to fake scarcity, and thus increase price, by secretly hoarding goods?
1) Will we get a return to differentiated sites for different civilizations next release? E.g. human towns being different from dwarven fortresses and goblin towers?
2) With the caravan arc starting, will towns have workshops corresponding to the professions of their citizens?
Is there point in wallowing in the economy now? Will time be found soon for toys?
One of the major annoyances I have had with post-sprawl worldgen is that civilizations are allowed to overlap their territories, and you end up with several civilizations stacked on top of each other. You seemed to allude to this a while ago when you said that "the upcoming association of hamlets/villages to the town markets is going to force me to come to terms with loose boundaries a bit, as will the desire to set up some kind of difference in available trade goods." I wasn't very clear on what you meant by this; did you intend civilizations to have these overlapping territories, or are there technical problems with giving civs clear, well-defined borders? If so, what are they, and how high a priority is it for you to fix the problem?
Will we ever have ghosts that appear even if you bury your dead properly? Because I want ghosts but I like having elaborate tombs. Maybe ghosts with unfinished business, like if they were murdered. Of course, we need murder first. Which would be awesome.
With the new caravan focus on trading, will we get any improvements to the fortress mode trade screen?
Any thoughts on how those things are going to work when applied to a fortress race? Would a sheep-men civ be able to shave eachother to produce wool trade goods? Lizard or birdmen lay eggs and carry them around like babies? Or is it currently looking like they'll pretty much ignore that kind of stuff and make an omlette out of their young?
Will that oil burn when exposed to fire/heat? Could we also have candles and torches from this update?
I really, really wish we could get some fix to animals' pathfinding now, otherwise the 16 new domestic species will murder the FPS, and to add insult to injury, make all the hallways extremely crowded. Some kind of fenced pastures perhaps? Or allow us to create a special alert+burrow for domestic animals that would prevent them from pathing? Please?
Are there plans to make changes to animal/unit list to better handle large number of units (i.e., filters, searching, sorting ... all that kinds of "boring business application" perks)
Quote from: 1freemanHey Toady, can you say what the 16 new animals will be? or do you want it to be a surprise?Quote from: monk12"Assorted animals and thinking beings?" Care to elaborate on some of those?
How will inherently lonely megabeasts find mates? Will other megabeasts reproduce? And will FBs and titans be able to inherit egg laying?
Toady, will eggs have a stockpile option, and if so will it be considered food or an animal for stockpile purposes?
also will dwarfs be able to eat eggs or are they off limits.
Now that trade routes depend on availability of roads (do they?), will fast-traveling over roads in Adventurer Mode confer reasonable bonuses to traveling speed (or penalties for moving off the road)? For both adventurers and merchants, it would make sense for walking on road to be easier, faster, and safer than hacking through wilderness.
Related: Will dwarven roads over mountains squares be accessible through fast-traveling in Adventurer Mode?
Quote from: LovechildIf I steal a dragon egg, will it hatch? And will the baby dragon think I'm its mom, or try to kill me?Quote from: freeformschoolerI realize that we'll probably be able to raise dragons and rocs from eggs in Fortress mode, but will we be able to do so in ADVENTURE MODE? Since there will probably be horse riding, I don't think it's too far off.
According to this pic ruc's eggs are enormous. How do we steal that?!
Also do this mean that all the animals that get eggs get lairs too?
Will you add any of the new craftable materials (wool, clay), but also some older ones (horn, teeth, pearls, feathers) as prerequisites for artifacts? And the other way around, will any of the new items (pottery, porcelain) be artifactable?
Will any creatures ever adopt an adventurer like cats do in Fort Mode? Also might some juveniles get an [IMPRESSIONABLE] tag or similar? Birds, that are about to hatch from all these crazy new eggs, are particularily good candidates for that I think.
Given that some of the new creatures and plants going in the game are going to have related economic benefits and produce tradable goods other than meat n' things, will we be able to buy rhino milk from the elves?
If I throw an egg will it's shell break and spill it's insides?
[OP statement about pathfinding/tiles] was about 6 months ago. Have these been on hold because Baughn's busy?
Do you find the recent trend of megathreads that unite all known suggestions on a given topic into a single post to be helpful?
If so, are there any topics that you wish had a megathread that you haven't seen one for yet?
Now that we have a readily available source of feathers, will arrows and bolts require them? Will they not be required, but provide an advantage if used? If that won't be the case in this update, will it be eventually/soon?
Will only cows grass or other animals like horses and goats too? Do you have a food/meat gathering ratio as tag (i.e. a cow that grazes down 3 tiles grows 30kg of meat)? Do animals need water now too?
But it does lead to the question... are there any actual gameplay differences between the different kinds of grass? Is it just different names depending on biome, or do they have other effects? Is there a point to the different types beyond the names?
Are the various types of Grass in the raws, or are they still hardcoded?
Will longland-grass yield hay/straw as side product?
Part of menus are not using full screen space - for example main menu, trading menu etc. Is it by bug/by design/sth that is planned to do but less important than other stuff?
With all these new animals any plans to diversify the biomes in terms of biodiversity or food stock? As I said before Dwarf Fortress doesn't handle variety well
If you answered this before please skip it. In fact by all means skip this question if you want, it just somehow seems off to me.
I was eagerly waiting the monthly report to know what are the plans for this month, but nothing was told. Since the animal sponsorship we don't hear a thing about the caravan arc. Is it on hold? What are the plans for this month?
I probably should have said "are you planning to allow the player to choose the material used for rock crafts in the next release?" I'm pretty sure it's planned to be done eventually, but It'd be nice to know when it's planned to come, ie. during the caravan arc, after the bugfixing push, etc.
Quote from: thvazI was eagerly waiting the monthly report to know what are the plans for this month, but nothing was told. Since the animal sponsorship we don't hear a thing about the caravan arc. Is it on hold? What are the plans for this month?
There just aren't any new plans yet this month. The unexpected amount of sponsorship drive and the holidays made things a little slower than anticipated, so we still have to do things like clay and vegetable oil. Once I'm caught up I'll put something up in the dev log.
I don't understand the question. The spatial ranges of animals are a new addition for next time, but the regions always had different critters (when there were enough available to pick from).
If you were trying to reword for clarity, I think you didn't really do so well here. I don't get what you're trying to say. But I have a strong suspicion that whatever you're asking about is something that has been happening for a while, we've just not seen the effects of it due to limited creature types.QuoteI don't understand the question. The spatial ranges of animals are a new addition for next time, but the regions always had different critters (when there were enough available to pick from).
Well I sort of meant if you would be allowing tracks of land more varieties of animals and have the selection of animals match their niches, size, and consumption types now that there is a huge influx of critters.
Also thanks again for answering out questions.
If you were trying to reword for clarity, I think you didn't really do so well here. I don't get what you're trying to say. But I have a strong suspicion that whatever you're asking about is something that has been happening for a while, we've just not seen the effects of it due to limited creature types.
If you were trying to reword for clarity, I think you didn't really do so well here. I don't get what you're trying to say. But I have a strong suspicion that whatever you're asking about is something that has been happening for a while, we've just not seen the effects of it due to limited creature types.QuoteI don't understand the question. The spatial ranges of animals are a new addition for next time, but the regions always had different critters (when there were enough available to pick from).
Well I sort of meant if you would be allowing tracks of land more varieties of animals and have the selection of animals match their niches, size, and consumption types now that there is a huge influx of critters.
Also thanks again for answering out questions.
I think I get what you're saying. Correct me if I'm wrong:If you were trying to reword for clarity, I think you didn't really do so well here. I don't get what you're trying to say. But I have a strong suspicion that whatever you're asking about is something that has been happening for a while, we've just not seen the effects of it due to limited creature types.QuoteI don't understand the question. The spatial ranges of animals are a new addition for next time, but the regions always had different critters (when there were enough available to pick from).
Well I sort of meant if you would be allowing tracks of land more varieties of animals and have the selection of animals match their niches, size, and consumption types now that there is a huge influx of critters.
Also thanks again for answering out questions.
Thus I give up
With the continued addition of good/evil/savage/calm flora and fauna, is there any chance of eventually having good/evil/savage/calm minerals/soils? I know it would involve changing worldgen to determine surroundings before minerals, so how feasible is this?It does seem like something that would naturally arise from the different grass types. But thus far, different types of grass are apparently very similar still, and soil doesn't inherit properties from things that die on it. This will likely remain unchanged until some farming rewrites, which I am pretty sure are not likely to be included in this update.
People are having too much fun speculating in that other thread for me to interrupt the process.
People are having too much fun speculating in that other thread for me to interrupt the process.
Never. Not a chance. Not going to happen.
He's stated that his goal is to make a massively single player game due to the plethora of massively multiplayer ones.Never. Not a chance. Not going to happen.
That's what I figured.
But never say never. Remember all the main dev goals are the ones up til 1.0.
Shoddy DRM and limited contend killed spore.
I don't think multiplayer will work, unless you change the game to real-time, which steals it from it's roguelike aspects. Or a turn-based game, but then you should just make a new game.
You know, Kobolds laying eggs kinda works. Actually...Oooh, just like the slave-taking behaviours of some ant species?
Kobolds are known for stealing. Here's a potential reason why;
Consider a Kobold nest While the eggs may be safe from predators, if hidden well in a good cave, they are not safe from a different Kobold clan, especially if they are left there while the parents forage and scavange. Now, what clan would be larger- one that respects property rights, or one that collects any old eggs they happen to see lying around?
You know, Kobolds laying eggs kinda works. Actually...
Kobolds are known for stealing. Here's a potential reason why;
Consider a Kobold nest While the eggs may be safe from predators, if hidden well in a good cave, they are not safe from a different Kobold clan, especially if they are left there while the parents forage and scavenge. Now, what clan would be larger- one that respects property rights, or one that collects any old eggs they happen to see lying around?
I can easily see Kobolds "pseudo-taming" creatures by stealing eggs, but stealing from other Kobolds? Wouldn't one of twenty Kobolds of a tribe stay and stand guard in the nest chamber of their home cave? Considering that they are prone to stealing, they'd be aware that other Kobolds are out there, capable of stealing their stuff and eggs.Aware, I think would be hard to judge. Kobolds to myself, don't seem to be very sapient. Being able to foresee events and plan for them is a pretty advance cognitive facility.
Wouldn't one of twenty Kobolds of a tribe stay and stand guard in the nest chamber of their home cave? Considering that they are prone to stealing, they'd be aware that other Kobolds are out there, capable of stealing their stuff and eggs.
Wouldn't one of twenty Kobolds of a tribe stay and stand guard in the nest chamber of their home cave? Considering that they are prone to stealing, they'd be aware that other Kobolds are out there, capable of stealing their stuff and eggs.
Stealing someone else's offspring to raise as your own seems like a pretty questionable strategy from an evolution standpoint. It's like the inverse of what a cuckoo does.
Stealing someone else's offspring to raise as your own seems like a pretty questionable strategy from an evolution standpoint.Not if you castrate em!
Besides the standalone creatures, there are several vermin/parasites sponsored that (could) live on/adopt unwilling creatures.
(cave beez living in beards, leeches clinging unto exposed skin, flees/mites/crabs living in furry bits or clothes, maggots burrowing into rotten bodyparts. etc)
Will these creatures get special code as they get added or will they, for now, remain the same as the vermin we know?
Oooh, niftiness. Out of curiosity, will these animals be implemented with all the expected bells and whistles, such as spitting cobras spitting venom, and termites eating wood?
I'm going to do my best -- there are things like the entire honey industry which I was considering putting in for the release but which overall might not be guaranteed with something like a bee sponsorship, but the existence and sponsorship of the bee certainly helps its prospects. So, some of the animals imply more work than others, and I can't guarantee absolute satisfaction, but I am dedicated to getting things up to speed, and I'm all for adding new tags and things.
Quote from: LASDWith animals like the Kakapo that produce a distinct booming sound that can be heard miles away, are you planning to add descriptive sound lines to Adventure Mode when these kind of creatures are around?
Yeah, it could happen. We'll probably focus on a few specific things for each animal, and it'll likely reverberate around a bit through the raws.
We will be able to mine and build in adventure mode?
And if it could be like that could we craft weapons and furniture in adventure mode?
I think some of us would enjoy to be a single man building everithing
Basic Adventure Mode Skills
* Some survival skills
[...]
o Ability to make clothing and some other objects from hides
* Wood use
o Ground debris/sticks/underbrush
o Ability to chop down tree using appropriate tool
o Ability to make simple wooden weapons and ammunition
o Ability to use logs to make constructions
o Site recognition for saving adventurer-made sites (will require entity pops first, see below)
o Ability to name site
* Digging and stone constructions
o Ability to dig out soil tiles
o Buried boulders in some soils
o Ability to pull up surface boulders
o Ability to make rough stone constructions
* Hunting/tracking animals
[...]
[...]
* Growing crops
o Ability to till tile (faster with tool)
o Ability to plant seeds
o Ability to pass time quickly (unlike current sleep command)
o Ability to harvest plants
o Ability to make a quern from a boulder
o Ability to grind grindable plants (designating any proper container for products)
o Ability to cook and appropriate tools for this
* Raising livestock
o Farms associated to entity population sprawl
o Ability to buy a livestock animal and lead it around
o Keep track of your animals as with hunted animals so they are not easily and permanently lost
o Ability to build fences (more than one fence tile per tree used, as opposed to wall)
o Ability to perform decisive attacks on unsuspecting or heavily injured opponent (a cow being slaughtered, for instance)
o Tracking livestock breeding/pregnancy information
o Grazing and drinking for livestock
o Eggs, chickens and associated objects
[...]
Yea, and for there being advantages to simply living in a bigger tribe, and siblings helping each other and so on. It works best if kobold eggs are big and require lots of energy to produce, but kobolds don't require much intensive parenting.Wouldn't one of twenty Kobolds of a tribe stay and stand guard in the nest chamber of their home cave? Considering that they are prone to stealing, they'd be aware that other Kobolds are out there, capable of stealing their stuff and eggs.
Stealing someone else's offspring to raise as your own seems like a pretty questionable strategy from an evolution standpoint. It's like the inverse of what a cuckoo does.
Actually for pack animals it might make sense to prevent inbreeding.
This'd probably be a good strategy to. Also very likely "slaves" would be killed and possibly eaten if food runs low enough that being in a large tribe stops being an advantage.Stealing someone else's offspring to raise as your own seems like a pretty questionable strategy from an evolution standpoint.Not if you castrate em!
Wouldn't one of twenty Kobolds of a tribe stay and stand guard in the nest chamber of their home cave? Considering that they are prone to stealing, they'd be aware that other Kobolds are out there, capable of stealing their stuff and eggs.
Stealing someone else's offspring to raise as your own seems like a pretty questionable strategy from an evolution standpoint. It's like the inverse of what a cuckoo does.
Stealing someone else's offspring to raise as your own seems like a pretty questionable strategy from an evolution standpoint. It's like the inverse of what a cuckoo does.
Hey Did Toady change the background to the Animal Drive or is it just my computer?
Hey Did Toady change the background to the Animal Drive or is it just my computer?
I guess your laptop may have chokedon the css (if there is one) file of that page.
Hey Did Toady change the background to the Animal Drive or is it just my computer?
Mind you on the Laptop I was using the background was 100% the Zebra stripes without the overlay for the writing.
Was Toady responsible or was it my Laptop?
This'd probably be a good strategy to. Also very likely "slaves" would be killed and possibly eaten if food runs low enough that being in a large tribe stops being an advantage.Stealing someone else's offspring to raise as your own seems like a pretty questionable strategy from an evolution standpoint.Not if you castrate em!
Criminy, you'd think the United States being a nation of immigrants and simultaneously being the most powerful nation on Earth would kind of demonstrate that
WWII? Remember pearl harbor?Criminy, you'd think the United States being a nation of immigrants and simultaneously being the most powerful nation on Earth would kind of demonstrate that
I doubt it's the only factor to take into account. I would bet more on the geographical situation : only two borders, with no ennemy around. No war was waged on american ground since the Civil War, I think ? It leaves the civilians free to do whatever they want. Waging a war doesn't really change anything for civilians in such a place.
Pearl harbor started a foreign war. The only American soil that saw combat was a few Alaskan Islands, Hawaii, Midway, Wake, the Marinaras, and the Phillipenes, none of which were on the US mainland or were states.Derp. Just pointing that out.
maybe kobolds need dwarves as part of their reproductive cycle? as silly as that thought is, it might make more !science! sense. they "couldve" evolved from the rats that infest dwarf fortresses...before the coming of cats and their powers over dwarves.Wait, don't they have cannibalism as a no-no in their ethics?
brings me to another idea: its a kobold rite of passage to become an adult...like in some cultures, hunting. afterwards, they feast upon the child, and have a big, old party.
maybe kobolds need dwarves as part of their reproductive cycle? as silly as that thought is, it might make more !science! sense. they "couldve" evolved from the rats that infest dwarf fortresses...before the coming of cats and their powers over dwarves.
brings me to another idea: its a kobold rite of passage to become an adult...like in some cultures, hunting. afterwards, they feast upon the child, and have a big, old party.
Nope.maybe kobolds need dwarves as part of their reproductive cycle? as silly as that thought is, it might make more !science! sense. they "couldve" evolved from the rats that infest dwarf fortresses...before the coming of cats and their powers over dwarves.
brings me to another idea: its a kobold rite of passage to become an adult...like in some cultures, hunting. afterwards, they feast upon the child, and have a big, old party.
So Kobolds are Xenomorphs now?
Wait. Thats interesting can we mod Xenomorphs in? Which the whole Facehugger -> Chestburster -> real alien thing?
maybe kobolds need dwarves as part of their reproductive cycle? as silly as that thought is, it might make more !science! sense. they "couldve" evolved from the rats that infest dwarf fortresses...before the coming of cats and their powers over dwarves.Uhm, just so you know, kobolds in DF are supossed to be yellow imp-like critters. Not the fluffy snout creature everyone seems to think it is.
maybe kobolds need dwarves as part of their reproductive cycle? as silly as that thought is, it might make more !science! sense. they "couldve" evolved from the rats that infest dwarf fortresses...before the coming of cats and their powers over dwarves.Uhm, just so you know, kobolds in DF are supossed to be yellow imp-like critters. Not the fluffy snout creature everyone seems to think it is.
I think the general idea here is not that slavery is silly, because from a purely logical standpoint it's obviously been proven to work, only whether or not it is worth the effort to actually bother raising somebody else's kid just to use them as a slave.
And that is debatable in most human-like scenarios, but keep in mind, kobolds are tiny and weak. They would see dwarves as large, stocky creatures. Getting a breeding pair and then training them from birth would give you hyper-intelligent cattle. Think like humans enslaving ogres, to use a fantasy setting example. As to why goblins snatch dwarves, I don't know. But, they worship demons and gods of slaughter. So, maybe they raise them to kill them ritually at a particular age, and the free labor part of it is just sort of a fringe benefit?
I found a kidnapped dwarf in Legends mode called Ingish Pillarspeak, who ended up being the sole defender of his adopted goblin civ, killing over two hundred dwarves, including his own mother, father, father in law (he married another kidnapped dwarf, she was killed by dwarves early in the war), brother in law (duelled him five times), several brothers, and a sister. He was at war with his original dwarven civ from the year 30 to 70, armed with a crossbow and presumably a knife. He liked to rip off the third toe of his opponents. Oh, and he ate the dwarves he killed (never his own family, at least).
He was the victor of his final battle against his original dwarven civ, but still (somehow) lost the war. He joined the new civ and died of old age, wandering the wild.
When I visited the now-dwarven dark fortress he'd defended for so long in Adventure mode, there was a goblin priest in the temple. Every dwarf I talked to had a relative who'd been killed by Ingish Pillarspeak.
I imagine the war was ended when Ingish was shown his own kill list, and it was explained how many of his own family he'd slain in battle. I imagine Ingish negotiated amnesty for the goblin priest, who may have been the only other surviving member of his adopted society by then.
Late in his life Ingish began worshipping a rampaging giant he'd seen battle his goblin kidnapper while still a prisoner. The giant passed through his life kind of like Halley's comet, right at the begining and just before the end. The list of gods and demons he'd worshipped and the various entities he'd claimed membership in made me sad: he fought so hard for so long, and for what? His dwarveness, his goblinness, his marriage, his nation, his sense of who his family was and who he had to protect, as it all kept shifting and changing around him. He was a dwarf constantly in search of something to believe in, and his capacity for belief gave him a terrible power. If that didn't alienate him from his fellow dwarves, I'm sure the fact he'd personally killed (and occasionally eaten) everyone's grandparents did.
I deleted his whole world after I realized I'd spent 40 hours researching his history in a week that I worked 50 hours, and was still accruing more detail. When I found out he'd shot and killed his youngest sister I cried. DF creates epic stories.
I know, I don't even mod, but somehow I seem to know what's in the raws better then some modders :|
EDIT: Even better, fluffly wamblers are made from nothing but fluff and pudge.
... Now I'm curious what else we've got in the raws. /goes to check on elves.
EDIT2: If I'm reading those raws right, elves have whiskers AND mustaches/sideburns o_o
... and some have pink hair...
I think it might be a good idea to start a 'dig up weird shit nobody knows about from the raws'-thread.
EDIT3: Nvmd on the whiskers. Dwarves have them noted too.
I can see puce.
Don't forget that goblin hair comes in puce and other various synonyms for pink and violet.
There's nothing inherently wrong with bringing people into your tribe or societyThe problem is that if clans were of a size significantly below the optimum they'd simply merge. There has to be a benefit to STEALING an egg rather than having it given voluntarily.
I can see puce.
Don't forget that goblin hair comes in puce and other various synonyms for pink and violet.Spoiler: Mildly disgusting (click to show/hide)
Humans and dwarves have pinks mentioned as well though. Which makes me wonder what is meant with pink. I mean, I don't think it's strawberry blond, is it?
Oh my FSM, are we discussing evolutionary biology in a roguelike? ::)
Oh my FSM, are we discussing evolutionary biology in a roguelike? ::)
Don't knock it, I find that to be the most compelling aspect of DF...
Oh my FSM, are we discussing evolutionary biology in a roguelike? ::)
Don't knock it, I find that to be the most compelling aspect of DF...
I know. It's just hilarious that we're discussing whether egg-stealing is a sufficiently evolutionary viable strategy in a game that has unicorns, dragons, and magically animated colossi. And six-legged eyeless koalas that live underground.
Unfortunately it is a pretty inevitable fact that the higher on the food chain, the fewer offspring in the average litter. Otherwise the ecosystem would be destroyed by the dragon population spiraling out of control.
Hey Did Toady change the background to the Animal Drive or is it just my computer?
Mind you on the Laptop I was using the background was 100% the Zebra stripes without the overlay for the writing.
Was Toady responsible or was it my Laptop?
Out of curiosity, what browser are you using?
But dragons are immortal unless killed. The population should still explode, and what about the time before sentients come into play and take dominance from the megabeasts? Dragons would be unequaled, except perhaps by collosi (which are probably magical, and thus a product of sentients).
Unfortunately it is a pretty inevitable fact that the higher on the food chain, the fewer offspring in the average litter. Otherwise the ecosystem would be destroyed by the dragon population spiraling out of control.
But dragons are immortal unless killed. The population should still explode, and what about the time before sentients come into play and take dominance from the megabeasts? Dragons would be unequaled, except perhaps by collosi (which are probably magical, and thus a product of sentients).Unless I missed something in the raws, dragons are typically thought to be immortal because their age lifespan is so long that it is usually cut off by something like getting killed.
All kobolds would share something like 94% of their DNA as identical. Hence, raising another child of the same species is only slightly less beneficial than raising your own child.
From fiction (may not be true of DF universe) we also know that dragons hibernate, and like caves. If they like caves they cannot be cold blooded (or at least it seems less likley).
of course culture could trump biology.
Will we ever be able to customize the "look" of our characters in adventure mode? Rather than just set the skills.
Quote from: wilsonnsWill be possible to edit the adventurer apperance or at least know about his apperance?
You can look at yourself and others. Changing the appearance would be an interface to write, which isn't the end of the day. You should certainly be able to customize yourself later on, at least in one version of the start setup (versus historical scenarios or whatever), since it's good to be able to be whatever you want to be. It'll probably depend on prodding or just me eventually doing it. Since you pick out where you are from first, it'll probably be constrained by the entity/race settings, with options to break convention or something. Breaking reality (ie making a blue-skinned human) is more difficult because of how the appearance variables are indexed, and there might even be some issues there with breaking out of entity stylings, though I don't think there are.
I think it's mostly the other way around, like 'not eating pig/raw meat' which is very very bad for you in a desert was embedded in desert dwelling cultures - in general, look further than the standard muslims; jews have their kosher stuff too which, unsurprisingly, forbid usage of animals which died of natural death and for the same reason Yoreh De'ah forbids drinking still water (water that is still for more than one night, that is).
look further the culture and in the realm of superstitions and proverbs, and you'll find good survival traits
From fiction (may not be true of DF universe) we also know that dragons hibernate, and like caves. If they like caves they cannot be cold blooded (or at least it seems less likley).
I think it's mostly the other way around, like 'not eating pig/raw meat' which is very very bad for you in a desert was embedded in desert dwelling cultures - in general, look further than the standard muslims; jews have their kosher stuff too which, unsurprisingly, forbid usage of animals which died of natural death and for the same reason Yoreh De'ah forbids drinking still water (water that is still for more than one night, that is).
look further the culture and in the realm of superstitions and proverbs, and you'll find good survival traits
Exactly, culture can trump biology.
Looking through creature_standard, dwarves and humans have the MAXAGE tag. Elves, goblins,and dragons do not. Dragons are biologically immortal.
There's a difference between immortality, and invincibility. The goblins have not yet obtained the latter.Looking through creature_standard, dwarves and humans have the MAXAGE tag. Elves, goblins,and dragons do not. Dragons are biologically immortal.
Goblins are immortal? o______________o
Just out of curiosity, what is "non-fairy vampirism" supposed to be? Vampire fairies are kind of a hilarious idea though, fluttering around nipping people on the arms.
Just out of curiosity, what is "non-fairy vampirism" supposed to be? Vampire fairies are kind of a hilarious idea though, fluttering around nipping people on the arms.
No, you're thinking of SCP-wannabe vampires. Real Vampires are corpses motivated only by truly inhuman forces. A true Vampire cannot be good, nor even evil, for it has no capacity to make moral decisions. It's only goal is domination of humans, and it's supernatural powers are merely compliments to it's most subtle and pererse ability- an incredible charisma and intelectual power that allows it to manipulate those around it with ease.
Real Vampire
Real Vampire
You can basically stop right there. You're taking a broad folk concept with about a bazillion different iterations through several centuries, and pretending that only one of them can be correct even though it's a freaking fantasy creature.
seconded! to hell the animal sponsorship drive, give us the monster sponsorship drive!
It occurs to me that vampirism usually only affects humans, DF is in a good position to challenge this trope.
(With the non-racist zombification and general undeath thing.)
Vampyxies fly!
Fuck this yo vampire shit! I want man-chomping, hairy werewolves! And some kind of entity that turns boys into witchers! Fuck yea
Real vampires are bunnies.I think I was working on a mod about something like that a while ago, but I sorta gave up.
Real vampires are bunnies.
my comment was a shot at the twilight vamps-who shouldve just been called fairies-who ever said fairies cant be violent and drink blood, imo, wouldve actually interested me then.
real vampires are squash: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vampire_pumpkins_and_watermelons
Looks like a good way to stretch a food supply.
Will the next update have a greater than 0.31 version number?Considering the scope of the economic stuff going in, almost certainly. Footkerchief probably could provide an assessment of which cores are likely to involved, and a range that of numbers for how it could increment based depending on what Toady considers totally done. But there will be more going in than currently is in.
Bee keeping surely deserves a +0.01 all by itself :)Nope.
@Doomshifter: I am pretty sure steam power has been suggested and knocked down as too advanced and too steampunk in hundreds of controversial threads all over the suggestion forums, with current thinking being eventual steam power is unlikely. Animal power seems reasonable though... maybe even prisoner powered treadmills.My understanding on Steam is that it's in the same boat as biological waste - because of its controversial nature, it would need to have an init option to disable it, and Toady doesn't want to prioritize something that a bunch of people would just turn off anyway.
My understanding on Steam is that it's in the same boat as biological waste - because of its controversial nature, it would need to have an init option to disable it, and Toady doesn't want to prioritize something that a bunch of people would just turn off anyway.
trophic level for chickens is iirc 2:1 thus 2 Kilo grain on 1 Kilo meat but for cows you would be about right - it depends on the animal. The thing is that animal feed (like pure grain) has a higher content of fat and Nutrients then the natural diet of animals (say normal grassing) so the trophic level for these diets are different. Its a little bit like humans which have a healthy diet (lots of vegies, 3 to 4 times a weak meat) compared to someone who lives on Fastfood and Softdrinks.
Even different breeds differ in the food-to-meat ratio. Cows like the diary breed "Holstein Cattle" produce less meat per kilo grain then Meat/beef breads "Florida cracker cattle" or "German Angus cattle". For most animals you have to look at the feed the species and the breed to get the correct ratio.
trophic level for chickens is iirc 2:1 thus 2 Kilo grain on 1 Kilo meat but for cows you would be about right - it depends on the animal. The thing is that animal feed (like pure grain) has a higher content of fat and Nutrients then the natural diet of animals (say normal grassing) so the trophic level for these diets are different. Its a little bit like humans which have a healthy diet (lots of vegies, 3 to 4 times a weak meat) compared to someone who lives on Fastfood and Softdrinks.
Even different breeds differ in the food-to-meat ratio. Cows like the diary breed "Holstein Cattle" produce less meat per kilo grain then Meat/beef breads "Florida cracker cattle" or "German Angus cattle". For most animals you have to look at the feed the species and the breed to get the correct ratio.
Anyone else find it comical that the person in the above quote is named Heph and speaking about cow breeds and their grain to meat ratio?
trophic level for chickens is iirc 2:1 thus 2 Kilo grain on 1 Kilo meat but for cows you would be about right - it depends on the animal. The thing is that animal feed (like pure grain) has a higher content of fat and Nutrients then the natural diet of animals (say normal grassing) so the trophic level for these diets are different. Its a little bit like humans which have a healthy diet (lots of vegies, 3 to 4 times a weak meat) compared to someone who lives on Fastfood and Softdrinks.
Even different breeds differ in the food-to-meat ratio. Cows like the diary breed "Holstein Cattle" produce less meat per kilo grain then Meat/beef breads "Florida cracker cattle" or "German Angus cattle". For most animals you have to look at the feed the species and the breed to get the correct ratio.
Will villages produce and export other goods besides food? And will they also demand materials for these?
I think it would be awesome if a nearby human town decided that they want to make walls or a special building of some kind and start mass-demanding stone blocks.
My understanding on Steam is that it's in the same boat as biological waste - because of its controversial nature, it would need to have an init option to disable it, and Toady doesn't want to prioritize something that a bunch of people would just turn off anyway.
Steam power isn't being excluded because it's controversial amongst the players; it's being excluded because Toady doesn't want to include it. He's made statements about that plenty of times.
Actually, I'm curious to know if the deforestation caused by human settlements is currently related to the amount of lumber demanded for the construction of buildings.
Haiti is island with high population density.
EDIT:
What was connected with the worst method of charcoal making ever
Rather than using techniques which could make forestry more productive for fuel, like coppicing and pollarding, the lack of title on much land results in charcoal burners digging up and using tree root structures. (sic!!!) [from enwiki]
Actually, I'm curious to know if the deforestation caused by human settlements is currently related to the amount of lumber demanded for the construction of buildings.
IIRC deforestation in history wasn't caused so by buildings, neither by house heating - those consume too little wood to have much impact. The main causes were charcoal burning for metal industry (should get in the caravan arc), ship building (far from in the game), and simply burning the woods to make more land for farming (which I guess is the current in-game deforestation).
I don't think it's funny, enlighten me please
Isn't it about time you created the 2011 page of the devlog? ;)
Just change 2010 to 2011 obviously :PIsn't it about time you created the 2011 page of the devlog? ;)
BUT WE HAVEN'T EVEN GOTTEN 10% OF THE CURRENT ONE DONE YET
:o
There still something to be done about trade and the caravan arc for this release? What do you still want to implement before a release?I started 3 fortresses in the last few days :P
I know you aren't good with release dates (no one is) but if a release is near, I won't start a fortress now (though I really want to play one)
There still something to be done about trade and the caravan arc for this release? What do you still want to implement before a release?I started 3 fortresses in the last few days :P
I know you aren't good with release dates (no one is) but if a release is near, I won't start a fortress now (though I really want to play one)
You can always get a new one, hehe
Neato, now we have clay!
Once we get some pies, I'll be able to my tribute fort to both SOAD and crazed Chinese emperors.
Where would you obtain clay from?
I'd assume it'd be from mining out clay soil layers, but it'd be nice to know of any alternative methods.
Hm... I thought clay showed up around pretty much all rivers? I could be wrong ofcourse...At the lower ends, yes, not so much in the high mountains. Where dwarfs
I really hope it works this way, I'd hate for clay to drop boulders as if it were stone...Where would you obtain clay from?
I'd assume it'd be from mining out clay soil layers, but it'd be nice to know of any alternative methods.
What about an interface like the sand one?
Yeah, that would probably work well, without completely destorying all of the soil layers.Where would you obtain clay from?
I'd assume it'd be from mining out clay soil layers, but it'd be nice to know of any alternative methods.
What about an interface like the sand one?
With the inclusion of pottery will more obscure things like bone ware (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bone_china) be included by default?It'd be neat to make goblin bones into mugs for our dwarves.
It'd be neat to make goblin bones into mugs for our dwarves.
We'd need to plug the eye holes first, though. Maybe with precious gems.It'd be neat to make goblin bones into mugs for our dwarves.
Drinking mead from the skulls of our goblin enemies. This is all.
It's thin, but there is bone at the back of eye sockets, IIRC.
Plus getting killed by a dwarf would usually mean their head is almost completely blown apart.It's thin, but there is bone at the back of eye sockets, IIRC.
Yes, but there are little holes for the optic nerve and stuff.
you'd still need fuel to fire ceramic, though.
Fill in the cracks/missing pieces with a precious metal?Plus getting killed by a dwarf would usually mean their head is almost completely blown apart.It's thin, but there is bone at the back of eye sockets, IIRC.
Yes, but there are little holes for the optic nerve and stuff.
With the inclusion of pottery will more obscure things like bone ware (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bone_china) be included by default?
Aren't there plans for more distinctive civilizations in future? With small deviations from raws ... a bit different ethics/reactions/items/etc were mentioned.
This right here is DF.Plus getting killed by a dwarf would usually mean their head is almost completely blown apart.It's thin, but there is bone at the back of eye sockets, IIRC.
Yes, but there are little holes for the optic nerve and stuff.
it's from homestuck.
Toady, will we ever be able to build golems for defensive/offensive purposes?
Toady, will we ever be able to build golems for defensive/offensive purposes?
...but I'm not sure if Toady wants souls to be seen as little more than magic charcoal.:lol:
Traditionally, golems have a parchment placed in their mouth that is the source of their energy.
Today an educated person would use "import soul" instead.
Though, just creating a full grown person out of literally nowhere is how it goes. Though the import soul could work if a world feature was added (Dimensional rift inside the ruins of somewhere?) which, upon activating, would export a 'person' file, that could moved to another world folder and be loaded and played as you would play as a retired adventurer, except located in a random place on the world, preferably land.Today an educated person would use "import soul" instead.
"mport soul"
not the same dramatic narrative effect as in truth->death
wouldn't make legends as tasteful.
Hehe werent a multiverse with different interconnected Df-worlds a idea of toady himself?Was it?
The most known legend is the Myth of Judah Löw a Rabi from Prague which lived in the 16th century so outside dfs timeframe. Actually Löw is just one of many Rabis that get associated with Golem(s) but because he was the adviser of emperor Rudolf the 2nd (which in turn was very interested in alchemy) he became the most known.
Well, if that's the case, I want my zombie!vampires.
The most known legend is the Myth of Judah Löw a Rabi from Prague which lived in the 16th century so outside dfs timeframe. Actually Löw is just one of many Rabis that get associated with Golem(s) but because he was the adviser of emperor Rudolf the 2nd (which in turn was very interested in alchemy) he became the most known.
We're talking about imaginary magical creations as if they conceivably fall on some continuum of technological progress??? So vampires are also not acceptable because their modern depictions originated in the 19th century?
The most known legend is the Myth of Judah Löw a Rabi from Prague which lived in the 16th century so outside dfs timeframe. Actually Löw is just one of many Rabis that get associated with Golem(s) but because he was the adviser of emperor Rudolf the 2nd (which in turn was very interested in alchemy) he became the most known.
We're talking about imaginary magical creations as if they conceivably fall on some continuum of technological progress??? So vampires are also not acceptable because their modern depictions originated in the 19th century?
Hehe werent a multiverse with different interconnected Df-worlds a idea of toady himself?Was it?
Still, it would be badass if your person traveled to different dimensions, maybe even giving them local raws so that they can end up going to a world that only pokemon or something exist in, without getting a 404 on their existence.
The main differences in worlds can be determined by mods, which does make much sense because they are all alternate worlds.Hehe werent a multiverse with different interconnected Df-worlds a idea of toady himself?Was it?
Still, it would be badass if your person traveled to different dimensions, maybe even giving them local raws so that they can end up going to a world that only pokemon or something exist in, without getting a 404 on their existence.
Yeah, yeah I think it was Toady's idea. At least for the original Slaves to Armok. I think he had mentioned that in the desired feature list for that game but either way multiverse sounds like a great idea. Once we get worlds that are truly different (a war-ravaged world rather than a peaceful island world) it'll be more interesting.
DF's equivalent of teleporting someone's heart three feet to the left will be briefly teleporting them to the dimension where the air is full of 20,000 degree syndrome-laiden toxins that cause the victim to hallucinate, vomit, and melt all at once, generally fatally.I'm not too sure I can see a point of any kind coming from this...
from the magmawiki
Minotaurs inhabit Labyrinths (marked with a # on the Travel map). As you explore the labyrinth, the Minotaur will taunt you until you find and kill it.
In january 2010 Toady updated the devlogs around twenty days. his number slowly decreased during the course of 2010, and in january he only made four updates up to this day.Maybe it is connected with bugfixing? But it would be cool to announce "Today I fixed bugs #262626 #727272 and #626262"
In january 2010 Toady updated the devlogs around twenty days. his number slowly decreased during the course of 2010, and in january he only made four updates up to this day.Maybe it is connected with bugfixing? But it would be cool to announce "Today I fixed bugs #262626 #727272 and #626262"
I think a lot of the stuff he's working on right now is pretty dry as well. It was hilarious to read about testing efforts around the medicine path, poisons, etc. Now that he's apparently mainly working on bringing up real industries in teh villages I don't suppose the bugs are as dramatic.
Yea, give us more short contentless updates.You heard him, lads.
Also, it's bad form to say "I thought about adding this feature / tried it out, and it didn't work, so I removed it". Gets peoples' hopes up or disappoints them. Leads to more havoc than it's worth.
Personally, I suspect that, at this very moment, toady is running a game where he builds the pyramid of Giza out of clay bricks. Well, not exactly the pyramid at giza, but something of similar scale, only with lots of twisty passages in the middle. Then, his next post is going to be something along the lines of "I made a pyramid of death. It is the site that is spawned when a necromancer decides to start making his undead legions. They automatically show up on the map, so they are easy to find. They sometimes connect to underground features. If you kill the necromancer and wield his staff, his undead minions might not attack you. Or they might all converge and hunt you down. Heh, heh, heh. Three Toe has now wasted 10, er, 11 adventurers trying to clear out a pyramid."
That's an easy mod.
aye but its still a pain....and realistically you should not be bound by the ethics of your race...during world gen...sure make them follow it...but once in fort you should be able to do whatever the hell you want!
That's an easy mod.
Not really; you can't use the meat or bones of creatures than can speak no matter what your ethics are. Civilized creatures that can learn but not speak are fair game (as my kobold meat roasts attest to).
Btw. That is again suggestion-land. Why do you keep invading FotF-eria? What did we do to you? Is it the religion?
Personally, I suspect that, at this very moment, toady is running a game where he builds the pyramid of Giza out of clay bricks.If you think that Toady plays his game*, you are mistaken. From his comments, dev log and nature of existing bugs I have impression that he embarks on 2x2 map and checks and re-checks what needed until he is happy with result. And never returns to, say, check if next features accidentally broke previous things. Or if this really works always, not only accidentally in one test scenario... or... or... well, results are well known.
Prepare for ceramics. You will now be able to construct anything from a jug to a mighty castle wall starting with simple clay. You will be able to make different kinds of ceramics from earthenware to porcelain as well as fire them with different types of glazes. Imagine a great hall filled with your own terracotta army.
I think infinite sand is a concession to the game not having any mechanism by which stone erodes into sand. In the real world, sand is practically infinite because the seas are constantly grinding out more of it.
The only time that I can fathom sand being used up in its entirety is if there was a large mining operation akin to a rock pit or something...especially in the desert...
I am aware of that....but even still...a handful of people digging sand wont make it go away...I think it makes sense and is realistic if it does to some degree...perhaps like well takes away from water...10 draws from a well = 1/7 water...apply that to sand would work.
As for the purity of sand used perhaps there needs to be added a sifters workshop added to the glass production chain or sand can be like some ores and only work a certain % of the time...
I call BS....we are talking about dwarf !!!SCIENCE!!! here!
And besides...if they couldn't find some way to make it work they would just sift it into submission until it finally gives up and turns white...
I call BS....we are talking about dwarf !!!SCIENCE!!! here!
And besides...if they couldn't find some way to make it work they would just sift it into submission until it finally gives up and turns white...
I like to think that Toady doesn't choose which features to implement based on bad jokes.
Its also good to be able to make a fort designed around a culture or something...I would love to be able to have a desert settlement with no stone and clay instead (trade based only)...most likely humans (sometimes I play as other races)...I like to impose realistic restrictions on myself...so that every game doesn't turn into a make the same fort every time rinse and repeat type thing...
I think Toady went on vacation. Im not complaining - it is well deserved.
...
I think Toady went on vacation. Im not complaining - it is well deserved.
Things have been messy lately -- last few days, including today, are going to be marred running around trying to fix up Zach's broken computer, and I'm sitting on a hundred emails. I should have a beekeeping devlog up within the hour though. A vacation would be nice, and I'll announce it if I finally get a chance for one, he he he.
Now that we know more about bees, our first order of business is turning those bees into roaming death machines gentlemen!
We don't have flowers yet -- just a requirement that bees be kept adjacent to an open outside tile.
Will said bees angrily attack whatever they land on/near and mercilessly chase them down? What would you do if said bees were attacking you? Can bees kill with their sting, or only produce bad thoughts?
We have titans made out of snow.
[So] I wouldn't put it out of the realm of possibility.
Honey ants would be nice too.
I'm sensing exploits already. However, honey and bee keeping will be a fun mini-game/addition to the main game. Regardless, Toady's signature "he he he" has begun to frighten me. It could mean any of:It will be used for candles, I'm sure, once lighting goes in. That's by far one of my most anticipated additions that nobody ever talks about, incidentally. I hope it comes soonish, although there's an entire dev page full of things that are higher priority.
-Hah, that's mildly amusing.
-Hah, that's correct and mildly amusing.
-Hah, the new release will include greater horrors than your feeble minds could possibly imagine, and these terrors on dwarfkind will stop at nothing to feast upon the flesh of your alchoholic midgets.
This has probably been asked, but what are the planned uses of wax collections, once they are implemented.
The addition of bees means that we'll have a chance to fight titans and forgotten beasts made of honey!
Wait, were we already getting forgotten beasts made entirely of stuff like meat, bone, or chitin?
Wait, were we already getting forgotten beasts made entirely of stuff like meat, bone, or chitin?
I don't think so, I'm pretty sure the single-material ones are inorganic (i.e. not based on creature materials).
Wait, were we already getting forgotten beasts made entirely of stuff like meat, bone, or chitin?
I don't think so, I'm pretty sure the single-material ones are inorganic (i.e. not based on creature materials).
I thought there were creatures made of nothing but blood. I don't know that I have ever seen a forgotten beast made of it, but I thought there were. If not blood, then vomit. Anybody else seen anything like that?
It will be used for candles, I'm sure, once lighting goes in. That's by far one of my most anticipated additions that nobody ever talks about, incidentally.Probably everyone is just too scared to even think about consequences of introduction of dozens of dynamic light sources. Even if Toady keeps it to binary light/dark state, re-calculating FOVs for them will be devastating fps-wise.
Hmmm. It'll be interesting to see what new tags come into play with bees. Might make for some interesting modding options.
Yeah, though minecraft seems to do OK when it comes to light.
Yeah, though minecraft seems to do OK when it comes to light.
Yeah, though minecraft seems to do OK when it comes to light.
I assume that's hardware-accelerated. Realtime 3D lighting is one of the reasons we pay $300 for those video cards :)
Speaking of which: I am excite. I am getting a new computer and moving from 1.6ghz per core to 3.0ghz. Full-speed Dwarf Fortress ahoy :D :D :D
Is it planned to implement in 2011 one of the top* suggestions from DF Eternal Suggestion Voting?
*one of top 4?
Yeah, though minecraft seems to do OK when it comes to light.
I assume that's hardware-accelerated. Realtime 3D lighting is one of the reasons we pay $300 for those video cards :)
Speaking of which: I am excite. I am getting a new computer and moving from 1.6ghz per core to 3.0ghz. Full-speed Dwarf Fortress ahoy :D :D :D
somehow I read that as "I am enzyte!" :o
You getting a single core or more?
We already have a binary light/dark state. Right there with inside/outside.It will be used for candles, I'm sure, once lighting goes in. That's by far one of my most anticipated additions that nobody ever talks about, incidentally.Probably everyone is just too scared to even think about consequences of introduction of dozens of dynamic light sources. Even if Toady keeps it to binary light/dark state, re-calculating FOVs for them will be devastating fps-wise.
It should be pretty rare in a fortress, too. For each moving light source, that's still not much compared to pathfinding. And there should be way fewer mobile light sources than mobile pathfinders (and less than mobile pathfinding targets).Yeah, though minecraft seems to do OK when it comes to light.
Absolutely. This is because Minecraft does not feature any moving light source. At all (the sun is global light). I think it's one of the reasons why you can't walk with your torch lit.
I recall there being a big Lighting Arc thread, and if I recall correctly one of the supposed issues, was with spotting in different light issues, shadows, and converging light sources.
Absolutely. This is because Minecraft does not feature any moving light source. At all (the sun is global light). I think it's one of the reasons why you can't walk with your torch lit.
I recall there being a big Lighting Arc thread, and if I recall correctly one of the supposed issues, was with spotting in different light issues, shadows, and converging light sources.
This it? (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=27999.msg346856#msg346856)
Honestly, I hope Toady doesn't bother with light any time soon. I just don't see it bringing much to the table, at least not compared to the effort involved for both programmer and player. Either it doesn't have substantial effects (i.e., creatures can basically see in the dark) in which case you're not doing much more than adding flavor text to the {k} screen, or it does and a person won't be able to mine more than ten squares from the surface without a damn bee industry. Or maybe you make the dwarves see in the dark (like if cave-adapted) but take it away from surface creatures, which basically would amount to creating an entire new tile dimension solely to create another gimmicky way to kill elves. Now I'm not opposed to gimmicky ways to kill elves--far from it--but you gotta have the proper priorities. I hope Bay12 at least finishes the army arc and a dozen or so Eternal Suggestions before they start bothering with lighting..
Honestly, I hope Toady doesn't bother with light any time soon. I just don't see it bringing much to the table, at least not compared to the effort involved for both programmer and player. Either it doesn't have substantial effects (i.e., creatures can basically see in the dark) in which case you're not doing much more than adding flavor text to the {k} screen, or it does and a person won't be able to mine more than ten squares from the surface without a damn bee industry. Or maybe you make the dwarves see in the dark (like if cave-adapted) but take it away from surface creatures, which basically would amount to creating an entire new tile dimension solely to create another gimmicky way to kill elves. Now I'm not opposed to gimmicky ways to kill elves--far from it--but you gotta have the proper priorities. I hope Bay12 at least finishes the army arc and a dozen or so Eternal Suggestions before they start bothering with lighting..
I personally wouldn't mind if the current "dig deep til you find the magma sea" or "dig til you see what you want" methods of play were slowed down somehow...wouldnt hurt anything except making you not as invulnerable in many cases
Honestly, I hope Toady doesn't bother with light any time soon. I just don't see it bringing much to the table, at least not compared to the effort involved for both programmer and player. Either it doesn't have substantial effects (i.e., creatures can basically see in the dark) in which case you're not doing much more than adding flavor text to the {k} screen, or it does and a person won't be able to mine more than ten squares from the surface without a damn bee industry. Or maybe you make the dwarves see in the dark (like if cave-adapted) but take it away from surface creatures, which basically would amount to creating an entire new tile dimension solely to create another gimmicky way to kill elves. Now I'm not opposed to gimmicky ways to kill elves--far from it--but you gotta have the proper priorities. I hope Bay12 at least finishes the army arc and a dozen or so Eternal Suggestions before they start bothering with lighting..
Honestly, I hope Toady doesn't bother with light any time soon. I just don't see it bringing much to the table, at least not compared to the effort involved for both programmer and player. Either it doesn't have substantial effects (i.e., creatures can basically see in the dark) in which case you're not doing much more than adding flavor text to the {k} screen, or it does and a person won't be able to mine more than ten squares from the surface without a damn bee industry. Or maybe you make the dwarves see in the dark (like if cave-adapted) but take it away from surface creatures, which basically would amount to creating an entire new tile dimension solely to create another gimmicky way to kill elves. Now I'm not opposed to gimmicky ways to kill elves--far from it--but you gotta have the proper priorities. I hope Bay12 at least finishes the army arc and a dozen or so Eternal Suggestions before they start bothering with lighting..
As discussed in the linked thread about lighting, it could affect various things.
Such as workshop qualities, combat, sneaking detections, noble demands, room values, and plant growth.
1.6ghz 3-core to 3.0ghz 2-core. I am still keeping the old computer actually since it's still only a year old and pretty great. It's just that my dad got a promotion and all :D :D :D
But before that I had the same 2.8ghz mono pentium 4 for five whole years. It ran DF mighty fast.
Quote from: abadidea link=topic=60554.msg1912159#msg1912159 [/quote1.6ghz 3-core to 3.0ghz 2-core. I am still keeping the old computer actually since it's still only a year old and pretty great. It's just that my dad got a promotion and all :D :D :D
But before that I had the same 2.8ghz mono pentium 4 for five whole years. It ran DF mighty fast.
Moving from a one core 3ghz machine to a two core 3ghz (with 2.5 x the bus speed, and faster RAM) was great for me. DF gets one core, the rest of the system, a web browser, and whatever libraries DF is taking to gets the other. People always talk about core speed and DF, but the impact of a fast low latency bus with fast low latency RAM really shouldn't be overlooked.
My single biggest issue is that I half live at my girlfriends place, and all I have there is a 1.6ghz P4 with 512MB of RAM on a Lenovo laptop. That's what Dungeon Crawl is for. :)
I personally wouldn't mind if the current "dig deep til you find the magma sea" or "dig til you see what you want" methods of play were slowed down somehow...wouldn't hurt anything except making you not as invulnerable in many cases
I personally wouldn't mind if the current "dig deep til you find the magma sea" or "dig til you see what you want" methods of play were slowed down somehow...wouldn't hurt anything except making you not as invulnerable in many cases
I agree about this. There has been a loss of pacing in dwarf mode since the .31 release. I don't know if lighting is the best solution to this, but in my mind there should be something stopping the player from just drilling down to hit magma at embark. I'm not saying it is a difficulty issue or anything, just pacing - in 40d there was usually a long period of searching for magma that held back the metal industry until completed, and it was pretty fun.
I personally wouldn't mind if the current "dig deep til you find the magma sea" or "dig til you see what you want" methods of play were slowed down somehow...wouldn't hurt anything except making you not as invulnerable in many cases
I agree about this. There has been a loss of pacing in dwarf mode since the .31 release. I don't know if lighting is the best solution to this, but in my mind there should be something stopping the player from just drilling down to hit magma at embark. I'm not saying it is a difficulty issue or anything, just pacing - in 40d there was usually a long period of searching for magma that held back the metal industry until completed, and it was pretty fun.
Things have been messy lately -- last few days, including today, are going to be marred running around trying to fix up Zach's broken computer, and I'm sitting on a hundred emails. I should have a beekeeping devlog up within the hour though. A vacation would be nice, and I'll announce it if I finally get a chance for one, he he he.
Things have been messy lately -- last few days, including today, are going to be marred running around trying to fix up Zach's broken computer, and I'm sitting on a hundred emails. I should have a beekeeping devlog up within the hour though. A vacation would be nice, and I'll announce it if I finally get a chance for one, he he he.
Probably way too late and old news but I wonder how many computer techs live in Washington that would happily fix the Adams' computers at cost, if not just completely for free.
Although it would probably be very hard to resist searching through the computer for a dev version, or hooking the drive up to a tech station with a data recovery program to look for deleted dev versions...
Huh... I probably single-handedly convinced Toady to never take his computer to a tech shop.
High five fellow Virginian :D
Actually at the moment I am getting snowed under on Cape Cod with my grandmother. It'd be a perfect day for DF if I had a computer more powerful than a 1.2ghz netbook with me. Technically playable, but it gets too slow too soon. It's also a really cramped keyboard.
Don't dwarves have IR vision anyway? That should alleviate the need for a while :P
Don't dwarves have IR vision anyway? That should alleviate the need for a while :P
Right, and a really good sense of smell (http://www.goblinscomic.com/10212005/) and laser vision. (heh)
Toady hasn't added anything to do with light perception other than glowing eyes in the dark, it's been made pretty apparent that we shouldn't go by other fantasy worlds as an indication of where things will go.
Well kobolds can see atleast infragreen.
Gflex you combo breaker ;) that was just a bit Wow humor. Too geeky?
I wonder if elves can see UV light...Elves can see megapurple... it is the colour of candy. :p
Most DF players see everything from infradead to ultraviolent.
Most DF players see everything from infradead to ultraviolent.
To the tag line thread.
Because it seems that no matter how many non-pet passable doors I put down they always get through eventually
I'm assuming questions are still posted here.
Are there any plans for better animal control? Maybe something where dwarfs will actively remove animals from an area where they're not allowed?
Because it seems that no matter how many non-pet passable doors I put down they always get through eventually, and it's such a pain to remove them. It's such an annoyance that I no longer stop the spikes in my Danger Room (a triple non-pet passable doored Danger Room at that) if an animal wanders into it, and I'm sure that's not the response I'm supposed to have.
Yep. Pastures are in for grazing animals to do their thing. IIRC, Toady also said that they would tend to stay there, given that it is a food source for them.
High five fellow Virginian :D
Actually at the moment I am getting snowed under on Cape Cod with my grandmother. It'd be a perfect day for DF if I had a computer more powerful than a 1.2ghz netbook with me. Technically playable, but it gets too slow too soon. It's also a really cramped keyboard.
That sucks! its just starting to get a bit warmer here (in Virginia Beach)...which I am very glad about...
High five fellow Virginian :D
Actually at the moment I am getting snowed under on Cape Cod with my grandmother. It'd be a perfect day for DF if I had a computer more powerful than a 1.2ghz netbook with me. Technically playable, but it gets too slow too soon. It's also a really cramped keyboard.
That sucks! its just starting to get a bit warmer here (in Virginia Beach)...which I am very glad about...
Well, NOVA just got a ton of snow/rain dumped on it.
High five fellow Virginian :D
Actually at the moment I am getting snowed under on Cape Cod with my grandmother. It'd be a perfect day for DF if I had a computer more powerful than a 1.2ghz netbook with me. Technically playable, but it gets too slow too soon. It's also a really cramped keyboard.
That sucks! its just starting to get a bit warmer here (in Virginia Beach)...which I am very glad about...
Well, NOVA just got a ton of snow/rain dumped on it.
Which has delayed my father coming to rescue me, which delays me being able to get a new computer, which delays me being able to play Dwarf Fortress in all its glory. :'(
Sorry to pile on the "ceramics" questions, but I just rejoined the forums after a three-month absence.
I was trying to get up to date on the updates, and came across the ceramics post that was put up on the sixteenth, and I was at first a little concerned, but then became very excited.
One of the things that I really love about Dwarf Fortress is that it lets me start getting very technical, and I start learning some things about, say, the difference between mafic and felsic magma. And one of the conversations I really learned a lot about was when Gazz taught me about pottery in one of the suggestion threads I participated in.
Essentially, the question I want to ask is will the ceramics be like the one in this thread on ceramics (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=49525.0)? Will we have just "clay" as a soil type to work with, or can we fire up any kind of soil to make terra cotta, so that it is (rightly) a material everyone with access to dirt can make? Can we wood glaze pots? Do we need sand or crushed feldspar to glaze? Are we going to be crushing a single metal ore unit to make, say, 50 pots worth of glazes which can then be used to make decorations? I hate to think we have to use an entire metal unit for one pot's decoration.
Honestly, the attention to realism on this one really makes or breaks my hopes and dreams. If this is actually very similar to what was discussed in the suggestion thread, I will love you forever... foreverer than I already do, at least.
These finer technical details were already discussed in the linked Clay & Ceramic thread.Spoiler: NW_Kohaku Post (click to show/hide)
Hmmm. I'd be surprised if any soil worked for terracotta. IRL, terracotta—as with all clays—needs clay of a certain quality to be viable for use. And there are better terracottas and worse terracottas, depending on where the clay's collected.
Clay itself is made up of certain minerals (phyllosilicates, IIRC). If the soil doesn't have those minerals, then it isn't going to work as clay.
Will there be respect for different "burial customs"? I, for one, have started to prefer the "Proper Dwarven Funeral" method of flooding a burial chamber with magma, encasing the dwarf in obsidian, then making a statue out of his/her obsidian. It's just dwarfier that way. Will this now mean I have to choose between not having personally amusing burial practices and being annoyed by the results of my "desecration of the bodies"?You can always carve them a burial slab out of the obsidian. Perhaps not as dorfy as a statue, but still gets the idea across.
I was enjoying the idea of that dwarf ghost starting parties. I'd like more of that kind of thing. Or even more "defenders of the weak" ghosts, that chase off sieges. >:) I'd've kept him around, too, except I wanted to get at the goblinite, and he was... territorial.
I loved the old "Ghostly Mason has organized party" 'bug'. I was hoping it wouldn't be removed
Mead, hive splitting and stinging bees? My first fort in the next version is going to be a pure bee industry fort. Honey roasts for food, mead for booze and the entrance surrounded with many hives linked to a single lever for fortress defense.
if you are collecting half of your hives and then splitting the other half back into those hives over and over I wouldn't be surprised.
I'm having a tiny bit of trouble parsing this sentence, but it could just be because of my ignorance of the whole beekeeping process:Quote from: Toady Oneif you are collecting half of your hives and then splitting the other half back into those hives over and over I wouldn't be surprised.
Does this basically mean even with a max number of hives on the map, beekeeping will basically be "renewable" within that limit as long as you keep unharvested ones to split into your bee farm?
I guess that question can be answered by anyone who knows about beekeeping (which seems to be a surprising/alarming number of people) on this forum.
I'm not sure whether or not to make it a green highlighted question, since I don't want to ask too many questions all at once, but I'm wondering how (player) manually intensive beekeeping might be...
If it's like ranching is currently, where you have to manually mark every cow for slaughter, I think I'll stick with farming, which runs more-or-less automatically. The automated slaughterhouses (where cows fall through trapdoors to their death on the butcher's block) made automated ranching automated, if elaborate to set up, but I don't foresee us being able to perform large mechanical solutions to something as delicate as splitting a beehive.
Is there going to be labors in adventurer mode?That would be very interesting.
ya beat me to it.Is there going to be labors in adventurer mode?That would be very interesting.
This is planned for the adventurer skills arc
Nice to see you again, too.
I am trying to limit myself to only three questions at most per session out of politeness, but if politeness is not reciprocated, then what is the point?
Also, I can assure you I am using the suggestions forum for what are real suggestions.
Sorry for being rash, but this kind of elaborate question really doesn't fit here. Toady didn't answer this thread for more than a month maybe because questions like yours. We did discuss this point here many times. Think of a simple rule - if you have to elaborate too much to ask a question it is not a question for this thread. Try the DF Talk thread instead.
Sounds great, but what does "Combat move/speed split" mean?
Sounds great, but what does "Combat move/speed split" mean?
This release schedule is really good. I mean, I don't play adventure mode so the big thing I'm waiting for (Inns) will take a while, but I love knowing what order everything is in.
An obvious question:
Will we have tavern brawls in the dwarf mode?
Has there been any word on how the caravan arc will impact the dwarven economy portion of fortress mode? Will minting coin have relevance now?
I only ask because I had to wonder how merchants and travelers will pay for their rooms at The Inn of the Prancing Skinless Moose after update 4... If "dwarf mode inns" means what I think it means.
Has there been any word on how the caravan arc will impact the dwarven economy portion of fortress mode? Will minting coin have relevance now?
I only ask because I had to wonder how merchants and travelers will pay for their rooms at The Inn of the Prancing Skinless Moose after update 4... If "dwarf mode inns" means what I think it means.
No, but something like this may come in Update 6. Though recall the major issue with the coins, is with how their stacked, a prevalent design issue with a lot of small items.
I know that interspecies breeding will eventually be possible, making for something like half-elves as well as just mules, but that's just being put off for now, but it's a little odd that dwarves and humans can't even be friends, much less dwarves and some of the cool hybrid critterpeoples like sharkmen. Likewise, humans or other people who somehow become part of dwarven society can't be assigned labors or assigned rooms without hacks.
I'm sure we won't have full interspecies breeding capabilities, although give me half a chance, and I'm interbreeding dwarves with GCS in a heartbeat.
I like the idea of separating combat speed from movement. Because I'm lying on the ground doesn't mean I can't swing my axe like crazy :)
Other stuff's fun too. Keep it up guys.
I'm curious why people assume inter-species breeding would be possible. This rarely works out very well in nature, usually resulting in sterile mutants. Unless people are suggesting that dwarves and elves and goblins are actually all different races of the same species? (seems unlikely, considering half of them are immortal)
Unless of course we're assuming a Wizard Did It, and in the DF world inter-species romance brings about perfectly viable half-and-half offspring. And thus Tigermen were born...
The only other options seem to be a world without halfbreeds or a world of poorly defined racial lines and mixed raced individuals being the norm.
I love that plan of mini-releases with bug fixes in between. Love it love it love it.
I'm curious why people assume inter-species breeding would be possible. This rarely works out very well in nature, usually resulting in sterile mutants. Unless people are suggesting that dwarves and elves and goblins are actually all different races of the same species? (seems unlikely, considering half of them are immortal)
Unless of course we're assuming a Wizard Did It, and in the DF world inter-species romance brings about perfectly viable half-and-half offspring. And thus Tigermen were born...
I don't know if this question will ever be answered or not. It's a little bit silly.
Will we ever have body parts on otherwise inanimate objects? Winged armor that lets you fly, gloves flowing with magma as blood, and so on.
I don't know if this question will ever be answered or not. It's a little bit silly.
Will we ever have body parts on otherwise inanimate objects? Winged armor that lets you fly, gloves flowing with magma as blood, and so on.
I wish for my Elona wings now :s
Uh hex? you know there is a colour selector in the post-edit windowish thingy. right next to the font-size. Just mark your text and hit "change color" where you can select limegreen for example.
+Microcline Syrup+
Has there been any word on how the caravan arc will impact the dwarven economy portion of fortress mode? Will minting coin have relevance now?
I only ask because I had to wonder how merchants and travelers will pay for their rooms at The Inn of the Prancing Skinless Moose after update 4... If "dwarf mode inns" means what I think it means.
No, but something like this may come in Update 6. Though recall the major issue with the coins, is with how their stacked, a prevalent design issue with a lot of small items.
Traders could at least abstract their payment to The Inn of the Prancing Skinless Moose in the trade screen. Say if you had an exceptional inn with quality food and a wide selection of intoxicants you would find your trade starting off with a certain trader profit to account for the "coin" they spent at your inn. Or maybe a legendary inn could at least give you more favorable trade rolls when offering the traders a less favorable deal.
Edit: Likewise, travelers (i.e. adventurers) might be more willing to do quests for your Fortress
Who knows, maybe Dwarves in this universe act like Gorons.+Microcline Syrup+
I could respond to this so many different ways, but...
"Stone Soup" is all I can really think about.
I'm not sure letting dwarves outright eat the excess stone they generate is necessarily the way we want to send this game.
Sorry to be thick, but where are the schedule and devblog?People are also asking about less immediate potential developments, as they come to mind. The things you linked are indeed the devlog and schedule.
I can find the current development (http://www.bay12games.com/dwarves/) and current goals (http://www.bay12games.com/dwarves/dev.html) listings, but these don't mention some of the things being talked about here, such as updates. What am I missing?
Or maybe it's more fit for a Goron mod. (I hope Dwarves in a New World keeps being updated! Eventually!) It definitely doesn't belong in vanilla. NW's post made me smile.Who knows, maybe Dwarves in this universe act like Gorons.+Microcline Syrup+
I could respond to this so many different ways, but...
"Stone Soup" is all I can really think about.
I'm not sure letting dwarves outright eat the excess stone they generate is necessarily the way we want to send this game.
Who knows, maybe Dwarves in this universe act like Gorons.+Microcline Syrup+
I could respond to this so many different ways, but...
"Stone Soup" is all I can really think about.
I'm not sure letting dwarves outright eat the excess stone they generate is necessarily the way we want to send this game.
REAL DWARVES EAT MAGMA FOR BREAKFASTWho knows, maybe Dwarves in this universe act like Gorons.+Microcline Syrup+
I could respond to this so many different ways, but...
"Stone Soup" is all I can really think about.
I'm not sure letting dwarves outright eat the excess stone they generate is necessarily the way we want to send this game.
Yeah, the whole "eating rocks" thing reminded me of the trading sequence in Oracle of Seasons, where you give the Subrosian a pot and he makes you some lava soup.
Now that would be a meal!
Native silver roasts anyone?Well, they carry around whole barrels full of prepared fly brains. I'm guessing they tried to eat ores before they got to this point.
Seriously if you can light the water from your water-tap on fire because its mixed with natural gas something must have gone reallywrongRIGHT.
Do flys even have brains? iirc they and many other insetcts have a ladder nervesystem that does all the stuff.
Then again, I've always hated everything ever called a "delicacy", and always thought they were just scams to get people to pay outrageous sums of money to eat stuffed mice or snails or something.
Then again, I've always hated everything ever called a "delicacy", and always thought they were just scams to get people to pay outrageous sums of money to eat stuffed mice or snails or something.
This is pretty much correct.
Because you are a genius?
*Begins work on Star Wars mod*
+Microcline Syrup+I'm not sure letting dwarves outright eat the excess stone they generate is necessarily the way we want to send this game.
... "The rivers run with claret fine,
The brooks with rich canary,
The ponds with other sorts of wine,
To make your hearts full merry:
Nay, more than this, you may behold,
The fountains flow with brandy,
The rocks are like refined gold,
The hills are sugar candy." ...
in a update that promises to have strangers wandering in to your fortress's innNo such promise has really been made. Dwarf mode inns may well cater only to your citizens. They could be as simple as a zone pretty much like a dining room, to which your dwarves go to drink.
The update that has me excited is the rewrite of Dorf personalities, and wants. I think this will be in part, the ground work for guilds, and religions.
Do personalities need a rewrite? :oI mean how much more complex and all-encompassing can personalities get?
Human 1: Look at him! The dwarf scout is headed for that mountain.
Human 2: I think we can catch him before he gets there... He's almost in range!
Human 3: ... That's no mountain... It's a fortress!
Human 2: It's too big to be a fortress.
Human 1: I've got a bad feeling about this. I'm making a backup save so I can savescum back to this point later in case I get greased instead of you cannon fodder companions I picked up back at that last cantina.
The problem with the current personality system isn't not enough detail, it is too much detail. Or too much meaningless detail, because you have things like "liberalism", "self-efficiency", "vulnerability", and dozens others. These are scales you don't even perceive or judge in everyday life, but every dwarf has a rank in each of these, which leads to a huge list of random attributes that you can't really make heads or tails off. I never could translate the DF personalities to a coherent idea of who the dwarf is. If there weren't there, it would be basically the same. At the same time, the game is not able to grasp and communicate as simple character features as "cruel", "selfish", "kind", "evil," "arrogant," "innocent", "ignorant", "shy", etc. which are labels we use in everyday life.
In other words: the game uses an artificial, mechanical, and politically correct system of expressing personalities. A system that is useless in the end, because when we talk about people or tell stories, we don't operate in a mechanical way. Toady said in one of the DF talks he would like to gut the current system and replace it with something which feels a bit more like a story, a book - when an author is writing a novel, he doesn't take his characters and assign each of them values from 0-100 on 30 different personality scales. He sticks labels like "manipulative bitch" or "helpful uncle" to them and works with these. So presumably, the personalities rewrite means a move from numbered scales to more lively and less number-based tags and descriptions.
Just picking up some threads on personalities, couldn't find the Jiri topic... did you write one, or did I imagine it?
So in short the System doesnt change at all but the displaying of this info changes? I think these dozen traits are meaningfull as part of the interaction between or NPC and the Player. Its a good foundation for much later.
I wonder if the behavior in terms of needs changes too thus people doing work eating and stuff like in rl.
So like I say, the system isn't ... I want to keep the personality facets, I like having the thirty different facets of the personalities, and just increasing the overall number of places those are used. But I think to complement the personality facets we also need stuff like different emotions that you can be feeling, and additionally some things along the lines of those likes and dislikes, but stuff that the dwarf could be into, or the dwarf's vices or something like that; some kind of more permanent characterstics, but that can be changed through exposure; just to give them more texture there. But happiness numbers are definitely going to go.
So I tried a bit of Footkerchiefing but I've found only this quote:Quote from: DF talk 8So like I say, the system isn't ... I want to keep the personality facets, I like having the thirty different facets of the personalities, and just increasing the overall number of places those are used. But I think to complement the personality facets we also need stuff like different emotions that you can be feeling, and additionally some things along the lines of those likes and dislikes, but stuff that the dwarf could be into, or the dwarf's vices or something like that; some kind of more permanent characterstics, but that can be changed through exposure; just to give them more texture there. But happiness numbers are definitely going to go.
Which is weird because I seem to remember Toady talking something about how the system probably needs to be replaced because it's too modern, politically correct and generally unfitting. It was while they were talking about bandit leaders, I think, but I can't find it.
While, having the personality affect the work ethic, or if they like their job.
In fact, I think I'm going to have to call you on what you think that dwarf whose set of personality traits I read out means... Let me see if I read the same thing into it that you read into it.
Now, what if I describe to you a person who, "rarely feels discouraged, is self-conscoius, somewhat reserved, enjoys thrills, lives life at a leisurely pace, and constantly strives for perfection", then you'd probably have a bit more trouble. Especially since some of those things kind of contradict one another.
I'm not saying that their personalities have to be defined by one particular archetype, which is just bad writing, but that it gives a quick way for players to be able to understand something about the character. (And I was thinking Shrinking Violet.)
I'm not saying that you can't give characters quirks or that we have to get rid of all the traits, and only deal with archetypes, but that it gives the player a lot more information in a much shorter amount of space, since it relies more upon how the player already percieves and categorizes the world. You can say "Grouchy old man" and then follow up with "who has strict self-discipline" and "a deadly fear of mice" as further details.
In fact, I think I'm going to have to call you on what you think that dwarf whose set of personality traits I read out means... Let me see if I read the same thing into it that you read into it.
I give my dwarves nicknames based upon what I read in their details menu so that I can at least try to tell them apart, and frankly, I generally just devolve into calling dwarves stuff like "Silverboots" because she likes silver and boots, since the "likes" stuff is far simpler to read. If you can get something close to what I came up with when I nicknamed my dwarf in the game, then I'll admit that maybe you have some point. But really, I am unusual in that I spend much, if any, time at all caring about what's on every single one of my dwarfves' personality pages.
I see no mention of parties, musical instruments or toys in the new short-term goals.
Are behaviours involving this type of item going to be put on hold, or will the new inns and such include them.
I see no mention of parties, musical instruments or toys in the new short-term goals.
Are behaviours involving this type of item going to be put on hold, or will the new inns and such include them.
I, for one, would like to see Musician and Singer skills added. I envision a random harpist wandering through the fort, generating happy thoughts for my dorfs, gathering a few bored idlers on the way, eventually winding up at the statue garden (or inn, perhaps?) where a little soirée starts up. I also see this playing into religious services when priests and temples are implemented in 14 years or so.
I would love to be able to easily match labors for dwarves by their personality. Some ability to ask game who is best Fisherdwarf that will take all the details into account (dwarf with preferences to fish, liking outdoors, procastrinating/lazy so that he wont overfish too fast and ideally with some skill ranks...).
I would love to be able to easily match labors for dwarves by their personality. Some ability to ask game who is best Fisherdwarf that will take all the details into account (dwarf with preferences to fish, liking outdoors, procastrinating/lazy so that he wont overfish too fast and ideally with some skill ranks...).
In a simulation, "all the details" are highly context-dependent: if you breach a cavern full of water then "likes the outdoors" is suddenly a much less important qualification for a fisherdwarf. The only way to tell how the simulation is going to play out is by...running the simulation.
The upshot is that the HR idea makes a lot of sense, because any kind of heuristics or rules of thumb along these lines are inevitably going to fail, in which case it'll be important to have someone to blame. (Just like real life.)
there was suggestion with "HR" dorf
There was suggestion with "HR" dorf that manages labor assigments to which you give worker template and amount of workers for it which you desire, template that would not only contain labor assigments, but also prefered presonalities and likes.
I have to admit I'm not too fond of a archetype system. Sure, it may convey information more quickly, but I just don't feel like having a fort filled with moe-moe dwarves. (You know that somewhere there's an RNG who would roll that)
Well, caring about personality traits is possible if you have 7 dwarves, but once you get closer to tripple digits than single... there is just no way i am going to familiarize myself with dwarf beyond basic labor assigment when they immigrate.
I would love to be able to easily match labors for dwarves by their personality. Some ability to ask game who is best Fisherdwarf that will take all the details into account (dwarf with preferences to fish, liking outdoors, procastrinating/lazy so that he wont overfish too fast and ideally with some skill ranks...).
There was suggestion with "HR" dorf that manages labor assigments to which you give worker template and amount of workers for it which you desire, template that would not only contain labor assigments, but also prefered presonalities and likes.
Quote from: NW_KohakuWould you even consider changing the relationship that the player has with the dwarves right now (as unquestioned overlord and direct allower and denier of all things dwarves can and cannot do), so that dwarves can become more autonomous and individual, and possibly create a better simulation, while on the other hand, potentially dramatically upping the potential for Fun because dwarves are stupid and very likely to hurt themselves unless continually babysat, or perhaps more importantly, if it meant that the player had less direct control over his fortress, and had to rely more on coaxing the ants in his/her antfarm to do his/her bidding?
Our eventual goal is to have the player's role be the embodiment of positions of power within the fortress, performing actions in their official capacity, to the point that in an ideal world each command you give would be linked to some noble, official or commander. I don't think coaxing is the way I'm thinking of it though, as with a game like Majesty which somebody brought up, because your orders would also carry the weight of being assumed to be for survival for the most part, not as bounties or a similar system. Once your fortress is larger, you might have to work a little harder to keep people around, but your dwarves in the first year would be more like crew taking orders from the captain of a ship out to sea or something, where you'd have difficulty getting them to do what you want only if you've totally flopped and they are ready to defy the expedition leader.
There was suggestion with "HR" dorf that manages labor assigments to which you give worker template and amount of workers for it which you desire, template that would not only contain labor assigments, but also prefered presonalities and likes.
Isn't this "too much control"? It feels like the player has absolute power over the dwarves and can also influence their personal lives and dictate their careers, bordering with social-engineering. IIRC, Toady repeatedly stated his goal is quite the opposite and that he wants the dwarves to retain some free will.
*sigh* I need to go back to refining this idea more seriously, though. I kind of have to finish writing up the Farming proposal, and do the rewrites to Imperial Dwarves, first, though.
hmmm I could help program when i finish some projects.*sigh* I need to go back to refining this idea more seriously, though. I kind of have to finish writing up the Farming proposal, and do the rewrites to Imperial Dwarves, first, though.
Have you ever tried working on a game of your own? You have so many ideas, it might be fun.
Not following this too closely lately, but I've seen a couple mentions of how one cares less about their dwarves as they get into the triple digits. I think this is a kind of neat dynamic as it is. Things are really rough starting out, and the first couple waves of settlers have really interesting lives. You build a bond with those, and they're typically a large enough cast of characters to keep you drawn in for many years. After the 50+ dwarf point, you're only vaguely familiar with most of them, and occasionally one dwarf will do something noteworthy and join in with the original core cast of important characters.
At least, this is what it feels like when I play, and I actually really like it. In my current fort, there's less than two dozen dwarves I actually care about out of 10 or so. Occasionally one dies, and occasionally I find reasons to care about another one who was previously just a face in the crowd. The cast and plot never seems to stagnate. It's awesome.
Have you ever tried working on a game of your own? You have so many ideas, it might be fun.
Not following this too closely lately, but I've seen a couple mentions of how one cares less about their dwarves as they get into the triple digits. I think this is a kind of neat dynamic as it is. Things are really rough starting out, and the first couple waves of settlers have really interesting lives. You build a bond with those, and they're typically a large enough cast of characters to keep you drawn in for many years. After the 50+ dwarf point, you're only vaguely familiar with most of them, and occasionally one dwarf will do something noteworthy and join in with the original core cast of important characters.
At least, this is what it feels like when I play, and I actually really like it. In my current fort, there's less than two dozen dwarves I actually care about out of 10 or so. Occasionally one dies, and occasionally I find reasons to care about another one who was previously just a face in the crowd. The cast and plot never seems to stagnate. It's awesome.
I like this aspect of DF as well- I think of the guys who pop out at me as Historical Figures in amongst a crowd of NPC's. The whole thing contributes to that Ye Olde Medieval Fantasy Setting feeling, where there's a lot of random peasants and the world seems to revolve around the kings, queens, heroes, and monsters. Its refreshingly non-democratic, if you know what I mean.
What's the point in giving your players a complex system, and then no way to figure out how to manipulate it?
Actually, thinking about it, I'm kind of worried about a personality overhaul, now, because if personality traits become more important, but we never get told what does what, we'll be inviting all kinds of wild speculation with almost no real way to verify quite a bit of it.
What's the point in giving your players a complex system, and then no way to figure out how to manipulate it?
Fun! When I feel like I have a game completely figured out, I usually don't feel like playing it anymore.
This is why I typically avoid things like MMOs or multiplayer RPGs in general, because everyone has decoded every aspect of the gameplay, crunched the numbers, and plastered all over the web exactly what character builds are 'the best' and how to play them. No fun.
I also enjoy leaving some things to fate when I'm making decisions. I'll do things without necessarily looking up all the relevant information that I could in order to make the best choice. I'll invent systems of management that only halfway make sense. I try to leave slightly more opportunity for failure than I do success, in general. This way it feels a lot more special when something goes really well... like there are more opportunities for those interesting historical figures to step forward and make themselves known.
In a case like this, if it's done well then it's organic/intuitive enough that you don't need to be told. After all, do you need to be told that a dwarf who doesn't like helping others might not make, say, a good doctor?
The game is made for people who enjoy modding, making mega-projects, and several other playstyles that would benefit from these things, already.
Once the disaster is upon you, you have no recourse to anything but those tools you have already prepared in advance to combat those disasters. If something surprises your fortress, it's pretty much going to crumble, end of story. And frankly, most players, regardless of the tagline, aren't too happy to see some utterly random event completely wreck a long-term fortress they grew attached to.
If you're the sort of person who doesn't care about the mechanics, and doesn't want to read the wiki unless there's a specific question you want answered, and want to learn things first-hand, though, guess what? Just don't read the wiki.
In the absence of understanding why something happens, those things are just stuff that happens, not a real story.
Compare this to the problems that players have with doctors not bothering to get their patients water, and having every injured dwarf die of thirst: Very, very few players know that personality traits play a role in this, and there is almost no hint in-game that these things are related. Most players are just declaring "doctors are broken!" and reporting it as a bug.
(And there are plenty of other things that are beyond player control that almost certainly are bugs that prevent most medicine from working, at that, such as a crutches.)
And just to reiterate and underline my point, it's because the difference in what the player can actually see and understand about the game because of what the game is actually willing to tell the player - the player needs to understand what action caused what consequence in order to learn.
In a case like this, if it's done well then it's organic/intuitive enough that you don't need to be told. After all, do you need to be told that a dwarf who doesn't like helping others might not make, say, a good doctor?
Obviously, yes.
We had this problem with noise, as well. People spent much time worrying about making sure their workshops would not interrupt their residential neighborhoods with too much noise until people figured out that workshops and training drills and the like didn't create noise. Only re-arranging furniture caused noise. This meant someone moving in to their home created a noise cube that woke up everyone in the entire fortress who was sleeping, but the pounding of the forge wouldn't wake up someone two feet away.
Suspending fortresses on bars of soap. Drawbridges count for support, but grates do not. Tricks for not having dwarves build floodgates in ways that wall them in a magma chamber. Animals reproducing through spores, without needing direct contact.
Just think of all the things in this game that logically should or shouldn't happen, but where logic is suspended by dwarfiness, and you'll have your answer as to why people don't just assume that simply because something is logical, it doesn't necessarily mean it will happen in the game.
dwarfbot thread (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=63109.0)Aw, man, I thought that thread was going to be about an automatic DF-playing engine. There's bots for Starcraft and bots for Angband and I made a bot for Puzzle Pirates, so I figured maybe someone was crazy enough...
With the continued addition of good/evil/savage/calm flora and fauna, is there any chance of eventually having good/evil/savage/calm minerals/soils? I know it would involve changing worldgen to determine surroundings before minerals, so how feasible is this?
Will kobolds lay eggs, as was joked in (I believe) the last DF Talk?
Besides the standalone creatures, there are several vermin/parasites sponsored that (could) live on/adopt unwilling creatures.
(cave beez living in beards, leeches clinging unto exposed skin, flees/mites/crabs living in furry bits or clothes, maggots burrowing into rotten bodyparts. etc)
Will these creatures get special code as they get added or will they, for now, remain the same as the vermin we know?
I've never seen it happen yet, my dorfs generally die of infection or thirst before they lose additional limbs; is the necrosis syndrome modelled in the healthcare/wound healing system ?
Hey Did Toady change the background to the Animal Drive or is it just my computer?
Mind you on the Laptop I was using the background was 100% the Zebra stripes without the overlay for the writing.
Was Toady responsible or was it my Laptop?
Can we see how many people and the total donation per animal?
With the addition of eggs and vegetable oil, it's gotten me wondering. Are there any plans to overhaul cooking at all in the near future? For example, meals that require certain ingredients to be included?
Toady One, what do you say to a monster sponsorship deal?
Are there plans to do something about the abundance of food in Fortress Mode? Right now, it's extremely easy to have almost endless food stocks - plants are easy to grow in huge numbers, using only a small land and dwarfpower; meat is very abundant thanks to the recent body changes which multiplied the number of food units in each creature, and thanks to massive and edible forgotten beasts; and now we have several new food sources to make things even easier. Doesn't this mean the player's fortress is a much bigger food producer than any other settlement on the world?
Will villages produce and export other goods besides food? And will they also demand materials for these?
I think it would be awesome if a nearby human town decided that they want to make walls or a special building of some kind and start mass-demanding stone blocks.
So, when moving fortress pieces are implemented, how mobile will they be?
For example, will we be able to move something to any point of our map, move things off-map, move it within a certain radius/confine/prepared area?
Also:
Could we put buildings and furniture (Workshops, ballistae, beds and etc.) on them? (I ask this because of the unbuildability of bridges, our only moving fortress terrain) How will they be controlled? Powered? Locomoted? Will we be able to make moving fortresses of death?
Is it likely to see any interface improvements before core element nr 25? For example - filtering for units list (now it is required to pass through all inhabitants of your fortress/or all dead creatures to reach invaders listing).
Isn't it about time you created the 2011 page of the devlog?
will only herbivore animals be eating now or will carnivores and omnivores be hunting or scavenging meat?
Do we get now a potter(-y) profession?
Will ceramic jugs (or some other ceramic product) be used to store any food or booze?
Quote from: NSQuoteWhere would you obtain clay from?Quote from: AreyarIt would be nice to see a mechanism where there is at least a small chance of a tile being mined out if clay mining will use the current sand collection interface. (Same for sand actually, but less so.)
Are there any plans to increase the frequency of Clay and Sand layers? Or to change what certain layers count as to make Sandy Clay a source for both Glassmaking and Pottery, for example?
With the inclusion of pottery will more obscure things like bone ware be included by default?
Toady does the new Ceramics stuff include enamel and decorations with enamel picture etc.?
Have all ceramics to be fired or can very basic things like low quality bricks be left in the sun to dry?
Now that site resources are going to become much more important, are we going to see items start to take multiple material types anytime soon? Spears are an obvious example, since wood is much cheaper than metal and it's cheaper and more efficient to make 4 spears instead of a single longsword.
What will my dwarves be making in their ceramics workshops?
How many intermediate workshops will there be for ceramics from beginning of the process to the final product?
I could see it as a chain of processes such as, clay maker --> potter --> kiln operator, or even more steps for decorated objects, etc... Or a potter who collects his own clumps of clay from mining and has a kiln in/as the workshop, so the process involves a minimum of 1 dwarf and 1 workshop, like a glass furnace.
Sort of covered in the last question, but how is clay handled in the game? Workshop product or clumps from mining that are processed in some general "pottery" workshop into a finished piece of pottery?
Since beehives are now in, any chance for a parallel underground creature in the underground? Or will wax production (once that's a thing) require that you keep your fort open to the surface?
And an entirely different question,
Is honey brewable into mead?
This has probably been asked, but what are the planned uses of wax collections, once they are implemented?
Are there any plans for better animal control? Maybe something where dwarfs will actively remove animals from an area where they're not allowed?
Essentially, the question I want to ask is will the ceramics be like the one in this thread on ceramics? Will we have just "clay" as a soil type to work with, or can we fire up any kind of soil to make terra cotta, so that it is (rightly) a material everyone with access to most types of dirt can make? Can we wood glaze pots? Do we need sand or crushed feldspar to glaze? Are glazes necessary to make a water-tight storage jug? Are we going to be crushing a single metal ore unit to make, say, 50 pots worth of glazes which can then be used to make decorations? I hate to think we have to use an entire metal unit for one pot's decoration.
Does this basically mean even with a max number of hives on the map, beekeeping will basically be "renewable" within that limit as long as you keep unharvested ones to split into your bee farm?
Are we going to get people who are deathly allergic to bee stings and can die from it?
Will we have tavern brawls in the dwarf mode?
Toady will the town map rewrite (shortterm release 1) just include renewed shops or will it be more in the direction of "district/alley" based placement of stuff. Like having a clothier-alley, a dyer-street or a jew-lane (these are real-life examples not some kind of political statement) where all people with the same job (or whatever) are concentrated? It makes only sense for bigger towns thought.
When the economy (presumably after the caravan arc) is more fleshed out, will there be a possibility for more fleshed out specifically-for-trade goods? (coins, and so forth) Currently coins are just minted with a random engraving and/or the symbol of the civ, but it might not be hard to come up with an alternative solution.
I see no mention of parties, musical instruments or toys in the new short-term goals.
Are behaviours involving this type of item going to be put on hold, or will the new inns and such include them.
Quote from: Jiri PetruNo, it's not the same. The personalities actually miss important stuff like "cruel", "evil", "ambitious", "envious" etc... But even if they were there, the main point is that numbered 0-100 scales simply aren't the way people think and stories work.
--
I seem to remember Toady talking something about how the system probably needs to be replaced because it's too modern, politically correct and generally unfitting. It was while they were talking about bandit leaders, I think, but I can't find
it.Quote from: MrWigglesWill the personality and need rewrite include the foot work for the the ability for dorfs to commit crime? Such as but not limited to murder, theft, and corruption? (Like embezzling)Quote from: HephFrom my PoV we dont need actually traits for "cruelness", being "envious" or being "evil" because either they are can be calculated from the current pesonality values or are context based like the "evil" trait you mentioned. "Ambitious" could for example come from high scores in "Achievement striving", "Assertiveness" and "Self efficacy". A cruel person could have low "sympathy", "altruism" and "cooperation" scores.Quote from: monk12What is involved in the Personality Rewrite? Do you have specific goals there?
Quote from: Jiri PetruAre there plans to do something about the abundance of food in Fortress Mode? Right now, it's extremely easy to have almost endless food stocks - plants are easy to grow in huge numbers, using only a small land and dwarfpower; meat is very abundant thanks to the recent body changes which multiplied the number of food units in each creature, and thanks to massive and edible forgotten beasts; and now we have several new food sources to make things even easier. Doesn't this mean the player's fortress is a much bigger food producer than any other settlement on the world?
The other settlements now outdo fortress food production by many times, because they are feeding by the day on more of an adventure mode scale, but they don't have the same margins in terms of excess food. You shouldn't end up having a lot of impact on the world food market, but internally it is a bit strange. The plans currently are the farming overhauls, which should reduce crop output a bit, and changes like livestock feeding requirements, which have started up with grazing for the next release.
Actually, on that topic...
Is it currently slated for animals of different sizes to require eating different amounts of food? If elephants and hoary marmots eat the same amount of food, but give off radically different amounts of meat when butchered, then it produces a rather silly comparison of which animals are the most effective to raise...
<talking about traits and effect on doctors> Most players are just declaring "doctors are broken!" and reporting it as a bug.There are broken - maybe it is really trait feature, but in that case doctors should display sth else than "No job". "On break" or even special thing for doctors. Without this doctors are broken.
From what I've read a single cow could feed a family of 4 or 5 for a year.
From what I've read a single cow could feed a family of 4 or 5 for a year.
Cow: 500 kg.
Family: 4 people.
Time: 365 days.
Meat/day=0,34 kg.
I think it is safe to say "single cow can deliver meat for a year" - but potatoes, rice or sth else are also neeeded.
Mead is in.
Well depending on which part of the cow you eat you get 100 (lung) to 870 (fat)Kcal/100g the average here is 230Kcal/100g...Milk gives you 65 kcal/100g and a normal mediaeval cow should produce between 2000 and 5000 liters per year - so you get around 5 liters per day milk which means 1.25 liters per Person a day.
...this would be a healthy diet. More the half of it comes from the cow.
Just a quick question: Are there any plans to change completely to a masked metric system? It seems popular and will save a lot of work.Quote from: DoomshifterSo, when moving fortress pieces are implemented, how mobile will they be?
For example, will we be able to move something to any point of our map, move things off-map, move it within a certain radius/confine/prepared area?
Also:
Could we put buildings and furniture (Workshops, ballistae, beds and etc.) on them? (I ask this because of the unbuildability of bridges, our only moving fortress terrain) How will they be controlled? Powered? Locomoted? Will we be able to make moving fortresses of death?
Moving off-map seems unlikely, at least in terms of what will be worked on for that dev item, although since boat-support is part of what that framework is about, it'll be a consideration. Buildings and anything else that can be placed in a tile will definitely be supported. I don't have any idea about how the rest of it will work.
I must re-start my vehicle megathread.Quote from: HephDo we get now a potter(-y) profession?Yeah, there are six new professions.
YES!
Yeah, there are six new professions.
Quote from: drvokeWill ceramic jugs (or some other ceramic product) be used to store any food or booze?
Yeah, there should be something. I just haven't found a name yet. Amphora made sense, and "large vase" seems too decorative, but I'm not really happy with anything yet, since those seem too specific. I'm not sure what the other historical examples are and if something else sounds nice and general. It could just be the jugs, but the jugs might be smaller. This was one of the last sort of unresolved quibbles for this release.
Quote from: MephansterasNow that site resources are going to become much more important, are we going to see items start to take multiple material types anytime soon? Spears are an obvious example, since wood is much cheaper than metal and it's cheaper and more efficient to make 4 spears instead of a single longsword.
I don't have a timeline. On the one hand, I've always been interested in multi-material, multi-part items, but there are complications, especially with using metal in small portions.
Who about just going with 'Pot'?Yeah, weeds will go in sometime and so should pot :P
What are the complications with this? We already have metal stored as units (150 iron instead of 1 bar). So I'm curious what the blocking factor is. Lingering old code?yeah, that might be it. when I add new stuff to my projects it tends to be hampered by old stuff :-\
Actually, on that topic...
Is it currently slated for animals of different sizes to require eating different amounts of food? If elephants and hoary marmots eat the same amount of food, but give off radically different amounts of meat when butchered, then it produces a rather silly comparison of which animals are the most effective to raise...
Well, in the case of Elephants, they take a while to grow up...
What are the complications with this? We already have metal stored as units (150 iron instead of 1 bar). So I'm curious what the blocking factor is. Lingering old code?
If only grazing animals will be needing food, is their any incentive for not just using large jaguar farms for food since they require nothing to keep alive?I bet it'll just be unbalanced until we get some more interesting carnivore type tags . . . things like [TASTES_GROSS] or [AGGRESSIVE_WHEN_PENNED] . . . although I be they start needing food before these are added.
Tricky one: Dwarves don't need to go to the bathroom... They don't need godamn toilet!
Is there going to be a fix for that? I mean... With poo you can make fertilizer, use it on spikes then you'll lead infections to your enemies, make dwarves unhappy(Very FUN), make them sick... Consider a fight between a monkey and a dwarf. *Monkey show the dwarf what he is made of* *Dwarf vomit* Aha.
There also a Feces and Urine thing you can vote for on the ESV.
Tricky one: Dwarves don't need to go to the bathroom... They don't need godamn toilet!
Is there going to be a fix for that? I mean... With poo you can make fertilizer, use it on spikes then you'll lead infections to your enemies, make dwarves unhappy(Very FUN), make them sick... Consider a fight between a monkey and a dwarf. *Monkey show the dwarf what he is made of* *Dwarf vomit* Aha.
There are several long, and heated debates over it, and probably best served in one of those threads then here. There also a Feces and Urine thing you can vote for on the ESV.
There are no plans to add "night soil". Dwarves poop little pebbles which seemlessly disappear into the cavern floor, or they collect them and cherish them or something.Do dwarves have water closets? Will we need to carefully craft "flushing" mechanisms to carry the unmentionables away?
There is currently no potty.4. Manure, as a fertilizer.
4. They just drop it everywhere? Everyone will might be doing it after a while... night soil, and so on. But it's a dangerous door to open, especially if the room on the other side is full. If a god turns you into a horse in adventure mode, would you suddenly start dropping the bomb?
From DF Talk: (http://bay12games.com/media/df_talk_combined_transcript.html)QuoteToady: [...] I like the idea of being able to track things and find them, and pick up little kobold scats and dig around to see what they've been eating ... after a fashion, anyway.QuoteRainseeker: So there's no poo creatures either?
Toady: It was a close thing! Because it was literally a decision I had to make, going down this list, because in the Hidden Fun Stuff of course if you get the tentacle demons then you get a layer scattered with various filth on the ground; and there's brown filth and yellow filth and so on and it's not clearly stated but it's a material that I had to put in properties for right? So there's these hard-coded filth materials, and when I was going down the list, you know 'Do I want creatures made out of mud? Do I want creatures made out of vomit? Do I want creatures made out of glass?', there's all these hard-coded materials, and I was just like 'Yeah, yeah, yeah ... No ... No ...' on the filth. But there are creatures made out of the grime, and the grime material is the material that collects on your body slowly over time, and it's also the material that's used in swamp water, so there's this ... I just needed this material called 'grime' for these miscellaneous purposes, it's just crap, just stuff that collects over time and when a creature is made out of that it just says 'composed of grime and filth'. So if you want to call that 'poo' even though it's not it's possible for you to extend your imagination.QuoteToady: [...] But the kind of thing that's on the table is gunpowder, and the materials that you need for that are already in the game, I think. We've got brimstone, which is sulphur, and I don't remember if we have saltpetre, if it's there or not, but ... I guess you could do all kinds of things with manure and urine to make it, or you can find it in a crystalline form in the ground perhaps.
And finally, sewers full of filth were a powergoal in the old dev item system:Quote# PowerGoal153, THE CRACKS OF DOOM, (Future): You flee into the sewer with the baron's ring, but sliding in the muck, you drop it. Try as you might, you cannot locate the precious object in the town's filth.
I think I might just gen an adventurer right after the next release and devote my time to stealing eggs. ALL OF THEM.
Tricky one: Dwarves don't need to go to the bathroom... They don't need godamn toilet!
Is there going to be a fix for that? I mean... With poo you can make fertilizer, use it on spikes then you'll lead infections to your enemies, make dwarves unhappy(Very FUN), make them sick... Consider a fight between a monkey and a dwarf. *Monkey show the dwarf what he is made of* *Dwarf vomit* Aha.
There are several long, and heated debates over it, and probably best served in one of those threads then here. There also a Feces and Urine thing you can vote for on the ESV.
Quote from: drvokeWill ceramic jugs (or some other ceramic product) be used to store any food or booze?
Yeah, there should be something. I just haven't found a name yet. Amphora made sense, and "large vase" seems too decorative, but I'm not really happy with anything yet, since those seem too specific. I'm not sure what the other historical examples are and if something else sounds nice and general. It could just be the jugs, but the jugs might be smaller. This was one of the last sort of unresolved quibbles for this release.
Who about just going with 'Pot'?
Large Adobe Vessel
Large Stoneware Vessel
Large China Vessel
+<*Large Stoneware Vessel*>+
I could see that.
You know, I've always wondered about having the angle brackets there. I think it's pretty clear that only the centermost quality symbol applies to the object itself. So it could be -+Sword+- instead of -<+Sword+>-.
Large Adobe Vessel
Large Stoneware Vessel
Large China Vessel
+<*Large Stoneware Vessel*>+
I could see that.
You know, I've always wondered about having the angle brackets there. I think it's pretty clear that only the centermost quality symbol applies to the object itself. So it could be -+Sword+- instead of -<+Sword+>-.
if it's going to work as a barrel, it should probably specify it's a large vessel and not a bowl or a jugIMO, 'vessel' is clear and concise enough by itself...though it would be kind of neat to have an in-game glossary (to tell that a door and a portal are the same thing for example). If you have large vessels, wouldn't that imply the existence of non-large vessels? Only have adjectives when they distinguish between two things, I say.
Large Adobe Vessel
Large Stoneware Vessel
Large China Vessel
+<*Large Stoneware Vessel*>+
I could see that.
You know, I've always wondered about having the angle brackets there. I think it's pretty clear that only the centermost quality symbol applies to the object itself. So it could be -+Sword+- instead of -<+Sword+>-.
Is +sword+ a no quality sword with fine decoration or just a fine sword?
The names of certain trap components would disagree.if it's going to work as a barrel, it should probably specify it's a large vessel and not a bowl or a jugIMO, 'vessel' is clear and concise enough by itself...though it would be kind of neat to have an in-game glossary (to tell that a door and a portal are the same thing for example). If you have large vessels, wouldn't that imply the existence of non-large vessels? Only have adjectives when they distinguish between two things, I say.
Since everything in DF is prefaced with its material type, I'm sure people who might otherwise be confused would understand that a "stoneware vessel" is a type of ceramic container.Goblets and steins are significantly different. A stein is more like a mug.
... I wonder if stoneware "goblets" will be called "steins"
The names of certain trap components would disagree.if it's going to work as a barrel, it should probably specify it's a large vessel and not a bowl or a jugIMO, 'vessel' is clear and concise enough by itself...though it would be kind of neat to have an in-game glossary (to tell that a door and a portal are the same thing for example). If you have large vessels, wouldn't that imply the existence of non-large vessels? Only have adjectives when they distinguish between two things, I say.
Quote from: drvokeWill ceramic jugs (or some other ceramic product) be used to store any food or booze?
Yeah, there should be something. I just haven't found a name yet. Amphora made sense, and "large vase" seems too decorative, but I'm not really happy with anything yet, since those seem too specific. I'm not sure what the other historical examples are and if something else sounds nice and general. It could just be the jugs, but the jugs might be smaller. This was one of the last sort of unresolved quibbles for this release.
There was a quote early in the thread in that vein:QuoteQuote from: Jiri PetruNo, it's not the same. The personalities actually miss important stuff like "cruel", "evil", "ambitious", "envious" etc... But even if they were there, the main point is that numbered 0-100 scales simply aren't the way people think and stories work.
--
I seem to remember Toady talking something about how the system probably needs to be replaced because it's too modern, politically correct and generally unfitting. It was while they were talking about bandit leaders, I think, but I can't find
it.Quote from: MrWigglesWill the personality and need rewrite include the foot work for the the ability for dorfs to commit crime? Such as but not limited to murder, theft, and corruption? (Like embezzling)Quote from: HephFrom my PoV we dont need actually traits for "cruelness", being "envious" or being "evil" because either they are can be calculated from the current pesonality values or are context based like the "evil" trait you mentioned. "Ambitious" could for example come from high scores in "Achievement striving", "Assertiveness" and "Self efficacy". A cruel person could have low "sympathy", "altruism" and "cooperation" scores.Quote from: monk12What is involved in the Personality Rewrite? Do you have specific goals there?
I tried to find a DF Talk quote too, but the one I was thinking of might be in the one I still have to edit, so I'm confused.
Personalities come up in world gen, but they are kind of lacking, because the modern system is so non-judgmental, he he he. There isn't much of any intra-entity strife, so they aren't used for that anyway. So we're going to end up augmenting it with additional goals and "virtue/vice"-type stuff, and that should let us have people work out their ambitions in a consistent way, and then we should have more meat for the succession/schism stuff. I'm not sure about the future of the current personality facets. They are useful for things, but not so much for this. Freeing up some of the boring professions for entity pop people should also give us more room for personal ambition among the realized people (or appropriate people can be elevated from entity pops if they don't arise -- it's somewhat disappointing not to trace everybody back all the way to the beginning, but it's the only reasonable way at this point).
ToadyThe answer to this is something like "That sounds reasonable, but there's no timeline."
With the fleshing out of so many things, could we have an additional use for bones? Pretty much all ancient cultures consumed bone marrow as part of their diet - it is a high-calorie substance, high in calcium (lactose intolerant cultures are particularly fond of it) and can be boiled into a jelly that can be used to extend the shelf life of meats by cooking them in it, or bones can be boiled up to make stock for gravy etc. Also, with vegetable and nut oils, will dorfs be abe to process raw animal fat into more than just tallow? I was thinking suet, lard, dripping...
if it gets answered at all. toady has been dismissing requests.
Will we get working crutches in dwarf mode soon, either in this release or the next? It's one of the biggest bugs yet to be squashed, and it seems particularly tragic that after you went to the work of implementing this cool and useful feature something continues to keep it from actually working.There going to be between 9-18 weeks of bug fixes after this release and the next one. So, probably soonishly.
Will we get working crutches in dwarf mode soon, either in this release or the next? It's one of the biggest bugs yet to be squashed, and it seems particularly tragic that after you went to the work of implementing this cool and useful feature something continues to keep it from actually working.There going to be between 9-18 weeks of bug fixes after this release and the next one. So, probably soonishly.
Did you get that quite vague number from a reliable source ?
Did you get that quite vague number from a reliable source ?
http://www.bay12games.com/dwarves/dev.html
"Each release will be accompanied by a general bug-fixing period one to two weeks long where we'll be working on old issues from the bug tracker."
I don't think the two weeks of bugfixing will apply with the new, shorter, dev cycle.It is part of that dev cycle as per the dev page. That said, I would expect that the 2-week bugfix periods will be the minority, reserved for particularly stubborn bugs, so that Toady can get more releases out rather than fewer.
Farming ImprovementsI have the feeling that someone who has been writing novels on the subject will be happy.
Soil moisture tracking and ability to moisten soil (buckets or other irrigation)
Soil nutrient requirements for plants and nutrient tracking to the extent the farming interface can provide decent feedback for you, fertilizers can reflect this
Harvestable flowers and fruit growing on plants, ability to plant trees
Weeds
More pests
I thought the point of the new release cycle was just so we had something to play with, rather than waiting ages for a release?
This is nothing compared to the delay from the last major release.
Toady's issue is when he decides to do something, he commits to the idea far and beyond what almost anyone expects. That naturally increases the amount of time between releases, but we reap the benefits all the same. (Not that I really had much interest in beekeeping, but hey, now it's the best damn bee-keeping simulator on the net, as well!)
*shrug* Most of players here wants new features more than bugfixs (except crashes). And they get what they wish for. Oh, so much.
I can only weep.
Would it be so bad for a workshop to have a hidden "wooden planks" type counter that just goes up by something like 8 when a log is brought in? Right now you've got your 60,000 units of string and such but a messy workshop might not need quite so much precision. The dwarf working in it would know he had some extra scrap wood hither and thither but if you actually deconstructed it the dwarves wouldn't be able to make heads or tails of it and would just have a lump of garbage materials to toss in the rubbish heap.Like the smelter currently works? It'd be a step in the right direction, but seems like a bit of a stopgap measure.
Why stop there? We can have trees that give more than a fixed amount of wood when cut down, after all. Why should all trees be exactly the same size, whether a saguaro or an oak or a tunnel tube? Why should all trees of the same kind be the same size, regardless of age?If the change is to include that, it will have to wait until we have multitile trees.
We do need multi-tile trees, but even with everything fitting in one tile, you can make one tree give more wood than another. One tree gives 50 liters of wood, another gives 57 liters of wood, another gives 82 liters of wood.Sure, but how do you define what gives what? And how would it integrate with multitile trees when that happens, if it's done right away?
That sounds too complicated. I like the one-log system we have now better.In practice it would be basically the same. Except that you wouldn't need to count individual bits of wood, and you'd get more out of your lumber.
Oh god, if that were implemented wrong we'd end up with Wurm Online's WOOD SCRAPS EVERYWHERE problem, and that's bad enough in a 1st person game. And we'd probably end up with some silliness with dwarves needing 10 almost totally used up logs to make one bed anyway.With thread, extremely small bits are considered refuse. The same would likely apply to wood.
Spoiler: Caldfir Largish Post (click to show/hide)
Also, I'm not sure if its a growing concern of the community that wants bugs to be fix above new content. For me, it seems closer to a loud minority.
The measure of complication for prior bug quashing is speculative. We can't say by adding Y makes Z harder to fix, only Toady can make that call. And simply fixing bugs will also add new bugs, though hopefully at a depreciated rate. We also don't know that the lingering prominent bugs havent been addressed; they maybe lingering because they've been quite hard to quash, or they have been completely ignored. Those extremes are fairly different.Also, I'm not sure if its a growing concern of the community that wants bugs to be fix above new content. For me, it seems closer to a loud minority.
Well, there are patient but still concerned people...
As pointed out, new content has potential to make fixing bugs harder than it needs to be and there are quite serious bugs.
I would also like to point out that bugs usually *remove* bits of content - for example, lye/soap issues discourage soap making, crutch walking bug makes making crutches pointless, awol dungeon master and his ability to tame some creatures...
Economy and military aren't mutually exclusive.
We won't get candles or torches until the general lighting improvements. Vegetable oil in general isn't super-flammable compared to other gassy/oily things, as far as I know, but we'll use whatever numbers we can find.
We won't get candles or torches until the general lighting improvements. Vegetable oil in general isn't super-flammable compared to other gassy/oily things, as far as I know, but we'll use whatever numbers we can find.
While we're on livestock and feeding, can we get manure? I've been imagining a pig-methane-powered fortress for a while.
While we're on livestock and feeding, can we get manure? I've been imagining a pig-methane-powered fortress for a while.
Your first post since registering in 08 and you waste it by posting a suggestion for steampunk technology in the development questions thread?
I had a post all typed up about philosophy and bug fixes and things, but decided to drop it because talking about bugs is boring.Good idea - instead we can discuss whether or not it's boring to talk about bugs.
I had a post all typed up about philosophy and bug fixes and things, but decided to drop it because talking about bugs is boring.Good idea - instead we can discuss whether or not it's boring to talk about bugs.
I had a post all typed up about philosophy and bug fixes and things, but decided to drop it because talking about bugs is boring.
Did the "No ETA" part of Toady's post concern anyone else a bit? I was hoping that the news of having losts of quick releases meant we were getting close to this one, it has been nearly 3 months now. Not that Toady ever gave us reason to expect consistent updates, I just like them! 8)"No ETA" doesn't mean "It's a long time coming" it just means he doesn't really know how long. It's just dependent on what comes up. If everything goes swimmingly, it's entirely possible that we could get it in a week. Or it might take longer.
But his post made it look like we've got a medium-long wait for this release still. Not that I would complain much if that were the case, I'd be disappointed though!
Thoughts?
Thought the release-number is something he actually dont has to think about since he just greens out one or two points on his big list of features and fluff and the number goes up by itself.That used to be the case when the version number was married to the Core/Req/Bloat system. Now, while Toady still pays attention to the content of the relevant dev items, he doesn't quite track which cores get completed. With the mention that the number should technically go to about 33, I guess that he considers Core 38 (site resources) and maybe Core 78 (wilderness population tracking) to be (mostly) handled by the recent work. Cores 3 (caravans) and 77 (age and population tracking for entities) seem to be covered by the upcoming small releases (release 4 and 5, respectively).
Can we actually see during adventure mode goblins sieging a human fortress?This would be cool.
Can we actually see during adventure mode goblins sieging a human fortress?
Can we actually see during adventure mode goblins sieging a human fortress?
That is something that should be part of the army arc which has yet to come. AtM sieges are only in Worlgen.
I've done it with humans against humans. Was a real mess.Can we actually see during adventure mode goblins sieging a human fortress?
That is something that should be part of the army arc which has yet to come. AtM sieges are only in Worlgen.
Not entirely. I've read about adventurers coming across towns under siege by hordes of animals or elves. It's just a ridiculously rare and abnormal occurrence with unpredictable triggers.
IIRC Tarn talked a bit about groups moving on the map again,
possibly he'll do sieges/armies together with caravans, gangs and other travellers
If Foot were here, he'd be able to tell you which DFtalk or even literally quote Toady.
Rainseeker: [1d]Is there ever going to be a time when goblins actually come and say 'we demand tribute, and then we'll go away?'
Toady: Yeah I mean there should be, they already do that in ... I mean they don't, I guess ... actually I don't remember if they do ... is it just the humans that do tribute relationships? Because there's these fake tribute relationships in world generation that aren't realised in any way. You could start in a fortress where every other fortress in your civilization is paying tribute to humans and you just don't hear or have anything to do with it. That kind of thing is ... I think all that stuff is up on dev next which means we're kind of starting to think about how it's going to work. It's all coming; we have this thing up on the future - post version one - goals about actual complicated diplomacy, whatever that means, where we'd actually be thinking a lot more about arrangements and individual goals and so on; but we're going to be doing a lot of that also in the pretty short term here. With things like tribute it's going to require ... I don't want to point everything back at the caravan arc because that became kind of a habit ... Really what that is shorthand for 'sites have resources and things are tracked', so that's going to have to happen kind of soon too, especially when you start sending armies out which is one of the things right after sieges are improved quite a bit, there's already going to be armies moving on the world map at that time, and your dwarves are also going to be able to send out armies after sieges are improved, and at that point we've got to start thinking about things like supply lines and so on. There's a sense in which that could be aggravating, but I think it really improves the flow of wars and so on to have to worry about that kind of thing so you just don't have strange things happening like some army marching from town to town without taking anything, just killing everything, without being supported. What I'm getting at, though, is [that] when you've got supply lines where an army's being supplied it's similar to paying tribute, to moving goods around in that way, which also goes back to the caravan arc. It's kind of a race to see which one's going to go in first, but people are going to be moving stuff around; at that point things like guys coming to you and demanding things of you instead of just trying to kill everybody would be easily attained, which would be cool.
[...]
Toady: [...] So for improved sieges you need to have armies moving around the map, that was one of our requirements; it's not a strict requirement, you could just improve the sieges, but in order for them to make sense they need to be coming from someplace, and we're going to want them to come from real historical figures, more so than they already do if they're commanders. For that to work out the civilization needs to know where to pull them from, and also just to increase the overall interest in our world we're going to do that motivation stuff right there, at least enough pieces of it to make some sense out of things; to have the armies moving on the world map, having them come from places and so on. So when they decide to attack you we're going to step that up from just being a random event that occurs: right now it's just like 'It's Spring, and ... flip the coin? Did you get it? Oh, well, too bad; goblin attack'. There's nothing going on there, nothing at all. So the more we put in there ... you put it into dwarf mode, you put it into world generation, and eventually adventure mode starts to see some of this as well; and it'll just get better and better. Hopefully now that I've done so much of it there'll be less fussing around with 'what tissues make up the toe?' [and more] sweeping world generation changes.
[...]
Rainseeker: Here's a question from DG: 'Will the arrival of a merchant once per year no longer be guaranteed if or when the time it takes for them to arrive is determined by the distance and terrain between your fort and their starting point?'
Toady: We're thinking about letting that one float once we got the model up to the point where it worked well enough, then we're just going to let it ride. Now right now the world is not so big that you can't walk across it in ... what does it take in adventure mode, I think you can step twelve tiles in day? I really don't remember. So if you're in adventure and you can go twelve tiles in a day then even in a large world you can go twenty or twenty two days to cross the entire world. So if you take the caravans time and up it up - up it up, up it up, that's great - if you shoot it up by like five times then it would still take a hundred days to cross the entire world, and if that's the case then there shouldn't be problems with not getting a dwarven caravan every year, even if they stop at various cities, even if they stop a city for like five days and move on. Five days is nothing in dwarf mode time, and then they'll mode to the next place and be shooting all over the world. That should work out well, especially if you can support several caravans at once and you have something that ends up looking more like a bazaar or something out in front of your fortress, people stop, there could even be local merchants from nearby villages or something like that that hang there quite a bit and your own guys and so on. It could be pretty cool out there.
I've heard that if you say Footkerchief in your post, he is immediately summoned with all the knowledge you could need.and what is your question?
And if you say it 3 times in one post, he appears in real life to take you to the magma baths for asking too many questions.
Will caravan arc things be re-used in the army arc? (i.e. traveling entities, the stuff they carry, etc.)?Unless I'm terribly misunderstanding, that's part of the point, isn't it? Support for traveling groups, the equipment they have access to, the reason why they go where they are going...
Yeah, there's a lot of stuff that needs framework provided by the caravan arc like that stuff for stuff to work.which is why I asked ;)
Will Legends mode have a section for battle added to it as a part of the Army Arc?
The reason I ask is I noticed in my first fort that there were some battles nearby where human villages were besieged by elephants once every 20 years or so. I wanted to look more into these weird occurrences, but found I could not look up battles as a topic (at least I couldn't find a way).
I figured that its a feature in the works (both because I see that each major battle in dwarf mode has a name and I'm pretty sure I seen it mentioned in a DF Talk somewhere) so I just thought "oh well", but with the Army Arc coming I was curious if that would be included in with the Army Arc or saved for a future update perhaps when Legends mode receives updates. I'm not asking for an ETA or anything specific timing-wise. Just if it will be included in the Army Arc or not.
Toady you planned for release 2 of the current arc "Work with 3D mineral veins and mine maps" does this include 3D Stone-blobs? Like microline being more a spheric inclusion then a circle-ish sheet in the surrounding stone.Oh good. More microline.
Oh hell, I hope the radius of 3D clusters is shortened a bit to compensate for the extra stuff on the other levels.
# Work with 3D mineral veins and mine mapswill stone layers become less... flat? i mean:
######~~~###
###~~~###~~~
~~~#########
hmmm I'm already seeing some of this in my current fort. there's soil/sand/sedimentary/flux going in a sort of "wave" on the z-axis.
Like this kinda (side view):Code: [Select]######~~~###
###~~~###~~~
~~~#########
it's actually 1 biome. I think it's already partially in (light folding and such)hmmm I'm already seeing some of this in my current fort. there's soil/sand/sedimentary/flux going in a sort of "wave" on the z-axis.
Like this kinda (side view):Code: [Select]######~~~###
###~~~###~~~
~~~#########
This usually happens when you have several different biomes meeting at map, layers are then kida erratic like this.
Spoiler: picture (click to show/hide)
I'm posting a little late, but I have personally seen animals siege a town in Adventure mode: it was in a early .31 version (before .08, because I remember I couldn't butcher anything) where a town was invaded by horses and rhesus macaques.
> The time frame for the release is <7 days
> Just started a new fortress hours before the announcement
EVERY SINGLE TIME ::)
Since Toady said there was a new version coming soon, I decided to hold off for a few weeks and build up some serious apetite for Microcline.> The time frame for the release is <7 days
> Just started a new fortress hours before the announcement
EVERY SINGLE TIME ::)
So? It shouldn't be save-breaking, so just enjoy your fort, and upgrade when it's time to upgrade.
If you held off on playing because there would be a new version coming out, then you would never have played DF at all. The game will probably never truly stop having updates until Toady either ragequits the whole thing or dies of old age.
... although I'm not sure actual geology works that way, though. They shouldn't all be the same depth, but at the same time, layers are layers because they are created at different times through different geological methods. A geode might form inside of a small pocket in the stone, but a total sphere doesn't seem like the sort of thing that should happen.
... I'm going to Wikipedia to look at how these things actually form, be back later...
And after that it goes Open-source (given that toady did die on oldage) and someone else like Baughn and small group of enthusiasts takes the hat.
Btw. thanks toady for the scamps picks :P he has grown up very well. He kinda reminds me of the cat i head some years ago. *sheds a tear*
What's the timeline for adding a better mouse interface? The goblin camp UI comes to mind... MS-paint style wall creation and right click to bring up most menus. It's very slick, really. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mm-dPes5NgEThat's presentation arc stuff. It's essentially last in line, as including it earlier would make other additions harder. In other words, not for years. There's no specific timeline, though.
Thanks for everything!
That's presentation arc stuff. It's essentially last in line, as including it earlier would make other additions harder. In other words, not for years. There's no specific timeline, though.
"The stocks screen and likely the unit list" (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=60554.msg1943773#msg1943773) are scheduled to get reworked soon, but I doubt a comprehensive interface overhaul will ever happen. It's just too entrenched at this point.
Interface changes are what enable expansions of the game, not something that prevents them. To dismiss interface requests as "bottom of the list" or unimportant until everything else in the game is done is simply an invalid argument.
That is true in some respects - I'd think that the game will remain 2d, tile-based, and top down, for example. Despite all the visualizers that have existed, I don't imagine dwarf fortress will ever natively exist in 3d.That's presentation arc stuff. It's essentially last in line, as including it earlier would make other additions harder. In other words, not for years. There's no specific timeline, though.
I get to use the exact same quote and general message twice in one day..."The stocks screen and likely the unit list" (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=60554.msg1943773#msg1943773) are scheduled to get reworked soon, but I doubt a comprehensive interface overhaul will ever happen. It's just too entrenched at this point.
Interface is not something that cripples the game or the ability to expand it, it's something that fundamentally changes the way in which the game is viewed from even a fundamental philosophical standpoint, player and developer alike. What is easily presented to the player determines what is important to the game overall. You can't pretend like it's just some superficial gloss, it's what determines what the player has the ability to do in the game, and because of that, what can go (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=61215.0) and can't go in the game (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=76926.0) for want of ability to represent it.
Interface changes are what enable expansions of the game, not something that prevents them. To dismiss interface requests as "bottom of the list" or unimportant until everything else in the game is done is simply an invalid argument.
... That said, I'm not exactly holding my breath for mouse-based interface (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=77192.0).
Nothing about that goblin camp interface would even touch anything about the game or make it unchangeable. The difference in programming between 'press this key to make this happen' and 'click here to make this happen' is so superficial it's hardly worth mentioning. You can already click spots to dig, and change the volume with the mouse. Same concept.
Nothing about that goblin camp interface would even touch anything about the game or make it unchangeable. The difference in programming between 'press this key to make this happen' and 'click here to make this happen' is so superficial it's hardly worth mentioning. You can already click spots to dig, and change the volume with the mouse. Same concept.
... Making a load of context menues isn't the hardest thing in the world but is harder than listening for keypresses and reacting... But more importantly than how difficult it is to do... it takes a lot of time and testing, and every time a new thing is added it adds to the update work load... and spending time on a half assed update that will be gutted out anyway is a little wasteful...
List orders, sorting and keyboard layout would do more to clean up the interface than a nice set of clicky mouse options...
No one thinks that the interface doesn't need work...
> The time frame for the release is <7 daysSame thing here.
> Just started a new fortress hours before the announcement
EVERY SINGLE TIME ::)
> The time frame for the release is <7 days
> Just started a new fortress hours before the announcement
> The time frame for the release is <7 days
release is <7 daysFUCK YEAH!!!
I guess I just don't see any advantage to using the mouse. I mean, I look at those goblin camp demos, and just see someone with a system that forces me to hunt through a context menu every time when it's so much easier to just mash "bCwlllll7774" than to try to find the proper spots on the screen to click. indubitably.Agreed.
A first person game would have obvious use for a mouse - that has analogue look and movement style. Having an analogue input makes it much easier to interact with the game. The big push in this, however, seems to be to add click-and-drag to map viewing...
I mean, really, you want click-and-drag?! hell no! Why would you ever want click-and-drag scrolling when you have keypress scrolling already? Click-and-drag scrolling is the bane of ease of control, especially in any game that might possibly have lag, where it still thinks you're holding down the mouse button while you're flicking the mouse back up to grab again, and it sends your screen flying in the opposite direction you want it to. And you know this is going to be a problem with Dwarf Fortress, don't even kid yourselves. in*insert little kid picture here*
A sensible all-keyboard interface is the ideal in a setup like DF has. Let's just work on getting a revised set of keys and menus that gives the player a more streamlined and intuitive set of controls, rather than gluing in some of the worst interface aspects from the rest of computing.
Every single time someone cries for a better interface, it quickly evolves into a pro mouse - vs. mouse fight. It's just a strawman. Forget about the mouse. Even re-organizing the horrible gumbo of menus, commands and underlying systems (the mishmash of workshops, zones, rooms, designations) so that they'd have at least some sanity would help users immensely and wouldn't make further developments any slower.
I am with G-flex here and seriously Therapist and Co. might be usefull but they arent needed at all to play the game.
Perhaps not necessary, but Therapist doesn't really add any sort of functionality to the game, it doesn't really "cheat" unless you make it, it just serves to help format your information to make it more readily accessable. It's a major help in sorting information so that you can make informed decisions. It gives you information in seconds that would take five, ten minutes of scanning the unit lists and writing down information about dwarves that you would have to do without it because that information requires digging through many pages of interface with no help from any sort of cursor memory or easy sorting in the units screen.
Pretty much, though I don't know how easy it would be to implement some of the things that keep coming up. I mean, I don't know anything about programming, but for example one thing a lot of people (me included) want is to have the building system streamlined so that everything works like hospitals - you designate rooms or workshops or meeting halls like a zone or a stockpile, and place furniture in them for your dwarves to work/sleep on. It's all in one system. But it seems like it would change a whole lot of little things and make programming trickier, since it means workshops are now rooms, new furniture has to be put in, multiple dwarves have to be able to work in workshops, etc, etc.
Well there is the idea that the information available to the player represents what can reasonably be known by a fortress's leadership. So you can know how many socks you have, but only if you've assigned somebody to run around counting up all the socks, and so forth.
Having to wade through all those personality profiles and labor settings taking notes can be seen as a reasonably good representation of the difficulty of organizing a populous community.
I think the medical system shows where the developers tend to want to go with this kind of thing, which is why we will be more likely to see an actual dwarf who is a therapist in the game than the DT functionality reproduced inside DF.
There does seem to be a group of people who think that not using tilesets or utilities makes them somehow better, and argue furiously that these things are pointless. Really I don't understand the mindset. It is pretty clear that dwarf therapist does a very good job of presenting otherwise obscured information. Its fine to like using ASCII tiles or the default job interface, but trying to argue it is better is very strange.
I mean, I agree with you except that I think ASCII vs. tiles is even more up to personal preference, as tiles have their drawback to and (aside from creatures) you're still limited to the same number of tiles.
Theoretically, isn't this what the "Full Graphical Support" ESV winner was about doing? The "make everything potentially graphics-pack-able"?
OK, since I'm in multiple threads talking about this at the same time, I think I might as well throw this one out there, as well.This probably would be a better DF Talk question than a question for here. Though I doubt Toady has much to tell us about it anyway.
I did some searching Toady posts and "UI" and "GUI" and "interface", but everything is either from two or more years ago, or very short and specifically about the stocks and units screen (and even then, vague).
Toady, since so many of us are discussing possible UI changes, could you give us some sort of idea of what sort of changes are "on the table" for you? There is talk about how much the mouse will dominate the interface, whether the interface ideas like Jiri Petru's (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=34949.0) are feasable, and whether we can have a sweep-up of controls in vanilla keybindings, so that there is more consistancy in the interface's control philosophy, and if you are set on one control philosophy (like first letter in a word is its keybinding versus localizing keybindings, such as with "u" being upstair and "j" being downstair to be be near one another). Likewise, it's worth those of us in the debate knowing how much possibility is there of either minor or major changes to the UI like the changes to the long and short term (short being "a couple years") of DF's development.
I realize it makes some people upset when I ask detailed questions, but to a certain extent, it feels like the forums are arguing over what is feasable or not with scraps of information. A clear idea of what is or isn't feasable, and in what vague timeframe these things might happen would go a long way in helping shape the debate.
This probably would be a better DF Talk question than a question for here. Though I doubt Toady has much to tell us about it anyway.
he does have a tendency to plug his own suggestion threads, but i usually don't mind it because i think they deserve some attention
I think that a lot of people have potentially interesting things to say, and that Who Gets To Talk To Toady shouldn't be decided via some weird forum popularity contest based on who talks the most about his own ideas (which isn't to say anything about about NW_Kohaku's ideas; I just think this is extremely silly).it's not really that, it's just that i think he has some merit for actually taking his suggestions seriously and doing his homework, this often makes his suggestions and questions a bit... unwieldy, though, so the only way to address them properly would be with a dedicated interview. i understand how that might go against the democratic values, though
I guess PM me about it if it annoys you and you want to say so, though, as this topic really doesn't belong in the FotF thread.i thought i had made it clear that it doesn't annoy me at all, as i said, i think your ideas deserve some atention
I guess PM me about it if it annoys you and you want to say so, though, as this topic really doesn't belong in the FotF thread.i thought i had made it clear that it doesn't annoy me at all, as i said, i think your ideas deserve some atention
I agree that a direct discussion of NW_Kohaku's ideas would be interesting and rewarding. Toady, what say you?
The deal here is that Dwarf Fortress is a unique project in the sense that Toady doesn't really care about the player base, and instead does it for himself. I can't compare it to anything because I don't know about any similar project like that.Aurora, the spreadsheet X4 space empire sim which requires a 50" screen.
Perhaps not necessary, but Therapist doesn't really add any sort of functionality to the game, it doesn't really "cheat" unless you make it, it just serves to help format your information to make it more readily accessable. It's a major help in sorting information so that you can make informed decisions. It gives you information in seconds that would take five, ten minutes of scanning the unit lists and writing down information about dwarves that you would have to do without it because that information requires digging through many pages of interface with no help from any sort of cursor memory or easy sorting in the units screen.
I agree that a direct discussion of NW_Kohaku's ideas would be interesting and rewarding. Toady, what say you?
Really? And again... Really?
Everyone, the Scamps included, is aware that DF needs an improved interface and I'm pretty sure asking Toady about it is going to get such a speculative response on his part because there are a million and one ways to improve it so unless he's sat down and finalised everything he's gonna program, even he won't know what it's going to be like. Sure he can talk about the generalities of what they're thinking about, or what could possibly happen - but so has the forum - many, many, many times - and there are enough Toady comments on the subject scattered around the place to give this info anyway. So what's the point?
This discussion is best held in the already excellent threads where speculation and advice remain where they should. I've never seen Toady ever give definite answers to anything that's not more than a few weeks away in development. As is quite right.
Toady would be speculating when it comes to the implementation details, yeah, but Kohaku's questions were pretty general (really they were more about inclination and will than about specific features) and I'm interested in hearing the answers too.
I think that a lot of people have potentially interesting things to say, and that Who Gets To Talk To Toady shouldn't be decided via some weird forum popularity contest based on who talks the most about his own ideas (which isn't to say anything about about NW_Kohaku's ideas; I just think this is extremely silly).it's not really that, it's just that i think he has some merit for actually taking his suggestions seriously and doing his homework, this often makes his suggestions and questions a bit... unwieldy, though, so the only way to address them properly would be with a dedicated interview. i understand how that might go against the democratic values, thoughI guess PM me about it if it annoys you and you want to say so, though, as this topic really doesn't belong in the FotF thread.i thought i had made it clear that it doesn't annoy me at all, as i said, i think your ideas deserve some atention
Ok, I'm doing some failing at finding the old dev goals. What specifically is entailed in the Presentation Arc?
Myself, I think a good way to do it would be to suggest a DF Talk specifically about Toady looking at the suggestion forums and providing commentary on select threads. That way, we get a nice smattering of topics in the talk based on what Toady happens to read, it draws attention to the suggestion forums as a place Toady frequents (which may or may not cut down on some of the "suggestion thread" stuff in this thread), and it means that Toady would be able to give some of the larger, well thought out threads some of the attention they deserve without just saying "NW_Kohaku has the most well developed ideas, so lets just talk about his stuff". It may so happen that that is true, and that it does form the bulk of the Talk, but "well developed ideas" is more democratic that "NW_Kohaku's well developed ideas"
Think I might go make a post to that effect in the DF Talk Topic Discussion Thread.
It is mainly problem with too large community - it is impossible for Toady to even read suggestion forum. And it is clear that "many people want X" is not reason good enough to implement X (see ESV). So - I am just ignoring suggestion forum.
It's basically a giant "Your Ideas And Feedback Not Welcome (but feel free to donate some money)" sign on the front of the community.
Toady stated that he in fact read the suggestions forums (though often behind)So it would be great to show sign of it - like "nice idea, similar to mine"/"I think that it is not good thing for DF"
QuoteToady stated that he in fact read the suggestions forums (though often behind)So it would be great to show sign of it - like "nice idea, similar to mine"/"I think that it is not good thing for DF"
So maybe only first type of response?QuoteToady stated that he in fact read the suggestions forums (though often behind)So it would be great to show sign of it - like "nice idea, similar to mine"/"I think that it is not good thing for DF"
Not a good idea if he wants to avoid his ass sued off by a jerk. Not that most people would sue him, but there is always the possibility.
Not a good idea if he wants to avoid his ass sued off by a jerk. Not that most people would sue him, but there is always the possibility.
So maybe only first type of response?
lolwut?
You mean he´ll sue because Toady stole an idea that was posted in the SUGGESTIONS FOR THE GAME forum? And that some judge would find that in favor of him?
This is the most ridiculous thing I´ve heard in a long time.
I never said some judge would find that in favour of him. Please work on your reading.
Though most certainly Toady would won, this doesn't mean someone wouldn't want to try. You have to remember Toady lives in the US.
Right you didn´t. No offense, mate, it just is really ridiculous.
Is there a case where something like that actually happened?
Right you didn´t. No offense, mate, it just is really ridiculous.
Is there a case where something like that actually happened?
No, I don't know any case, but the United States are infamous for this kind of ridiculous litigations, and I think Toady is very right on being cautious as he is.
No, I don't know any case, but the United States are infamous for this kind of ridiculous litigations, and I think Toady is very right on being cautious as he is.
Maybe you´re right. I was really astonished when I heard for the first time why the americans have those 'Caution Hot Coffee' stickers on cups, or 'Caution XXX' on freakin' everything.
The US has relatively weak consumer protection laws in general, so the accessibility of our civil courts sort of serves as a stop-gap. Not necessarily the most efficient way of doing things, but not completely pointless.
I'm starting the first one to two week bug fix cycle now, so there weren't a lot of bug fixes for this release, but creatures, items and vegetation don't pick up as many contaminants now.
I love troll-wool ... and troll wool is freaking great.
I'm just hoping this doesn't mean that those one to two weeks will be the entirety of the bug-fixing. I was under the impression a more thorough effort was planned for the near future, and I hope that's still the case, since the game could really use some cleaning up in a few areas before moving on to new ones.
Now that there's a new release, we can talk about that instead!*screams of joy heard throughout the land*
Animals can be placed in pen/pasture zones, and grazing animals will need to graze on grassCool! Now to get rid of those pesky...
This is the first release of what we once called the Caravan Arc, where we'll be changing how trade and the economy work. The entire release schedule is up at the development page. This particular release doesn't have visible changes to trade -- just a lot of world generation infrastructure.'Tis Cool.
You can mill rocknuts into paste and press the paste for oil (which goes into jugs). Pressing occurs at the new screw press building.Oil! Does it do anything?
*Ceramics*Oh goodie!
The site finder records the best hit in each square now, and you can stop the finder at any time and browse the results. The categories and readout have been changed up a bit. Minerals have been redistributed on the world map, though this might not be satisfying as I was expecting to get a bit farther with dwarf mode trade.Hell yeah! This will probably be fairly popular.
The evil grasses are probably a little extreme and seizure-inducing. I might throttle that back.OH YEAH! that will be Hilarious!
I'm starting the first one to two week bug fix cycle now, so there weren't a lot of bug fixes for this release, but creatures, items and vegetation don't pick up as many contaminants now.Hmmm... less contaminants are good, bugfixes are good. I think it's not just game-breaking bugs, but also contaminants, maybe even stacking.
For a list of the new tags available for modding (container reagents in reactions, etc.) see file_changes.txt or the new stock reactions.Thank you so much! This will be great!
The key word here is 'cycle' which means that Toady tackles some bugs first for about a week or longer and then adds new features, repeat*9.QuoteI'm starting the first one to two week bug fix cycle now, so there weren't a lot of bug fixes for this release, but creatures, items and vegetation don't pick up as many contaminants now.
I'm just hoping this doesn't mean that those one to two weeks will be the entirety of the bug-fixing. I was under the impression a more thorough effort was planned for the near future, and I hope that's still the case, since the game could really use some cleaning up in a few areas before moving on to new ones.
I'm with Capntastic on this. Suggestions forum only exist everywhere on game fora because regardless if the developers will read and use them or not, people will feel entitled to make them anyway. The "suggestions forum" is there so they don''t clutter the rest of the fora with their self-entitled right to make suggestions.
There should be a super-secret-double-suggestions forum for them, where they can huddle together and stew in their snide superiority, leaving the escaped lunatics to their fun :P
snip
Beyond that, it's worth having a serious discussion about the forums
Calm down.
Hahaha.
Looking at the raws for giraffes:
- They don't have long necks.
- Their head horns appear identical in type and proportion to, say, the horns of a yak or bull.
- Speaking of proportions, the fact that giraffes are so big probably means they have gigantic heads as well, but I'm not sure because I didn't pay much attention to the animal's size.
So yeah, our "giraffes" are basically just regular old ruminant animals. But with a different name, I guess!
To be honest, I don't think you can give giraffes long necks. Not without problems.
Think about it: DF has no particular way to represent a body part being long and thin. You can make a giraffe's neck larger relative to body size, but that would effectively also make it extremely thick, wouldn't it?
snip
Geez you can get defensive. Like, holy cow, you don't need to write an essay every time you feel slighted. This is at least the third time I've seen you do this. Calm down.
To be honest, I don't think you can give giraffes long necks. Not without problems.
Think about it: DF has no particular way to represent a body part being long and thin. You can make a giraffe's neck larger relative to body size, but that would effectively also make it extremely thick, wouldn't it?
Body parts are basically all big spheres or cubes or something, yeah, but at least it would be more likely to get hit. And impossible to cut through, I guess.
So I noticed we can embark with bunnies now... How long until war !!bunnies!!? Or a fortress that completely lives off eating and butchering bunnies.You can easily mod them to be war bunnies. just make them "trainable" in the raws ;)
Geez you can get defensive. Like, holy cow, you don't need to write an essay every time you feel slighted. This is at least the third time I've seen you do this. Calm down.
I'm sorry, but I find it more than a little destructive to claim that the only reason people make suggestion threads is because they want to throw their ego around, or to be a "thread tyrant", and that such people can't possibly want to help make a better game.
And yes, I tend to be verbose no matter what my emotional state.
To be honest, I don't think you can give giraffes long necks. Not without problems.
Think about it: DF has no particular way to represent a body part being long and thin. You can make a giraffe's neck larger relative to body size, but that would effectively also make it extremely thick, wouldn't it?
Body parts are basically all big spheres or cubes or something, yeah, but at least it would be more likely to get hit. And impossible to cut through, I guess.
Yeah. I find it a little ironic that we were pretty much just introduced to the new creature body system and it's already running into brick walls even with totally mundane animals.
Quote from: ToadyI'm starting the first one to two week bug fix cycle now, so there weren't a lot of bug fixes for this release, but creatures, items and vegetation don't pick up as many contaminants now.
I'm just hoping this doesn't mean that those one to two weeks will be the entirety of the bug-fixing. I was under the impression a more thorough effort was planned for the near future, and I hope that's still the case, since the game could really use some cleaning up in a few areas before moving on to new ones.
I'm starting the first one to two week bug fix cycle now, so there weren't a lot of bug fixes for this release, but creatures, items and vegetation don't pick up as many contaminants now.
I think a custom "long neck" part and maybe horns of a custom tissue, along with a unique color pattern (spots, like stripes) would complete giraffes.
Maybe we should outsource the creation of donation drive creatures to solve this problem?
I think a custom "long neck" part and maybe horns of a custom tissue, along with a unique color pattern (spots, like stripes) would complete giraffes.
Maybe we should outsource the creation of donation drive creatures to solve this problem?
I think a custom "long neck" part and maybe horns of a custom tissue, along with a unique color pattern (spots, like stripes) would complete giraffes.
Maybe we should outsource the creation of donation drive creatures to solve this problem?
This is not possible. You can't make a body part that is thin, but long. Creature body parts can effectively be thought of as spheres and little else.
I think a custom "long neck" part and maybe horns of a custom tissue, along with a unique color pattern (spots, like stripes) would complete giraffes.
Maybe we should outsource the creation of donation drive creatures to solve this problem?
This is not possible. You can't make a body part that is thin, but long. Creature body parts can effectively be thought of as spheres and little else.
Since DF tracks everything by mass anyway, this is still the most accurate replication that its engine can achieve. And in combat, I don't think there'll be a significant observable difference.
I think a custom "long neck" part and maybe horns of a custom tissue, along with a unique color pattern (spots, like stripes) would complete giraffes.
Maybe we should outsource the creation of donation drive creatures to solve this problem?
This is not possible. You can't make a body part that is thin, but long. Creature body parts can effectively be thought of as spheres and little else.
Since DF tracks everything by mass anyway, this is still the most accurate replication that its engine can achieve. And in combat, I don't think there'll be a significant observable difference.
This simply isn't correct at all.
Yes, you'll see a huge difference in combat, unless you're telling me you couldn't tell the difference between cutting through something a foot thick and cutting through something five feet thick. It's not much more difficult (if at all) to cut through something if it's twice as long as normal, but if it's twice as thick as normal, that's quite different.
Also, "tracks everything by mass"? I don't know how that's relevant. The game tracks things like depth, surface area, volume, and various other measures as well. The creature body system just needs a notion of how "oblong" a part is, so that the game can know that despite having, say, a large mass, it doesn't have huge cross-sectional area and isn't very "deep". There's no real reason why this has to be difficult to implement, at least not that I know of.
I like the hive interface, it's very clear what it's supossed to be, and automatic, which is a plus.How can I produce honeycomb? <sorry for derail, but my experimental fortress is killed by bad combination of stockpile, pick, elk bird, deep shaft and dodging bug>
Holy shit. Toady's a genius.
(http://img.ie/a5c73.png)
He made help come up on the starting screen! Haven't checked fort mode yet.
I suppose a temporary workaround for giraffes would be a "lower neck, middle neck, upper neck" thing -- still made of spheres, just a linear stack of them.
Reference: Evil grass being seizure-inducing: Is that a comment on the default display values for said grass, or is there a syndrome now associated with some ground cover?
So yeah, our "giraffes" are basically just regular old ruminant animals. But with a different name, I guess!
Man, that's pretty bad. I was hoping the donation drive animals would be a little more carefully implemented.
Reference: Evil grass being seizure-inducing: Is that a comment on the default display values for said grass, or is there a syndrome now associated with some ground cover?
The former, judging by the raws. They don't cause any syndrome, but tendrils do have an alt-tile thing going on so that they "writhe."
So yeah, our "giraffes" are basically just regular old ruminant animals. But with a different name, I guess!
Man, that's pretty bad. I was hoping the donation drive animals would be a little more carefully implemented.
Giraffes are not a donation drive animal. Only bees were, and I think I did enough work for them. But yeah, there are things to be done.
Giraffes are not a donation drive animal.
A wild turkey hen just claimed one of my nest boxes and laid some eggs!
Great Toady, have you planned to make DF multithreaded? Or have at least a separate thread for the GUI, so that it frees at least a few cpu cycles for pathfinding etc.? Is there still hope to avoid the nowadays inevitable FPS-Death some day in the future?
Being able to actually play DF with up to 200 dwarves would make me a lot more happier than all new features and animals combined.
The wild turkey hen sketches pictures of hay.A wild turkey hen just claimed one of my nest boxes and laid some eggs!
You make it sound like a fey mood!
I'm aware of the suggestions forum, and I'm also aware that multithreading has already been suggested. I didn't intend to misuse the development thread for a suggestion; my Intention was to make a status request about that issue. So basically I just wanted to know if it is in the works or not (or not yet). Sorry if it's still wrong, didn't mean any harm.Great Toady, have you planned to make DF multithreaded? Or have at least a separate thread for the GUI, so that it frees at least a few cpu cycles for pathfinding etc.? Is there still hope to avoid the nowadays inevitable FPS-Death some day in the future?
Being able to actually play DF with up to 200 dwarves would make me a lot more happier than all new features and animals combined.
This is one of those extremely repeated suggestions that we really, really don't need another discussion about in here... again.
But hey, feel free to post random feature/implementation suggestions in the development thread instead of the suggestions forum. That seems to be the thing to do these days.
Tor Tastycreator has made a Masterful Turkey egg omelet!The wild turkey hen sketches pictures of hay.A wild turkey hen just claimed one of my nest boxes and laid some eggs!
You make it sound like a fey mood!
The wild turkey hen sketches pictures of chaff.
The wild turkey hen sketches pictures of grit.
The wild turkey hen has begun a delicious construction!
I'm aware of the suggestions forum, and I'm also aware that multithreading has already been suggested. I didn't intend to misuse the development thread for a suggestion; my Intention was to make a status request about that issue. So basically I just wanted to know if it is in the works or not (or not yet). Sorry if it's still wrong, didn't mean any harm.Great Toady, have you planned to make DF multithreaded? Or have at least a separate thread for the GUI, so that it frees at least a few cpu cycles for pathfinding etc.? Is there still hope to avoid the nowadays inevitable FPS-Death some day in the future?
Being able to actually play DF with up to 200 dwarves would make me a lot more happier than all new features and animals combined.
This is one of those extremely repeated suggestions that we really, really don't need another discussion about in here... again.
But hey, feel free to post random feature/implementation suggestions in the development thread instead of the suggestions forum. That seems to be the thing to do these days.
On a more positive note: I like seeing the oldschool bay12 quirkiness show through with the evil/good grasses and troll wool. There is no substitute for that kind of thing.
Great Toady, have you planned to make DF multithreaded? Or have at least a separate thread for the GUI, so that it frees at least a few cpu cycles for pathfinding etc.? Is there still hope to avoid the nowadays inevitable FPS-Death some day in the future?
Being able to actually play DF with up to 200 dwarves would make me a lot more happier than all new features and animals combined.
A wild turkey hen just claimed one of my nest boxes and laid some eggs!
You make it sound like a fey mood!
and are there any plans to improve the trader interface and improve the amout of traders that will visit you?
Are there any plans to put metal abundance in the worldgen?
and are there any plans to improve the trader interface and improve the amout of traders that will visit you?
Question: Has Toady ever mentioned taking the principle of stigmergy from the ACO scheme in order to dynamically modify the PATH_COST value for tiles as dwarves travel over those tiles? My thought is that since we can already improve framerate by manually designating High Traffic Areas, perhaps inserting some code to dynamically modify High Traffic areas as the dwarves are travelling would provide the same benefit while keeping the same A* algorithm in place.
So how about that? Have I missed Toady's prior comments on this very topic?
Because I'm bored, I've decided to sort of catalog some of the ways in which the new embark screen and mineral distributions (and other resource availability issues) are causing people problems or frustration, potential reasons for those issues, and possible solutions. This way, there's at least sort of a rundown in one location, as opposed to retyping various bits of it all over the place. This is sort of for everybody's benefit, including the people miffed by how things have changed, just to make it easier to think about these changes, what they mean, and how things might go in the near future.
Point 2 on gflex list i think does not actually need big setlements to be moved. I would say if the dwarfs would open some mining outposts it would be enough to scratch this issue.
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Why is it understandable that we don't have a means of knowing what kind of rock / soil we'll be embarking on? Why do we not need to know anymore? I fail to see how that's a good thing, it just makes it arbitrarily harder for you to get your perfect fort.
In fact, this whole new system just straitjackets you. Before this metal-apocalypse you could survive and thrive anywhere. Now you HAVE to go to certain areas just to make sure you have some kind of metal to defend yourself with. Everywhere else, the only way you can possible make it is if you completely wall yourself in. It's unnecessary and completely arbitrary to punish players this way. Now they're be no more sea forts, no more jungle forts of swamp towns, simply because the game decided to make the earth barren.
And even if you manage to find a decent site, that is the biome you want (an extraordinary feat in itself!) you're going to be screwed over by the fact that your civilisation doesn't have iron or steel (so no anvils), or doesn't have copper meaning you have to give up half your supplies just so you can fork over three times as many dwarfbucks get a few picks and an axe.
tl;dr, this whole new system is stupid, and I mad.
I never understood this "want to have a perfect site on every world square" fetish.
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
It's understandable that you won't know every single layer of the Earth's crust, and it matters less now that the game seems to be focused more on localized mineral deposits and less on what types of layers you have. It matters more that the game tells you that you have metal than, say, granite, because layers are no longer such a guaranteed predictor of mineral wealth like they were before.
(not to the post above, but those above above):
Yeah... because having valuable minerals everywhere is how things should work in a simulation of "real" geography ::)
But the fact that you don't have an inkling of what kind of stone you're facing does hinder you. You said it yourself that it's silly that we don't even know the top layer of stone or soil. Plus - and my biggest gripe with it is here - it means you have to savescum over and over if you want a fort made of the stone you want. Not letting us know what type of stone or soil to expect adds nothing to the game, but detracts something.
But the fact that you don't have an inkling of what kind of stone you're facing does hinder you. You said it yourself that it's silly that we don't even know the top layer of stone or soil. Plus - and my biggest gripe with it is here - it means you have to savescum over and over if you want a fort made of the stone you want. Not letting us know what type of stone or soil to expect adds nothing to the game, but detracts something.
To clarify, I feel that the player should be told some information, just not all information, and that the detailed layer summary we had before isn't really as important or necessary. It would still be nice to see things like "there's sedimentary stone on top, and some nice coal deposits and sand".
... that would almost certainly lead to massive pet execution.
I'm fairly certain every path in the game leads to some sort of massive execution.
Game could let you bootstrap metal indrustry from nothing thou - like making anvil without forge ... clay form from kiln and reaction at smelter to pour iron into it would be rather nice if you have iron-less civ.
If some of the classic tricks for handling animals goes away, people may just decide not to bother with animals at all. It's a large amount of micromanagement to monitor and order the slaughtering of animals by hand when you inevitably wind up with a couple dozen species of domestic farm animals all having up to 50 creatures apiece, who can't be allowed to overcrowd lest they attack you.
Only certain things would work with this. Things that need designations, like stone, logs, plants from gathering/farming, meat from butchering, as well as other various things wouldn't work. I'll put up a list later.
Game could let you bootstrap metal indrustry from nothing thou - like making anvil without forge ... clay form from kiln and reaction at smelter to pour iron into it would be rather nice if you have iron-less civ.
wow, this would allow to start with a zero point embark... now, can somebody do it?
pretty please?
Yea they are, I think the most recent speculation is that they don't have anybody nearby enough to filch food from and die out. Some worlds do get surviving kobolds, but it I understand it correctly those kobolds that survive started very close to one of the big 3 civs.Some might call this natural selection.
Yea they are, I think the most recent speculation is that they don't have anybody nearby enough to filch food from and die out. Some worlds do get surviving kobolds, but it I understand it correctly those kobolds that survive started very close to one of the big 3 civs.
I believe he was referring to the fact that it has been split into a series of mini releases.
If a kobold can take off my commander's head in one swipe of a large dagger, I don't see why they can't at least do some self sustaining foraging for edible raw plants, some fishing, or even rustle up a brace of coneys. Even vermin would do.Well, they are carnivores, so plants wouldn't do it. Vermin is actually what they are supposed to live of according to Toady, but that doesn't seem to work right.
Game could let you bootstrap metal indrustry from nothing thou - like making anvil without forge ... clay form from kiln and reaction at smelter to pour iron into it would be rather nice if you have iron-less civ.
wow, this would allow to start with a zero point embark... now, can somebody do it?
pretty please?
Toady One,
What do you mean "what we once called the Caravan Arc"? What are we calling it now?
I believe he was referring to the fact that it has been split into a series of mini releases.
I have seen the future of the fortress, and it has whiskers.But apparently no tail.
meow :3
DIE!meow :3
Cute! :D
Scamps has been adopted by Development Page Thread.
Development Page Thread cancels all rational thought: Interrupted by Scamps
So anyway, after the round of bugfixes the next thing on the dev page is some town stuff, including workshops. [color=chartreuseWill we be able to use these workshops in Adventure Mode?
31.19 does not have animal mass play any factor in how much they eat. How much they need to eat is derived from an absolute value in the [GRAZER:<integer>] tag. The integer determines how much of the hunger variable is removed per unit of grass eaten.
...keep in mind that milk production is also independent of creature size - goats produce just as much milk as cows, in spite of eating less than a tenth as much grass.
Question: Are there any plans to make milk production, grazing, and/or food consumption influenced by genetics or body size?
# stopped regrow from adding extra grass types on a tile
# stopped megabeasts from coming back to life and continuing to kill people
Quote# stopped regrow from adding extra grass types on a tile
Aw. I thought It like meadows with different grasses sticking up between each other.
It's been my impression that you only need to generate a world to at least 125 or 250 years or so, and you should be able to see dead megabeasts continuing their megabeast stuff in Legends mode (They seem to be dropping like flies in this release). I've had at least one that got killed, and later got revenge on the warrior that killed it. Whether they can be met in adventure mode though I don't know.Quote# stopped megabeasts from coming back to life and continuing to kill people
This is a bug I almost want to see in action. And advice on reproducing?
As someone originally from Maine and New Hampshire, it still blows my mind that 2 inches of snow can completely shut down this state.As someone originally from Scotland, that blows my mind :o.
Quote# stopped regrow from adding extra grass types on a tile
Aw. I thought It like meadows with different grasses sticking up between each other.
Yeah that was kinda realistic. Pure breed lawns are a human invention. A real meadow has all sorts of grasses and plants all over the place.
Quote# stopped regrow from adding extra grass types on a tile
Aw. I thought It like meadows with different grasses sticking up between each other.Yeah that was kinda realistic. Pure breed lawns are a human invention. A real meadow has all sorts of grasses and plants all over the place.
Yeah, as a few people mentioned -- there is no change to what you see in the game currently (where grasses are all mixed up among different adjacent tiles). There was just some unintended invisible overlap on regrow that might end up breaking who knows what.
After a few months, grasses seem to settle for a perfectly square pattern.Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Is this intentional? It looks ugly.
stopped bees and vermin from being assignable to pastures
- stopped dwarves from encrusting honeycombs with jewels etc.
# stopped shearing/milking/pasture/cage jobs from fighting with each other
Why on earth is that your favourite bug? I liked the one where invaders' mounts claim your nesting boxes much more than animal handlers fighting over a cow.Quote# stopped shearing/milking/pasture/cage jobs from fighting with each otherMy favorite bug's been fixed? GAH!
As someone from Winnipeg, I just laugh.As someone originally from Maine and New Hampshire, it still blows my mind that 2 inches of snow can completely shut down this state.As someone originally from Scotland, that blows my mind :o.
Horses? Not just horses, but riding them to. Wait, GOBLINS RIDING TROLLZ! HOLY FUCK! Or is that already implated? If so, then make it in adventure mode. And stables to buy animals from. Please, o mighty toady, be a kind god of AWESOME!I'm not really sure where the question is supposed to be here, but anyway, that's already going in.
Let me try and rephrase if for him:
Will horses and other animals be implemented to be traded and ridden in Adventure mode?
Adventure Role: Hero
- Mounts
- Can buy them as with livestock, handled as with livestock
- Movement speeds, turning and inertia
- Combat effects (velocity addition, body part selection, trampling)
Dwarf fortress: Where even the bugs are so good, players complain when they are fixed.
YAY! Wait... somebody insulted me. :'(Let me try and rephrase if for him:
Will horses and other animals be implemented to be traded and ridden in Adventure mode?
As Cruxador said, though, it is already going in...Quote from: The DevpageAdventure Role: Hero
- Mounts
- Can buy them as with livestock, handled as with livestock
- Movement speeds, turning and inertia
- Combat effects (velocity addition, body part selection, trampling)
Dwarf fortress: Where even the bugs are so good, players complain when they are fixed.
I noticed that the problem where zombie birds would claim nest boxes and lay live eggs was fixed. Didn't mention what fixed meant, though... <eg>
Because it was the closest thing DF has to dancing dwarves.Why on earth is that your favourite bug? I liked the one where invaders' mounts claim your nesting boxes much more than animal handlers fighting over a cow.Quote# stopped shearing/milking/pasture/cage jobs from fighting with each otherMy favorite bug's been fixed? GAH!
As someone originally from Winnipeg who just suffered through the iciest Super Bowl week ever, I just facepalmAs someone from Winnipeg, I just laugh.As someone originally from Maine and New Hampshire, it still blows my mind that 2 inches of snow can completely shut down this state.As someone originally from Scotland, that blows my mind :o.
Are you planning on ever implementing browsing animals? Right now all herbivores are grazers, but lots of animals eat basically only shrubs and trees.
*Does the dwarfcube unit have a name? I'm referring to the smallest unit square tile that fit a dwarf, a cabinet, a door or a wall.
I can't really pictures dwarves sailing around in ships, they might make ships, but not sail in them. Elves likely view boats as massacres of entire forests. Goblins aren't really interested in trade. Kobolds can't even wipe their own behinds, how can they sail or build vessels? So that only leaves humans?
Quote from: devlog
- stopped dwarves from encrusting honeycombs with jewels etc.
I... kind of want to make that my main export now. But I understand why it must go. Oh, the sacrifices we must make in the pursuit of the glorious version 1.0!
Dwarves don't sail? Are you mad? Just look at how pirates treated their booze (http://www.thepirateking.com/historical/pirate_booze.htm), (or the drinking game where the pirate captain shoots wildly into the dark and declares that whoever he happened to shoot must have been a traitor) and tell me those aren't just unusually lanky dwarves!(The humans undoubtedly like booze just as much as the dwarves)
Furthermore, Vikings.
Clearly, dwarves are viking pirates who prowl the seas with ballista at the ready to slaughter any who dare ply the seas without donating to the dwarves' booze stockpiles! Besides, how else are you going to capture enough mermaids and sea serpents to stock your fisheries but to go chasing them down? You don't honestly believe that mere humans are dwarfy enough to trully plunder every natural resource to its stomach-churning limits?
Travelling over the world map by sea would also be a great way to break out of being locked into a single mountain range for all of worldgen.
...Honestly, I can see dwarves doing either one, but I think vikings and hand-to-hand warfare are more dwarfy than the Egyptians.
hehehe, just a mermaid figurehead?Mermaid bone? Mermaid bone?!
I'd expect the entire dwarven hull be crafted out of mermaid bone. :D
Do you see humans as the seafaring race? Will waterways and trade by ship play a central role to civilizations? Which races will participate in sailing and building ships? How large, in units of men and/or dwarfcube dimensions*, will the larger boats be in the future?
I had an email discussion about this recently and I didn't see any posts of mine in the threads Footkerchief linked (though I've said it elsewhere), so I figured I'd say it again. We'd like to have larger ships, something 16x5 with a 3 tile wide deck and multiple z levels would be fine. And yeah, there are a few problems.
With the improved sieges (sometime soon after this release, likely) will come a different and more properly supported notion of a moving vehicle (say, a siege tower), likely as a set of tiles handled something like constructions, but with the ability to move as a unit (along with any creatures or items in their tiles).
Now, boats can move along any heading in a near perfect approximation (over over up over over up etc., maybe using the guts of the standard line drawing algorithm, etc.) but the main issue is displayed facing. There are issues with any rotation idea I've heard of that does more than 4 directions. The shearing row by row idea in alfie's post for example has issues with flows coming in along the diagonals (especially in a multi-story ship), and that there's still going to be a fundamental flip once you hit 45 degrees anyway. The flows might be plugged up with temporary tiles along the new diagonals or something, but that might lead to temporary floors for items that then disappear or something. There are a lot of issues.
There's also the idea of just using 4 directions for the boat (it can move in many more directions, but it can actually only sit in 4 directions). This leads to teleportation and displacement problems, but these aren't necessarily deal breakers, especially if you add a requirement that the ship must have a free space underneath any tile (so water critters and swimmers can just be pushed down a tile instead of teleported across the ship, which isn't so different from what would happen if you get run over). You can also deal with the ship flipping back and forth between two directions by instituting some buffer versus the actual facing, so that crossing from 30 degrees to 45 doesn't change you from east to north, but you have to actually get to 60 or so first. Then once your ship shoots up to north, you have to go all the way back to 30 to get it back to east, which gives you a 30 degree difference so you can't just flip back and forth. Flips need to be minimized not only because they are ugly, but especially with issues like wrestling and stuck-ins, they can be fundamentally messy and game-breaking (say a guy on deck is holding a crew member who is dangling overboard while a sea serpent is chomping on the dangling guy's leg and then the boat turns, and the sea serpent is hooked to a post underwater, etc. -- you'd probably want to break the chain of creatures and buildings at the weakest link, but it might be a net not a chain, etc etc etc).
Anyway, things are possible in dwarf mode, but the idea here was more for adventure mode and the necessity of boats there. If boats never make it into dwarf mode it wouldn't particularly bother me, since we are talking about dwarves, but I wouldn't rule anything out. I'm starting from an adv mode perspective here though, since it would obviously be a lot of fun to do things like epic voyages and piracy.
Adventurer Role: Explorer
* Mapping and obstacles
o Ferries
o Ports and boats (even if they are just used to teleport to other ports at first)
Military
* Improved sieges
o Siege engine improvements depend on state of boats, lifts/moving fortress sections, since these should all use the same framework
*Does the dwarfcube unit have a name? I'm referring to the smallest unit square tile that fit a dwarf, a cabinet, a door or a wall.
Do you see humans as the seafaring race? Will waterways and trade by ship play a central role to civilizations? Which races will participate in sailing and building ships? How large, in units of men and/or dwarfcube dimensions*, will the larger boats be in the future?
Speaking of booze, does dwarven wine really fit for dwarves? Perhaps it could be named whiskey or something similarly more liver terrifying.
Kobolds: Yes: More by accident than anything else, but they can travel by fallen tree express (1-3x1x1).It's the ship's kobold! (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kobold#Water_spirits)
...just because they are dwarves, I see them sailing in massive vessels composed of anything from wood to stone to bones to bones/flesh to ice. These massive vessels would possess extensive fortifications and excessive quanitites of weapons (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/MoreDakka), not to mention the onboard plump helmet farms and the endless supply of booze.
...we could create some sort of oceanside embark, create a concrete fortress in the ocean, and then sail it into the ocean, to where there are resources that you cannot reach from land (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=78079.msg2010209#msg2010209), and we could set up a dwarven "oil rig" that sails into position, "drills" into the crust, sets up oceanic mining expeditions, loads up on ores and magma, then pulls up anchor, and sets sail once again in search of new material wealth to plunder from the briney deep.
I embarked in an evil area and a lot of the ground is covered in, um, eyeballs on stalks. Will this actually work for animal feed or will I have to break a cavern?
At the moment, grazing animals will eat staring eyeball and wormy tendril grass as if it were normal with no ill effects. I'm hoping this will change in the future, but at the moment it's just cosmetic.
Wouldn't the place be, like, engorged with ravens that swoop down and peck the eyes out of the grass?
Don't forget that goats will eat all kinds of garbage, including paper.
Besides, I have a suspicion that if it smells and tastes plant-like and edible, most grazing animals would not care what the grass looks like. Although, grass that wiggles like worms or tentacles should certainly spook them. At least until they either get used to it or get hungry enough.
Units have reached a new level of cowardice:
Urist Stonekiller: Blacksmith cancels forge war-hammer: Interrupted by duck.
Units have reached a new level of cowardice:
Urist Stonekiller: Blacksmith cancels forge war-hammer: Interrupted by duck.
To be fair, the eye and worm grass are literally made out of eye and muscle tissue, respectively. They aren't grass at all, so it is pretty damn weird that herbivorous grazing animals can eat them just the same.
Units have reached a new level of cowardice:
Urist Stonekiller: Blacksmith cancels forge war-hammer: Interrupted by duck.
That's not cowardice. Those ducks can be pretty annoying sometimes. They'll whip around inside your clothes, then kiss you on the lips, then dance around while yelling "WOOHOO! WOOHOO! WOOHOO!", and no matter how many times you blast them with your shotgun during "Wabbit Season", they never die.
I mean, that'd interrupt anything you were trying to do.
I've been trying out a kobold mod. So far it's working, but I'm getting a LOT of Kobold eggs... and they're going in the food stockpile.
How do I go about getting these eggs hatched?
Does this mean you have added [TUNNELLING] as a tag and method of movement?Nope, it's currently just description. I think another of the new underground beasts is described as hanging from the ceilings, which also is just description.
I've been trying out a kobold mod. So far it's working, but I'm getting a LOT of Kobold eggs... and they're going in the food stockpile.
How do I go about getting these eggs hatched?
Disable them in the stockpile and they'll stay in the nestboxes, but you want to dump infertile ones because they'll never hatch.
Possibly a stupid question and one that will probably be answered before you even read this:
I just read the description of the Giant Earthworm.Does this mean you have added [TUNNELLING] as a tag and method of movement?Spoiler (click to show/hide)
It should be called a Rockworm or maybe a Sqyrm (as in Wyrm) ;).
So what are your plans for cobaltite and cinnabar?
So what are your plans for cobaltite and cinnabar?
Cobalt is pretty far beyond the technological realm of possibility here, although cinnabar mining isn't, and I don't think mercury extraction from cinnabar even requires much of a "smelting" operation, per se (I think it mostly consists of tumbling the broken rock in a high-heat environment).
So what are your plans for cobaltite and cinnabar?
Cobalt is pretty far beyond the technological realm of possibility here, although cinnabar mining isn't, and I don't think mercury extraction from cinnabar even requires much of a "smelting" operation, per se (I think it mostly consists of tumbling the broken rock in a high-heat environment).
Back to boats:
Is there any reason to expect a 1 to 1 correlation between location inside the ship and location outside? What I mean is, when you're on the ship, calculate your location in relation to the ship. If you jump out, calculate a 'best guess' square to land in based on where the ship is. Then all you need to do is handle normal movement(Display as whatever angle you want, but move 1 up 1 across style) and parking (since docks will be on the grid, a docked ship has to align to the grid to dock.).
Added bonus: Reference frame for everything on the ship is to the ship, so you don't have to think about anything on the ship when you move it.
Granite is smart. These are good ideas.
Back to boats:Post it here please: Vehicles Megathread (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=72675)
Is there any reason to expect a 1 to 1 correlation between location inside the ship and location outside? What I mean is, when you're on the ship, calculate your location in relation to the ship. If you jump out, calculate a 'best guess' square to land in based on where the ship is. Then all you need to do is handle normal movement(Display as whatever angle you want, but move 1 up 1 across style) and parking (since docks will be on the grid, a docked ship has to align to the grid to dock.).
Added bonus: Reference frame for everything on the ship is to the ship, so you don't have to think about anything on the ship when you move it.
I'd love to see salt in DF. Historically it was extremely important (and a major trade good).
The development page states that the next release is going to focus on the towns. Are you planning to do the non-human civ dwellings as well?
I'd love to see salt in DF. Historically it was extremely important (and a major trade good).
I think it's in there in some sort of obscene way, since you can have a god of salt. Although it might just be in the vocabulary files.The development page states that the next release is going to focus on the towns. Are you planning to do the non-human civ dwellings as well?
Apparently this is happening much later on in the army arc.
QuoteQuote from: nenjinSo in the flurry of the caravan and army arcs, are you going to rough out the dwarven, elven and goblin civs so there's something for people to see when they venture out to those sites? Or does that play into too much political/civ-specific design you don't want to get bogged down in yet?Quote from: metime00What kind of structures/towns will dwarves and elves have if they get visible settlements in the next update?
There will most likely be something there into the army arc. It's not in for the next update.
This quote's from before the current release.QuoteQuote from: nenjinSo in the flurry of the caravan and army arcs, are you going to rough out the dwarven, elven and goblin civs so there's something for people to see when they venture out to those sites? Or does that play into too much political/civ-specific design you don't want to get bogged down in yet?Quote from: metime00What kind of structures/towns will dwarves and elves have if they get visible settlements in the next update?
There will most likely be something there into the army arc. It's not in for the next update.
Salt is a material that forgotten beasts, demons, and titans can be made out of.I'd love to see salt in DF. Historically it was extremely important (and a major trade good).
I think it's in there in some sort of obscene way, since you can have a god of salt. Although it might just be in the vocabulary files.
Where in inits is option for animal population cap? I can't find it. I believe the default is 50, but I'd like to set it to 20.
It's not in the inits. It appears to be a hard-coded limit in the code. You can't change it.
Where in inits is option for animal population cap? I can't find it. I believe the default is 50, but I'd like to set it to 20.
It's not in the inits. It appears to be a hard-coded limit in the code. You can't change it.
... and you should be able to see dead megabeasts continuing their megabeast stuff in Legends mode (They seem to be dropping like flies in this release).
Has it been considered to turn this into an init.txt or d_init.txt option?
I'm sure more than a few players would appreciate that. I assume this would be simple to code. (The game would just have to read a variable from init.txt instead of using a constant.) And it's not like doing this would be something that players could abuse or would ruin the atmosphere of the game. We can already control population caps for dwarves and children.
Iirc, there is indeed a site cap for each animal in the relevant creature's raws.
In my last generated world two megabeasts were killed by elves...and both of them came back due to the bug.
Why megabeasts doesn't reproduce yet? I thought Dragons and hydras were waiting for eggs. Do you plan to change this soon?
Quote from: KillerClownsHow will inherently lonely megabeasts find mates? Will other megabeasts reproduce? And will FBs and titans be able to inherit egg laying?
Until critters move around on the world map, which is coming but isn't here yet, we just have megabeast reproduction in world gen and eggs sitting around that ostensibly come around from whatever. I don't know that titans or FBs will ever lay eggs as a matter of course, because we don't really have an explanation for what they are or what their continuing role in the world is.
In my last generated world two megabeasts were killed by elves...and both of them came back due to the bug.
Why megabeasts doesn't reproduce yet? I thought Dragons and hydras were waiting for eggs. Do you plan to change this soon?
It sounds like it's already in:Quote from: KillerClownsHow will inherently lonely megabeasts find mates? Will other megabeasts reproduce? And will FBs and titans be able to inherit egg laying?
Until critters move around on the world map, which is coming but isn't here yet, we just have megabeast reproduction in world gen and eggs sitting around that ostensibly come around from whatever. I don't know that titans or FBs will ever lay eggs as a matter of course, because we don't really have an explanation for what they are or what their continuing role in the world is.
Are you sure they aren't reproducing?
Why megabeasts doesn't reproduce yet? I thought Dragons and hydras were waiting for eggs. Do you plan to change this soon?
Or elite goblin marksmen? (Or elite trolls in steel armor, help us all...)
I, personally, don't want to see Toady recreating Warcraft, here, and think that we don't need to have a set of "good" and "evil" ranked bunch of opponents. Especially when the two sides mirror each other so fiercely that the term "evil" is only superficially different from "good", and may as well be described as a battle between the forces of "green skin" versus "hairy people".
Or elite goblin marksmen? (Or elite trolls in steel armor, help us all...)I'm with you. It might cool if the game organically created some form of progression (like early on you only fight the closest enemy civs, which usually have two or three towers and rely on hide and copper, but eventually you may become wealthy enough to attract the attention of the five-hundred-pount, bronze-armored gorilla halfway across the map. But threats abroad should be at most balanced with those from below and within.
I, personally, don't want to see Toady recreating Warcraft, here, and think that we don't need to have a set of "good" and "evil" ranked bunch of opponents.Plus, no one will ever convince me that orc isn't just a word for particularly large goblin. 8)
Or elite goblin marksmen? (Or elite trolls in steel armor, help us all...)I'm with you. It might cool if the game organically created some form of progression (like early on you only fight the closest enemy civs, which usually have two or three towers and rely on hide and copper, but eventually you may become wealthy enough to attract the attention of the five-hundred-pount, bronze-armored gorilla halfway across the map.
Or elite goblin marksmen? (Or elite trolls in steel armor, help us all...)I'm with you. It might cool if the game organically created some form of progression (like early on you only fight the closest enemy civs, which usually have two or three towers and rely on hide and copper, but eventually you may become wealthy enough to attract the attention of the five-hundred-pount, bronze-armored gorilla halfway across the map. But threats abroad should be at most balanced with those from below and within.I, personally, don't want to see Toady recreating Warcraft, here, and think that we don't need to have a set of "good" and "evil" ranked bunch of opponents.Plus, no one will ever convince me that orc isn't just a word for particularly large goblin. 8)
This'd be especially awesome if 'civ threat level' was a map layer on the embark screen.
This one is a good enough suggestion.
Do people actually reach legendary in world generation now?
DF 0.31.20 now contains more fixes than any other 0.31.* version (according to the bug tracker). Go toady!
Other bugfix releases also increased the release number.DF 0.31.20 now contains more fixes than any other 0.31.* version (according to the bug tracker). Go toady!
Wouldn't it be like .31.19A?
Its suppose to be just bug fixes.
Those other bugfix releases also contained new content.Other bugfix releases also increased the release number.DF 0.31.20 now contains more fixes than any other 0.31.* version (according to the bug tracker). Go toady!
Wouldn't it be like .31.19A?
Its suppose to be just bug fixes.
Those other bugfix releases also contained new content.Not really. 31.02, 31.06, 31.08, 31.10, and 31.15 pretty much were bugfix releases only. Depending on what you consider a feature rather than a tweak, you could add more to that list.
Say, Toady, what with the new trade improvements coming up, will it eventually be possible for traders to place orders or commission stuff from your fortress, such as armour? In that case, will it be possible for dwarves in Fortress mode to make armour fitted to the size of other races? This would be most helpful in adventure mode too.
Quote from: jpwrunyanwhen will we be able to forge non-dwarf size weapons and armor?
Probably when agreements with humans become more interesting. They just pay more for certain weapons right now, but it would be fun to have them commission several human breastplates, for example.
Have you planned further limiting the availability of plate armour? As far as I know, it is not 'one size fits all' equipment. So if we wanted to commission a set to our measurements, it'd cost a lot and take (a lot) of time make. Adventure mode in particular would benefit, fortress mode perhaps less so.
Making clothing size requirements more stringent is iffy:
http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=30026.msg994813;topicseen#msg994813Quote from: Toady Onehaving to size clothing for different dwarves [...] is a nightmare
http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=30026.msg698450;topicseen#msg698450Quote from: Toady OneQuote from: ArkDelgatoWill there ever be size differentiation for clothes?
There might be size differentiation for clothes later, but only when we can handle it without it being a total nightmare for the player.
Quote from: rex mortisHave you planned further limiting the availability of plate armour? As far as I know, it is not 'one size fits all' equipment. So if we wanted to commission a set to our measurements, it'd cost a lot and take (a lot) of time make. Adventure mode in particular would benefit, fortress mode perhaps less so.
How about proper shield damage to make them less reusable? This is possibly coming with item damage though.
I don't have any particular plans, but it sounds reasonable enough. People have posted some relevant quotes and things here for the issues in fort mode.
The oldest question in the book: When you were editing the raws for all the new stuff, what did you add first, the chicken or the egg?Good question. :o :D
Well the actual question would be if we can get a selfhetching egg. We have now eggs and itemcorpses so could i create now a proper phoenix(?) that keeps killing stuff for centurys with fire?
Well the actual question would be if we can get a selfhetching egg. We have now eggs and itemcorpses so could i create now a proper phoenix(?) that keeps killing stuff for centurys with fire?
Well the actual question would be if we can get a selfhetching egg. We have now eggs and itemcorpses so could i create now a proper phoenix(?) that keeps killing stuff for centurys with fire?
According to the wiki, (http://df.magmawiki.com/index.php/Egg) eggs won't hatch unless fertilized by a male, so I don't think you can make them self-hatching.
mods are like alternate realities. :?Pretty much... there's a fallout mod for df with supermutants and everything. a few zombie survival mods, and just about every alternate culture you can think of.
Are you planning on ever implementing browsing animals? Right now all herbivores are grazers, but lots of animals eat basically only shrubs and trees.
If you read through the raw entries on actual browsing animals (giraffes and the like) there are notes from Toady about browsing. Presumably this means he wants to include it at some point, but it is unlikely to occur before multi-tile vegetation gets some attention.
The elephant raw entry has a note:Quote from: creature_large_tropical.txt[GRAZER:12] don't have browsing trees yet
That sounds like trees WHICH browse, not trees FOR browsing. (I know which one it is, yeah, but the concept of trees roaming around nomming smaller trees and/or shrubs is terrifying and awesome. And now I think that would make an awesome creature, if you set up their armor and limbs such that they're most vulnerable to axes, and made them drop wood when killed.)
Back in 40d I made a "glumprong" creature that was extremely slow but appeared in massive numbers and ambushed. Naturally it'd only appear in evil forests alongside "benign" glumprongs.
I also attempted to make it so that the creature used its shadow to attack via some bodypart trickery, but I don't think I ever got it to work properly.
That sounds like trees WHICH browse, not trees FOR browsing. (I know which one it is, yeah, but the concept of trees roaming around nomming smaller trees and/or shrubs is terrifying and awesome. And now I think that would make an awesome creature, if you set up their armor and limbs such that they're most vulnerable to axes, and made them drop wood when killed.)
I also attempted to make it so that the creature used its shadow to attack
Well the actual question would be if we can get a selfhetching egg. We have now eggs and itemcorpses so could i create now a proper phoenix(?) that keeps killing stuff for centurys with fire?
According to the wiki, (http://df.magmawiki.com/index.php/Egg) eggs won't hatch unless fertilized by a male, so I don't think you can make them self-hatching.
What if you add the male AND female tags?
Civilizations are starving in world gen, in part because the caravans of food aren't set up yet. Will civilizations continue to starve if they can't afford the food? Will there be cities/whatever that can't feed themselves without trade (from areas beyond their immediate zone of influence), such that sudden price changes will cause starvation?...I hope so. That's often how famines happen in the real world, and the same should be true in DF. Plus, once adventurers can lead caravans, it would be the perfect hook for a "please go procure grain for my/our people" quests.
Do you have code to stop pregnant women from having moods, so that actually having the baby doesn't interrupt the mood? If so, why are pregnant women the LEAST moody dwarves? If so, how does that work? Urist cancels 'Make awesome artifact, seeking infant'?the child is used as a material. Artefact decorated with spikes of infant. ;)
if you use feathers it works. Attacks pass through feathers (or at least they used to). I was going to use it to make "smoke creatures", but did not know enough about modding to create new bodyparts out of it.
eux0r: Those are good suggestions. They should go in the suggestions forum.
first:
considering you want to get to fights between ships and giant squid and such at some point wouldnt it be more wise to rename the 'roc' to 'ziz' as it fits better with leviathan and behemoth? cause you know, leviathan would be like an imperative at sea(at least as far as i see it) and adding behemoth wouldnt change too much, considering the existence of some other megabeasts
second:
do you plan on making the races more diverse(at least later on, when more races are available in fortress mode)? right now, all the races are just like different flavours of humans. yeah, they have their own culture and habits and ethics and morphologies, but those differences also exist between, lets say the chinese and some african tribe. i thought more of something along the lines of goblins actually being humanoid carnivorous plants or something like that. this one, for example, could actually help explain their ethics(lives are expendable) and where they take their numbers from(i never could imagine goblins to have intersexual relationships of any kind, in my mind theyre asexual and just coming from _somewhere_).
# Core87, PROPER DWARVES, (Future): Dwarves are, of course, proper when they are played in dwarf mode, but their sites in adventure mode are completely lacking and their society isn't really realized anywhere outside of dwarf mode play. They need to be brought up to standards throughout the world and in adventure mode. Also note, for this and the following three core items, there will be some emphasis not on just building up the stock universe, but extending modding/random possibilities for all civilizations by providing these as fleshed-out and somewhat diverse examples.
# Core88, PROPER ELVES, (Future): As with the dwarves, the current elves, especially their sites, suffer from a lack of almost everything. Multi-tile trees, how the druids and the regional forces interact, their relationship with animals and the animal peoples, their dining habits in-game rather than just in world generation...
# Core89, PROPER GOBLINS, (Future): At the very least, the role of baby-snatching needs to be further sorted, and their demonic leaders should have proper world-spanning aspirations. Many of the elements of their might-makes-right ethical framework need to be fleshed out and used in actual play.
# Core90, PROPER KOBOLDS, (Future): Of course, this means different things to different people. To us, a proper kobold is neither a chihuahua man nor a mini-draconian, but instead sort of a small mammaloreptilian humanoid with pointy ears and yellow eyes with a penchant for trickery and mischief, context-based sublanguage, poisonous critter collection, traps and kleptomaniacal hoarding.
third:
do you plan to include 'throwing us bones', like adding a 'prepared meals' category to the 'bring to depot' list or making 'bone/shell' or 'wood' additional options when choosing materials for your military dwarves' equipment , while doing the next few releases, as they would only contain bugfixes, as far as i understood. you know, just easy and fast to implement stuff(at least i think my examples are like that) to prevent having several releases without anything added. i guess it would also help to keep your income at a bearable level.
Moreover, leviathans and behemoths lack interesting attributes and nobody knows what a ziz is.
Moreover, leviathans and behemoths lack interesting attributes and nobody knows what a ziz is.
I don't see why it matters that people don't have pre-existing knowledge of a creature before coming into the game; that would be an argument against most anything creative in most works of fiction, wouldn't it? And if anything, DF does the opposite of shying away from including elements just because people might be unfamiliar with them at first glance.
concerning the stuff on the bugtracker:
i wasnt specifically asking for those things to be done now, those were just examples. this question should have looked more like:
will the future series of releases also cover some of the older annoyances(at least one per release) or will they only include the new features of the arc and related bugs?
Yes, the roc is a much wider known name. I'd never heard of the "ziz".
EDIT: After looking both up to check, they're nothing alike. The ziz is a griffin, the roc is a giant eagle.
EDIT 2: Also check out Haast's Eagle (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haast%27s_eagle) for a real life giant eagle.
As Toady has stated several time in his dev log, that yes the 1-2 period of bug fixing between releases, will cover both new bugs and older bugs.
As Toady has stated several time in his dev log, that yes the 1-2 period of bug fixing between releases, will cover both new bugs and older bugs.
hm, i cant seem to remember seeing this, but thanks for reminding. after reading through so many posts and logs i already cant remember very many things i read at the beginning 0o
The idea is to do a bug fix with the new bugs, and then to spend one to two weeks with old bugs, so the timer hasn't even started yet. That said, the first one should probably be up in a few days. I won't get to all of the bugs with the new stuff with the first release, but I might clean up more of those with the old bugs depending on what's left.
-i was simply assuming leviathan would go into the game when ships come around
Will humans go on ships, and dwarves be more ... feetonin the ground? As in, will humans be far more seafaring than dwarves?
Anyway, things are possible in dwarf mode, but the idea here was more for adventure mode and the necessity of boats there. If boats never make it into dwarf mode it wouldn't particularly bother me, since we are talking about dwarves, but I wouldn't rule anything out. I'm starting from an adv mode perspective here though, since it would obviously be a lot of fun to do things like epic voyages and piracy.
Which of the options is the default mineral distribution as in 31.19? Sparse/Rare/Very Rare?Rare I think.
Wait, is animals vocalizing something that's already in and I just haven't seen it due to the current state of towns? Or is that new?
In that caseHeh, also several of the procedural creatures could benefit. Muttering or howling creatures, creatures that intone names, banshees...
How soon can we expect more preexisting animals to be vocalizing?
I don't think it was actually mentioned in the dev log, just in the Bay 12 Games Report (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=78613.msg2032082#msg2032082) and another recent post:The idea is to do a bug fix with the new bugs, and then to spend one to two weeks with old bugs, so the timer hasn't even started yet. That said, the first one should probably be up in a few days. I won't get to all of the bugs with the new stuff with the first release, but I might clean up more of those with the old bugs depending on what's left.
Cows need vocalizations so they can ACTUALLY have hunting moos.
Legendary Milkers, what daredevils they have become in .19....Cows need vocalizations so they can ACTUALLY have hunting moos.
"Urist, we can't stop here! This is cow country!"
"Mooooooo!"
"By Armok, Urist, the pack is closing in! Quickly, to the mines! There isn't much time!"
Cows need vocalizations so they can ACTUALLY have hunting moos."Urist, we can't stop here! This is cow country!"
"Mooooooo!"
"By Armok, Urist, the pack is closing in! Quickly, to the mines! There isn't much time!"
Cows need vocalizations so they can ACTUALLY have hunting moos.Heh! :D I think you meant to say "haunting moos". Cows with "hunting moos" implies that we have carnivorous predator cows that will ambush things and tear them limb from limb with their fangs. :P
Cows need vocalizations so they can ACTUALLY have hunting moos.Heh! :D I think you meant to say "haunting moos". Cows with "hunting moos" implies that we have carnivorous predator cows that will ambush things and tear them limb from limb with their fangs. :P
Have you recently reconsidered allowing constructed floors and walls to be engraved, like natural stone? I just don't understand why constructed stone walls/floors and other surfaces should not be engravable. In real life this is possible, as all it takes is a hammer and chisel...
Also, how about changing it so passing by high quality engravings will give dwarves a minor happy thought? Engraving seems to add a lot to value. So one might naturally assume that it would make dwarves happy to be surrounded by masterpiece engravings.
Have you recently reconsidered allowing constructed floors and walls to be engraved, like natural stone? I just don't understand why constructed stone walls/floors and other surfaces should not be engravable. In real life this is possible, as all it takes is a hammer and chisel...
Quote from: JoshuaFHHey, you know how it's possible to engrave floors? Well, what if I don't LIKE whatever material the floor is? As it stands, I can place artificial floors down with other materials, but not artificial engravings ontop of the natural floors! Will this change in the future? I want my entire fortress to adhere to ONE color scheme!
can I engrave those constructed floors in the future?
I always thought of engraving lots of blocks as sort of weird, at least for a large engraving. You'll probably be allowed to place larger engraved panels later.
If I remember correctly the issue isn't with doing the engravings on the blocks, it's what to do if the blocks are then re-purposed. Say you disassemble that wall and then use those blocks as part of a bridge? Does the game need to remember that they're engraved blocks and what's on them?No.
That one-log thing is going away, though.If I remember correctly the issue isn't with doing the engravings on the blocks, it's what to do if the blocks are then re-purposed. Say you disassemble that wall and then use those blocks as part of a bridge? Does the game need to remember that they're engraved blocks and what's on them?No.
It isn't very realistic but may be useful simplification (like 1-log-for-everything-including-walls-and-splints)
That doesn't mean that new simplifications and placeholders won't be introduced as the scope of the project grows. Toady has recently expanded a number of systems, but when the first few trading rewrites happen you can bet they'll be stuffed full of simplifications and placeholders, at least for a while. The fact that some simplifications are being expanded on should have no bearing on the introduction of new ones.That one-log thing is going away, though.If I remember correctly the issue isn't with doing the engravings on the blocks, it's what to do if the blocks are then re-purposed. Say you disassemble that wall and then use those blocks as part of a bridge? Does the game need to remember that they're engraved blocks and what's on them?No.
It isn't very realistic but may be useful simplification (like 1-log-for-everything-including-walls-and-splints)
We're moving away from placeholders and towards having everything make more sense.
I always saw the "no construction engravings" thing as an incentive tolive undergroundconstruct incredibly byzantine pump stack mega complexes to raise water and magma to the roof of the world, only to send it tumbling together back down into a crazy jelly mold, thus casting a tower of doom from obsidian in which to live. Is this not an intended metagame directive?
However it would be nice if when assigning specific armor/weapons to a dwarf, the items that were already assigned to someone were noted somehow as when you assign them again, it deletes the original assignment.
However it would be nice if when assigning specific armor/weapons to a dwarf, the items that were already assigned to someone were noted somehow as when you assign them again, it deletes the original assignment.
This. It'd be even nicer, though, if the equivalent were done when assigning dwarves to squads.
Totally non-phallic squad names ya got there, Tenebrais.
same here.Totally non-phallic squad names ya got there, Tenebrais.
I lol'd
fixed problem causing attacks to occur through multiple z levels
# fixed problems with glass material properties
cleaned up some wood/metal etc. issues in stockpile settings
I'm pretty sure there is. When you highlight a dwarf in that menu it tells you what squad he's in.
I'm pretty sure there is. When you highlight a dwarf in that menu it tells you what squad he's in.
I can't even begin to describe how foolish I feel at this point.
I'm pretty sure there is. When you highlight a dwarf in that menu it tells you what squad he's in.
I can't even begin to describe how foolish I feel at this point.
Don't feel too bad, I had never noticed that either. And I thought I had a pretty good handle on the military screen!
I actually shuffle my squads quite a lot, especially if I have weapon-specific squads, but then want to make a combined-arms squad to deal with general threats. Or if I have my fortress guard armed with wooden swords for day-to-day work (so they don't slaughter the guys they beat) but then want them moved to a real squad with real swords for when actual slaughter is appropriate.ditto
It might be more clear if dwarves already assigned to a squad are listed in a different colour. Maybe someone should suggest that.
Quote from: dev logfixed problem causing attacks to occur through multiple z levels
Well, now my way to rush down stairs at random won't work any more. I hope. I'll have to make a test fort to determine.
As a note, if that is the bug I think it is, you could change z-levels by charging at things. I think, to some extent, the problem evaporated when manual aiming was implemented, but now I want to test to find out.
To the fortress!
Also, they could be shuffled to the bottom of the list. Perhaps even an option to show them in order, hide them or put them at the bottom of the list.
Also, they could be shuffled to the bottom of the list. Perhaps even an option to show them in order, hide them or put them at the bottom of the list.
Like the Nobles, which are listed in order of qualification of the position?
Listing warriors in order of XP points in specific weaponskill>>general combat skills.
I rather like that recruits are listed in order of appearance though.
Makes it easier to find favored skilled soldiers and especially handy in finding those immigrant recruits.
Is it currently slated for animals of different sizes to require eating different amounts of food? If elephants and hoary marmots eat the same amount of food, but give off radically different amounts of meat when butchered, then it produces a rather silly comparison of which animals are the most effective to raise...
Quote from: MephansterasRather: how to handle partly used bars to avoid economy induced coin spam.Quote from: Toady OneI don't have a timeline. On the one hand, I've always been interested in multi-material, multi-part items, but there are complications, especially with using metal in small portions.What are the complications with this? We already have metal stored as units (150 iron instead of 1 bar). So I'm curious what the blocking factor is. Lingering old code?
If you are planning on changing the sphere system, how are you planning on changing it? Are you still planning on introducing spheres as a replacement for the simpler Good/Evil Benign/Savage system of biomes, and if so, how far down are you planning on consolidating spheres (since it would be almost impossible to have different biomes and creatures for 128 different spheres)?
what exactly is the functionality of the dwarf-mode inn?
Will we get working crutches in dwarf mode soon, either in this release or the next? It's one of the biggest bugs yet to be squashed, and it seems particularly tragic that after you went to the work of implementing this cool and useful feature something continues to keep it from actually working.
Toady you planned for release 2 of the current arc "Work with 3D mineral veins and mine maps" does this include 3D Stone-blobs? Like microline being more a spheric inclusion then a circle-ish sheet in the surrounding stone.
Ratmen mysteriously vanished in the transition from 40d to DF 2010. Since you'll now be adding new creatures such as bees, maintaining the sameness of the creature raws between versions will no longer matter as much. Assuming the removal of ratmen was an oversight, does this mean we will see ratmen reintroduced in the next version of DF?
With eyeball grass made out of eye tissue, and wormy grass made out of muscle tissue, how is it that cows and such are supposed to eat them? Assuming they actually can.
will the town revamp starting with the next release finally give us elf/dwarf settlements with actual elves & dwarves?
Guinea Fowl have this line for eggs:
"[CLUTCH_SIZE:4:15] should be 25 to 30"
What reason did you have for not just making it 25:30?
Toady, what are the conditions for eggs hatching? Civ races can use nesting boxes and lay eggs, but will the eggs hatch?
I see that hydras do not lay eggs. Is this intentional? Do you intend for hydras to have gooey amphibian eggs instead of shelled eggs?
And another, somewhat related question:
Do you intend on giving crocodiles, etc. proper leathery eggs at some point?
What is going to be the fate of the current market towns that boom and subsequently die during world gen, leaving a myriad of abandoned stores?
DF Talk 11 mentioned that towns can get specialized in materials and/or items, which is something that can be seen if you go looking for it, but it isn't always quite out in the open. As the short-term releases come in, are there plans to make those specializations more visible to adventurers or fortresses?
Do you see humans as the seafaring race? Will waterways and trade by ship play a central role to civilizations? Which races will participate in sailing and building ships? How large, in units of men and/or dwarfcube dimensions*, will the larger boats be in the future?
I liked the option of setting a pasture for my tame Phantom Spiders (it made silk production / collection easier). Now that you've fixed the "bug" of allowing vermin assigned to pastures, is there anything I can do to restrict my phantom spiders to a particular area? (I'd been using entry-less pits, previously, but they still wander out of there if they're able.)
I'm wondering how much of the increase in megabeast deaths is intentional? When you fixed the comeback bug, you made no mention of the increased number of megabeast deaths itself being a bug, but it seems off to see an elf kill a slade colossus (quick mod to test this out).
Quote from: thvazWhy megabeasts doesn't reproduce yet? I thought Dragons and hydras were waiting for eggs. Do you plan to change this soon?
<discussion>
Maybe they reproduce in play but not in world gen, then.Quote from: CaldfirIt's in, just SUPER rare.
When you were editing the raws for all the new stuff, what did you add first, the chicken or the egg?
Civilizations are starving in world gen, in part because the caravans of food aren't set up yet. Will civilizations continue to starve if they can't afford the food? Will there be cities/whatever that can't feed themselves without trade (from areas beyond their immediate zone of influence), such that sudden price changes will cause starvation? How will food be distributed?
Do you have code to stop pregnant women from having moods, so that actually having the baby doesn't interrupt the mood? If so, why are pregnant women the LEAST moody dwarves? If so, how does that work? Urist cancels 'Make awesome artifact, seeking infant'?
How soon can we expect more preexisting animals to be vocalizing?
Quote from: Toady OneRather: how to handle partly used bars to avoid economy induced coin spam.Quote from: MephansterasI don't have a timeline. On the one hand, I've always been interested in multi-material, multi-part items, but there are complications, especially with using metal in small portions.What are the complications with this? We already have metal stored as units (150 iron instead of 1 bar). So I'm curious what the blocking factor is. Lingering old code?
Secondly the grass raws include now tissues which is nice but could it support more indepth stuff like a simplifyed body-defintion (which would be nice for shrubs too).Plants still have a fair bit of work coming. I don't think grass stands to benefit that much from body definitions, though. Shrubs were planned to have there own system very using a lot of the same code as the grass stuff, but I imagine they'll nonetheless be separate. And of course, trees are going to have to be significantly different from grass, because they need the potential to be multi-tile. For them it would make sense to have something like a body-detail plan - though it would also ideally be something that defines the shape of the tiles that the tree occupies.
I know that eventually, the plan is to be able to play an adventure from any scenario (a politician, merchant etc.) Do you plan to have the implementation for that similar to a long list of "Peasent/Demigod/etc"? Or more like "When you were young, if you encountered a weary traveller, you would..." and then some multiple choice questions or something? I have always been interested in this idea.If I recall correctly, this was discussed at length in one of the talks.
0000005 (http://www.bay12games.com/dwarves/mantisbt/view.php?id=5): [Legends Mode -- Display] Underground regions have no names in Legends (Toady One (http://www.bay12games.com/dwarves/mantisbt/view_user_page.php?id=2)) - resolved.Might this mean the caverns have names now?
Quote0000005 (http://www.bay12games.com/dwarves/mantisbt/view.php?id=5): [Legends Mode -- Display] Underground regions have no names in Legends (Toady One (http://www.bay12games.com/dwarves/mantisbt/view_user_page.php?id=2)) - resolved.Might this mean the caverns have names now?
- made dwarves get crutches properly
They do eat them, but they aren't supposed to, in the end. I remember adding the muscle tissue to worms and thinking "grazers are going to eat this..." and then just taking a note and moving on. So it'll be handled sometime, maybe extending the specific food tags to classes or something, or waiting for actual diet rewrites. Until then, gummy treats!
omg crutches will work(http://img.ie/706ab.png)
*tears of joy*
All of these bug fixes are pretty awesome. .22 is likely going to be one of those very stable version everyone plays forever until the next stable version comes along.
Especially because of towns suddenly being nice again.
*stuff about spheres*hmm that would be nice.
Hmm eagerly awaiting.Quote from: Dwarfuwhat exactly is the functionality of the dwarf-mode inn?DF Talk 12 will have more on this.
YAY~ Next few days! I'll probably refrain from playing non-LP fort.Quote from: nilWill we get working crutches in dwarf mode soon, either in this release or the next? It's one of the biggest bugs yet to be squashed, and it seems particularly tragic that after you went to the work of implementing this cool and useful feature something continues to keep it from actually working.I'm planning to handle medical bugs included crutch use problems in the next few days.
Lol, this sounds cool.Quote from: G-FlexWith eyeball grass made out of eye tissue, and wormy grass made out of muscle tissue, how is it that cows and such are supposed to eat them? Assuming they actually can.
They do eat them, but they aren't supposed to, in the end. I remember adding the muscle tissue to worms and thinking "grazers are going to eat this..." and then just taking a note and moving on. So it'll be handled sometime, maybe extending the specific food tags to classes or something, or waiting for actual diet rewrites. Until then, gummy treats!
Hmm is it possible to have at least placeholders for now (shallow caves for dwarves, circles of trees for hippies, etc.)? Or would it not make much sense to do that now?Quote from: freeformschoolerwill the town revamp starting with the next release finally give us elf/dwarf settlements with actual elves & dwarves?
Doing those prior to the dwarf mode army arc releases is the current plan, so that you have something to attack. So in between the caravan releases and the army-related army arc releases. If it comes up, it might happen sooner, if it's forced in some way by the trading, but that might not be how it works out.
Creepy.:o
*ghost towns*sounds interesting, cool.
Anxiously awaiting...Quote from: JohnieRWilkinsDo you see humans as the seafaring race? Will waterways and trade by ship play a central role to civilizations? Which races will participate in sailing and building ships? How large, in units of men and/or dwarfcube dimensions*, will the larger boats be in the future?
Footkerchief posted quite a bit on this one. I just wanted to add that, yeah, some humans should be seafarers to different degrees -- probably all of the civs on the coast, but not the civs that have no settlements on the water. The same goes for other races on the water or large rivers. Dwarves and kobolds are sort of the odd ones out here. I have trouble imagining seafaring dwarves, especially out on the open ocean, but there are large bodies of water underground and lakes up in the mountains, so it's hard to say what we'll end up with once all the mechanics are just sitting there waiting to be used.
TOADY HATH SOLVED THE MYSTERIOUS QUESTION!Quote from: Granite26When you were editing the raws for all the new stuff, what did you add first, the chicken or the egg?
My recollection is that I did all of the domestic raws and then added all of the egg raws in afterward.
On the topic of healthcare, what's the plan for Animal Caretakers? Will they eventually Diagnose/Surgery/Set/Suture/Dress injured animals using just the Caretaker skill?
On the topic of healthcare, what's the plan for Animal Caretakers? Will they eventually Diagnose/Surgery/Set/Suture/Dress injured animals using just the Caretaker skill?
On the topic of healthcare, what's the plan for Animal Caretakers? Will they eventually Diagnose/Surgery/Set/Suture/Dress injured animals using just the Caretaker skill?
I thought that it will use standard doctor skills
Quote from: Toady OneHmm is it possible to have at least placeholders for now (shallow caves for dwarves, circles of trees for hippies, etc.)? Or would it not make much sense to do that now?Quote from: freeformschoolerwill the town revamp starting with the next release finally give us elf/dwarf settlements with actual elves & dwarves?
Doing those prior to the dwarf mode army arc releases is the current plan, so that you have something to attack. So in between the caravan releases and the army-related army arc releases. If it comes up, it might happen sooner, if it's forced in some way by the trading, but that might not be how it works out.
On the topic of healthcare, what's the plan for Animal Caretakers? Will they eventually Diagnose/Surgery/Set/Suture/Dress injured animals using just the Caretaker skill?
Quote from: ChthonicAre dwarves with animal care enabled going to be able to splint wardogs' broken legs and so forth, and in general make veterinary care functional?
It's one of those things that is sitting on the put-off pile and I'm not sure what's going to happen.
Also, any plans for a way to designate how long chains can be?
The default chains were originally going to be longer, but it takes some technical infrastructure to have them drag across the floor properly, especially if you want the dragging to behave somewhat sensibly. Ideally you'd be able to lay down lengths of thread to follow back out of a cave and so on, not that it's hard to get out when you have the whole map sitting right there, but maybe it'll become easier to get lost sometimes.
They won't be. The schedule, as I understand it, lists content releases. Following each of those is a release to fix new bugs from the previous release, then a release where old bugs are fixed. Hence, .22 will fix old hospital and stockpile bugs, .23 will have "Better town maps involving workshops/markets/shops based on world gen economic activities", .24 will fix bugs introduced in .23, .25 will fix more old bugs, and .26 will have "Villager/farmer schedules/activities and work with 3D mineral veins and mine maps".That's not quite it, either, I believe - the 31.20/21 releases were not actually part of the new release schedule like 31.22 will be. So the releases should go, barring any emergency updates, 31.22 bugs (and possibly a few sponsored animals), 32.01 (remember Toady hopes to increment version number here) better town maps and a few sponsored animals, 32.02 bugs, 32.03 schedules, veins, and mines, 32.04 bugs, 32.05 Taverns, hirelings, manors... insert sponsored animals, their kin, potentially the mentioned animal men, and various supplemental new features as appropriate.
On the topic of healthcare, what's the plan for Animal Caretakers? Will they eventually Diagnose/Surgery/Set/Suture/Dress injured animals using just the Caretaker skill?
I thought that it will use standard doctor skills
At that point, there won't be much use for a distinct "veterinarian" school of medicine. I wouldn't be surprised if the reason animal healthcare is in limbo is because Toady isn't sure which way to jump on the issue.
I have a question, partially regarding the problems grazing animals have right now with starving to death so easily
How do Grazing, Hunger, and grass growth work alongside each other?
To be more specific, I can see that the GRAZER:X token allows X hunger to be removed for every unit of grass eaten.
What determines the rate at which hunger increases? Is creature size a factor?
Is a 'unit' of grass simply 1/4 the maximum amount that is growing on a space?
If creature size is a factor in determining rate of hunger, why is there such an enormous difference in how much hunger is removed?
First, Limegreen, not Green.Lime's brighter.
Nope. I'd need to see a save for that, and even that might not help. Getting it to reliably reproduce is the best way. If all that's already on the bug tracker it'll just take time to get there.Sometimes creatures get notable without getting a name. This affects civilized creatures without [CAN_SPEAK] and the merchants' animals in Fortress mode when they are killed.
I have a question, partially regarding the problems grazing animals have right now with starving to death so easily
How do Grazing, Hunger, and grass growth work alongside each other?
To be more specific, I can see that the GRAZER:X token allows X hunger to be removed for every unit of grass eaten.
What determines the rate at which hunger increases? Is creature size a factor?
Is a 'unit' of grass simply 1/4 the maximum amount that is growing on a space?
If creature size is a factor in determining rate of hunger, why is there such an enormous difference in how much hunger is removed?
First, Limegreen, not Green.
Second, one unit of hunger is added every frame, regardless of creature speed. The average creature gets 1 turn every 10 frames, and one of those turns has to be used moving, so any creature with Grazer:19 or less cannot feed itself. An elephant, which only removes 12 hunger per eating of grass, is on a countdown to starvation the instant that hunger is in place. I'm told they generally starve within a season regardless of anything you try to do, short of butchering them immediately.
Third, creature size is only a factor in how Toady hand-coded the raws. I'm assuming hunger coding involves simply iterating a hunger counter for every hunger-tracked creature every frame, and creature size will only have an impact on how much they need to eat at once. You can manually recode Elephants to eat as little as rabbits if you so chose.
Fourth, creature size is such an enormous difference because the creatures have such enormous differences in size (http://df.magmawiki.com/index.php/Pasture). Toady clearly simply started with 60,000,000 and divided by creature size to find the grazer value. No other factors of creature metabolism or attributes or individual animal size difference compared to the average of the species or even the age category are as yet implemented (although Toady's recent response implies that is coming), so this is purely a function of size alone, and you're comparing a 5-metric-ton elephant to a .5-kilogram rabbit. Hence, rabbits eat 1/10,000 as much food as an elephant. (Only technically not, since a rabbit would starve before it got to 120,000 hunger, anyway. This intermediate-stage hunger thing lacks sanity checking.)
I was concerned that perhaps the rate at which hunger increases is also linked to size, in which case creature size would be affecting it twice.
I was concerned that perhaps the rate at which hunger increases is also linked to size, in which case creature size would be affecting it twice.
I don't think so - this seems to be based off of a iterate-each-frame method, so that all creatures starve after the same period of time with no food (when the unsigned integer hits its maximum value at 65535), they simply eat more (or lose less hunger when eating the same amount) to compensate for size at this moment.
To do otherwise would require a system where all the units on the map weren't iterated through every single frame. You can't add 1.25 to an integer for a creature 1.25 times normal mass, after all. That's not to say that Toady couldn't overhaul the system so that hunger was only added on every 10 frames or so to give some room for a "fraction" of a hunger per turn, of course, but that's just not the system we have right now.
The glittery balls of fire that fire imps toss look pretty, but they don't appear to do anything in arena mode, even if you get hit by dozens.Just wanted to verify, do you have temperature turned on?
The glittery balls of fire that fire imps toss look pretty, but they don't appear to do anything in arena mode, even if you get hit by dozens.Just wanted to verify, do you have temperature turned on?
The glittery balls of fire that fire imps toss look pretty, but they don't appear to do anything in arena mode, even if you get hit by dozens.Just wanted to verify, do you have temperature turned on?
Just tested, arena mode, 1 elf vs ~60 imps. I ran the elf around to stay just out of melee range of the horde. "You are caught in a cloud of flames!" 19x, and "You are struck by a ball of flames!" 26x. Temperature was on. Nothing happened. However, dragon breath did cause the elf to bleed/melt to death.
Were you naked? If you were, you didn't have any clothes to catch alight.
Were you naked? If you were, you didn't have any clothes to catch alight.
In other words yeah, fireballs and fire in general need a fair bit of work yet.
The problem is that there are only two numbers that matter - what point something burns at, and what point something melts at.
Real creatures are harmed by heat and cold for reasons other than their flesh actually being so hot it melts off. Homeostasis isn't really modeled that well.
I don't understand how a river can surface if they go downhill. :\
I don't understand how a river can surface if they go downhill. :\
or the surface of the ground falling faster than the river level. probably exiting at a cliff-face.I feel the urge...
yeah, that's what we need, cliff-faces, with exposed caverns.
cleaned up a lag problem from ghosts and some other general lag issues
or the surface of the ground falling faster than the river level. probably exiting at a cliff-face.
yeah, that's what we need, cliff-faces, with exposed caverns.
Haven't been in this thread for a long time so not sure if this has been asked before, but:
Toady, when will you revisit combat balancing? Stuff like "Superdwarvenly dwarf gets a broken finger, falls to the ground (gives into pain) and gets his skull instantly bashed in", or "whips/scourges/arrows/bolts can whip and punch through every armor in existence", or "a slightly bruised brain from a punch for example is always lethal" etc.
And is hard to Of course it is possible that this is one of the last bugs.
When people start getting over questions-suggestions, we now have questions-requests. ::)
Have you ever seen the bug tracker? There are plenty left.
I meant one of the last bugs he was doing before release.
Quotecleaned up a lag problem from ghosts and some other general lag issues
Would I be wrong to read this as some known causes of disproportionate FPS hits have been alleviated?
When people start getting over questions-suggestions, we now have questions-requests. ::)
Quotecleaned up a lag problem from ghosts and some other general lag issues
Would I be wrong to read this as some known causes of disproportionate FPS hits have been alleviated?
1000 fps @ 250 dwarves, here we come!
Quotecleaned up a lag problem from ghosts and some other general lag issues
Would I be wrong to read this as some known causes of disproportionate FPS hits have been alleviated?
1000 fps @ 250 dwarves, here we come!
In case you're being serious, do not expect orders of magnitude of improvement
This could be a real possability if toady gave us the ability to choose a 10x10x10 tile sized embarks :PQuotecleaned up a lag problem from ghosts and some other general lag issues
Would I be wrong to read this as some known causes of disproportionate FPS hits have been alleviated?
1000 fps @ 250 dwarves, here we come!
the key word here is the 10x10x10, i.e. 10 z-levels ;)This could be a real possability if toady gave us the ability to choose a 10x10x10 tile sized embarks :PQuotecleaned up a lag problem from ghosts and some other general lag issues
Would I be wrong to read this as some known causes of disproportionate FPS hits have been alleviated?
1000 fps @ 250 dwarves, here we come!
Yea the clean self soap thing pretty much seems to be a massive issue with it. And is hard to workaround while still keeping the soap's functionality to healthcare. It's either
A) Don't make any soap and live with losing dwarves to infection.
B) Make very small amounts of soap and hope some gets taken to the hospital before the chests get filled with cloth and forbid all that isn't, and
C) Make soap normally, and just live with the job cancellation spam and nobody ever cleaning themselves.
Of course it is possible that this is one of the last bugs. And it's also possible that it is more complicated than it looks making it be set aside for a while longer.
ah...the key word here is the 10x10x10, i.e. 10 z-levels ;)This could be a real possability if toady gave us the ability to choose a 10x10x10 tile sized embarks :PQuotecleaned up a lag problem from ghosts and some other general lag issues
Would I be wrong to read this as some known causes of disproportionate FPS hits have been alleviated?
1000 fps @ 250 dwarves, here we come!
Hospitals are going to work in .22? *brain explodes*Check: http://www.bay12games.com/dwarves/mantisbt/view.php?id=10
EDIT:
Uh oh. (http://www.bay12games.com/dwarves/mantisbt/view.php?id=4285) Does this mean we won't be able to magically tell whether a clown fortress is in our embarks anymore?
EDIT2:
Nevermind, that's not "fixed" yet. I read "resolved" as "fixed".
Toady One (administrator)
2011-03-13 12:33
I've fixed the wealth count and hidden items on the stock screen issues, but I'm going to leave it open until I get through more of the child issues which might be resolved.
Oh nuts, you're right, I missed that :( oh well. Guess we'll have to find clown fortresses ourselves, now.
Does anyone else remember how angry the forums seemed just a few weeks ago with people jumping up and down for bug fixes?
Its kind of funny in hindsight, because this stint of bug fixes was, at that time, already scheduled. Like what, people thought Toady should drop what he was working on at that moment to get bugfixes done a week earlier?
I for one have faith in the Toad.
They will now complain as why it wasn't fixed earlier. Or complain about bugs not fixed this time.
I will give you my firstborn Toady. Do you prefer you slave children delivered in bags sacks or cardboard boxes? Boxes would be best for me (I could just use one of those postal service flat rate boxes. I think I could cram the kid in there.) but of course your preference determines the final say.
Or complain about this irritating bug number... Dammit, it is fixed. :D (The worst one on my personal list is 0001899: Game locks up for 30 min during seasonal temperature shift)Does anyone else remember how angry the forums seemed just a few weeks ago with people jumping up and down for bug fixes?
Its kind of funny in hindsight, because this stint of bug fixes was, at that time, already scheduled. Like what, people thought Toady should drop what he was working on at that moment to get bugfixes done a week earlier?
I for one have faith in the Toad.
They will now complain as why it wasn't fixed earlier. Or complain about bugs not fixed this time.
If previous trends hold, they'll complain about how he's spending all this time bugfixing, when he should be adding content.Does anyone else remember how angry the forums seemed just a few weeks ago with people jumping up and down for bug fixes?
Its kind of funny in hindsight, because this stint of bug fixes was, at that time, already scheduled. Like what, people thought Toady should drop what he was working on at that moment to get bugfixes done a week earlier?
I for one have faith in the Toad.
They will now complain as why it wasn't fixed earlier. Or complain about bugs not fixed this time.
They will also complain when bugs that they thought were features get fixed.
I still see nothing wrong in giant bughunt.If previous trends hold, they'll complain about how he's spending all this time bugfixing, when he should be adding content.Does anyone else remember how angry the forums seemed just a few weeks ago with people jumping up and down for bug fixes?
Its kind of funny in hindsight, because this stint of bug fixes was, at that time, already scheduled. Like what, people thought Toady should drop what he was working on at that moment to get bugfixes done a week earlier?
I for one have faith in the Toad.
They will now complain as why it wasn't fixed earlier. Or complain about bugs not fixed this time.
If previous trends hold, they'll complain about how he's spending all this time bugfixing, when he should be adding content.
If previous trends hold, they'll complain about how he's spending all this time bugfixing, when he should be adding content.
Link please. I must have missed where people were doing this.
Not on these forums, necessarily. But complaints about lack of content being added pop up whenever we aren't getting content updates rolling out quickly. They're not really prevalent, but bug complaints aren't all that frequent either.If previous trends hold, they'll complain about how he's spending all this time bugfixing, when he should be adding content.
Link please. I must have missed where people were doing this.
Are there any plans for an in-fortress economy in the near future (I mean as part of the next few updates)? It's not specifically mentioned on the list but seeing as this is the "caravan arc", i though might be hidden under a larger goal.
What I mean - you've scratched the old economy so any plans to replace it? Some kind of in-fortress supply/demand system? Buying/selling? A notion of collective/personal ownership? I suppose the answer is no because it sounds like a great deal of work... but then there are the fortress inns that would suggest some kind of fortress-mode economy.
They will now complain as why it wasn't fixed earlier. Or complain about bugs not fixed this time.
Or about the possible bugs that are not even in the game yet. ::)
Oh, and as for all the talk about complaints, "They" is a rather generic term. People have been complaining about the lack of bugfixes for awhile, and may still complain about certain ones that haven't been fixed. And the complaints were getting more and more common as more updates came out with new content but no new fixes. But with the schedule of fixing both new and old bugs in between releases, at least for awhile, I really doubt that "they" will be complaining. As for the people who said that new content was more important than bug fixes, I doubt "they" will complain about getting problems fixed when new content is planned fairly regularly too. But if somebody does complain, I doubt they will, when they are specifically the people complaining about not enough bugfixes. I may be ranting a little though, I read a thread last night on minecraft where somebody was basically saying you aren't allowed to say the creator needs to fix bugs when the game is still in development, even though that's when bugs really need to be worked out. Point is, the people who are complaining about things are real people who have a legitimate right to voice their concerns, even if they aren't the same as the majority.I wasn't meaning to imply that bug fixes aren't a necessary part of development; only that bug fixing was already scheduled, so complaining about it was moot.
- My one-legged dwarf has claimed and is using eight crutches simultaneously
And the complaints were getting more and more common as more updates came out with new content but no new fixes.
That IS an interresting experiment!
- My one-legged dwarf has claimed and is using eight crutches simultaneously
One of the first things I'm going to do in the next release is give Dwarves an extra pair of legs and arms, then get a bunch of them lopped off and see what happens.
And the complaints were getting more and more common as more updates came out with new content but no new fixes.
Thats false, each of the release this year and last after the initial .31 release has had bug fixes. With an average of 18 or so per release.
Well somehow the Number of fxed Bugs keeps jumping. This morning (for me) it was 56 and now its back to 49.
Deconstructing the wagon causes a deceased wagon to appear in the unit list. If you don't erect a slab to its memory, a ghost wagon will haunt your booze stockpile and occasionally run over hapless dwarves
And the complaints were getting more and more common as more updates came out with new content but no new fixes.
Thats false, each of the release this year and last after the initial .31 release has had bug fixes. With an average of 18 or so per release.
Yeah, I completely forgot that like, every other update was almost exclusively bug-fixing. I don't know how, since I always waited for the bug-patches to get an update. But it did seem to me like people were getting more vocal over time, and I'm pretty sure that was just because the hospital bugs staying out of every patch was bugging lots of people. I expect things to die down a little bit for a little while.
My guess would have to be that some ghosts were using the normal A*-based pathfinding code, but with ALL tiles allowed (including hidden ones), making it incredibly expensive to recalculate.
I don't think they can, as far as I recall there was a case of a ghost throwing itself off a cliff repeatedly in an attempt to path to it's body onceGhosts do travel through walls, floors, fluids, etc. You can see them hanging out inside your walls sometimes, or travelling in a straight line through a mountain.
Yeah, that's what I meant I think. All tiles allowed to be checked for a route, instead of just the immediate adjacent non-fluid-covered non-walled non-empty-space ones.
I don't think they can, as far as I recall there was a case of a ghost throwing itself off a cliff repeatedly in an attempt to path to it's body onceGhosts do travel through walls, floors, fluids, etc. You can see them hanging out inside your walls sometimes, or travelling in a straight line through a mountain.
That is not the difference we're talking about. NW_Kohaku is talking about the difference between something like A* and a basic flood-fill algorithm, although I don't know why anything would use the latter. Hell, something that can travel in a straight line doesn't really need pathfinding at all.
It's possible Toady just made ghosts flood-fill pathfind entire maps until they found their destination to cut down on how much he'd have to code or take up memory for a secondary connectivity map that includes every tile, or something. It would certainly explain the massive lag ghosts cause.
Speaking of which, is stairs one of the things that got an FPS fix? I remember some science proving stairs drain FPS more than ramps, but then we get this update where some unspecified sources of fps problems were cleaned up. So can anyone tell if stairs was one of those?
Is there a way to strangle/cut throats with weapons besides slashing/stabbing them in aimed combat? It would be cool to some sort of stealth kill for scrawny rogue characters, such as the aforementioned throat cutting and garroting.You can strangle using aimed wrestling (hand or limb -> throat). Once they're unconscious, you can use an aimed melee attack to cut their throats easily. It works quite well.
some other general lag issuesCan you specify what was fixed?
Did you check on Mantis? If not, you would do well to do so. If you did and require additional information, you would do well to make your question more specific.Quotesome other general lag issuesCan you specify what was fixed?
Yes, I checked and only "0003651: [Undeath] Ghost appearing/disappearing causes a massive slowdown" is lag related.Did you check on Mantis? If not, you would do well to do so. If you did and require additional information, you would do well to make your question more specific.Quotesome other general lag issuesCan you specify what was fixed?
New release is great.
Now that we have bamboo, will we ever be able to chop it down and make bamboo crafts? Currently it is only a grass, which is technically correct, but...
So next will be the dwarven inn?
I'm pretty sure that the answer to this is elsewhere, but I've looked around for ten-ish minutes and haven't found an answer, so, figured I might as well ask.
Do we have any word on when the fortress economy will make a reappearance? Or at least a projected portion of the development that will contain it? Because I just met the previous requirements, then was all "where's mah economy?" and the wiki said it was removed but wasn't entirely clear on it. So yeah.
it seems world gen is faster, but that may just be because I did a default gen and usually choose to go for maximum size.But larger map in worldgen would be great...
I just like to observe how the world develops. :)
When will sand get the same treatment as clay? (finder option, shown on embark screen)
That's really my only major complaint with 31.19+: not being able to guarantee sand on my embark unless I embark in a sand desert (which guarantees no clay).
Say, I was thinking of the future multitile trees. Will this mean multiple types of wood from variaous 'tissues' as well?I already have modded GOODWOOD material, it's for fine barrels and furniture and better crafts & ammo.
For instance high quality log, fit for working into anything (or the planks IIRC you mentioned once). and branches/roots (low quality wood/debris), perfect for coalburning, building fences or stuff requiring small bits of wood (bolts, beads etc?).
With the Talk of upcoming Hill dwarves, I had a thought today- What happens to the hill dwarves when a fortress is abandoned/destroyed? Do they just pack up and leave now that they lack the protection of a fortress, or do they huddle in their villages muttering about the cursed fortress up on the hill? Will these kinds of choices be determined by the reason the fortress ended- HFS, Siege, or just plain old player boredom?
Hey Toady, will we someday get dried streams and rivers, including underground ones(With nearby caverns covered in mud, soil, etc. and some rare plants and animals.)?I made a thread for this. Search for "cliffs rivers exposed caverns" and you should see a thread by me on this.
Perhaps add possibility for rivers to go underground, so we'd get a new way to travel into caverns in adventurer mode.
Ok, going with water-related suggestions, I'd also like to suggest lakes, as I haven't really seen big lakes that are not sea.
Those all seemed like clear suggestions to me... If you ask "will we ever get X" and it's related to something recently added or a planned feature on the dev log in a short-term way, then it's a suggestion, really.This definition is somewhat imperfect. In its current state, it could apply to a fair few perfectly legitimate questions. Consider issues of phrasing. Suppose the questions had been as follows:
I've always been struck by how migration is sort of all or nothing in the default version, so you're either getting slammed by waves of new migrants or getting none at all through a modified pop cap. Would Hill Dwarves coming in have any impact on the whole migrant situation?
Are Hill Dwarves going to be heavily agricultural as opposed to a largely industrial/military Mountainhome society? If my adventurer wanders into a Hill Dwarf settlement, will it be mostly brown smilies? And will fortress dwarves be largely grey/white/red?
Noble -> Diplomat -> Set policy to "Love It or Leave It"? We can only wish, and also hope. :DHmm... That makes me think of the potential possibilities for immigration as well. Might shift at some point of a fortress' life from random immigrants from the mountainhome to selected recruits from the surrounding hill-dwarf population. That would be neat.
Those all seemed like clear suggestions to me... If you ask "will we ever get X" and it's related to something recently added or a planned feature on the dev log in a short-term way, then it's a suggestion, really.This definition is somewhat imperfect. In its current state, it could apply to a fair few perfectly legitimate questions. Consider issues of phrasing. Suppose the questions had been as follows:
I've been thinking about water a lot lately. What is the future of fresh water bodies? Will we get the flooding of 2d back? Presumably if you did this in depth it would be weather-oriented and we could have wet and dry spells, but is weather likely to get that level of detail?
Also, will more realistic or at least more varied subterranean water go in with the mines coming up? I'm thinking specifically of the return of the underground rivers, and ideally even rivers that could traverse different z-levels and breach the surface or caverns."
Then slap some limegreen on a couple of those sentances. It would at the very least appear to be perfectly legitimate, despite containing and requesting very similar sets of information.
I've always been struck by how migration is sort of all or nothing in the default version, so you're either getting slammed by waves of new migrants or getting none at all through a modified pop cap. Would Hill Dwarves coming in have any impact on the whole migrant situation?
Quote from: NW_KohakuWould you even consider changing the relationship that the player has with the dwarves right now (as unquestioned overlord and direct allower and denier of all things dwarves can and cannot do), so that dwarves can become more autonomous and individual, and possibly create a better simulation, while on the other hand, potentially dramatically upping the potential for Fun because dwarves are stupid and very likely to hurt themselves unless continually babysat, or perhaps more importantly, if it meant that the player had less direct control over his fortress, and had to rely more on coaxing the ants in his/her antfarm to do his/her bidding?
Our eventual goal is to have the player's role be the embodiment of positions of power within the fortress, performing actions in their official capacity, to the point that in an ideal world each command you give would be linked to some noble, official or commander. I don't think coaxing is the way I'm thinking of it though, as with a game like Majesty which somebody brought up, because your orders would also carry the weight of being assumed to be for survival for the most part, not as bounties or a similar system. Once your fortress is larger, you might have to work a little harder to keep people around, but your dwarves in the first year would be more like crew taking orders from the captain of a ship out to sea or something, where you'd have difficulty getting them to do what you want only if you've totally flopped and they are ready to defy the expedition leader.
I've always been struck by how migration is sort of all or nothing in the default version, so you're either getting slammed by waves of new migrants or getting none at all through a modified pop cap. Would Hill Dwarves coming in have any impact on the whole migrant situation?
I hope so. It would be nice if instead of tantrumming, some dwarves would just left your fortress.
OH MY GOD
Slow downs due to water freezing/thawing seem to be gone! When did this happen??!
Will the mounted combat rewrite slated for the seventh caravan arc release allow amphibious mounts to hold their riders above water when fording rivers/streams/lakes/oceans, or will that come in the army arc sometime?
Will the mounted combat rewrite slated for the seventh caravan arc release allow amphibious mounts to hold their riders above water when fording rivers/streams/lakes/oceans, or will that come in the army arc sometime?
Cf. 0000926: Amphibian invader mounts drown their riders (http://www.bay12games.com/dwarves/mantisbt/view.php?id=926)
Will the mounted combat rewrite slated for the seventh caravan arc release allow amphibious mounts to hold their riders above water when fording rivers/streams/lakes/oceans, or will that come in the army arc sometime?
Cf. 0000926: Amphibian invader mounts drown their riders (http://www.bay12games.com/dwarves/mantisbt/view.php?id=926)
Anyway, I can't come up with good proof of it, but I recall Toady saying something else that gave an impression of having dwarves that would be willing to just up and leave for the hills in the villages around your fort if there were no rooms left or it was too expensive or the economy was bad and they couldn't get a job.
Anyway, I can't come up with good proof of it, but I recall Toady saying something else that gave an impression of having dwarves that would be willing to just up and leave for the hills in the villages around your fort if there were no rooms left or it was too expensive or the economy was bad and they couldn't get a job.
I can't remember or find where either, but also remember that being said or implied as something that would eventually happen. I do have a vague feeling it was sometime during the long interval prior to the 0.31 release cycle though.
Quote from: Beardlessare you saying that dwarfs may emigrate to the sprawl if fortress housing prices are too high? More broadly, what are your plans for emigration during fortress mode in general?
If fortress housing prices are too high for everybody, they should be lowered. If they are too high just for few dwarves, then yeah, if an affected dwarf has some way/place to survive out in the world and nothing keeping them in the fort then they should leave. In general, a dwarf seeing better opportunity or lack of death elsewhere should go when practical -- some of your initial dwarves especially might feel more bound by loyalty, depending on the start scenario. A start scenario oriented around a temple or something might see many of the dwarves refusing to leave under any circumstances. Overall, the emigration mechanics shouldn't have them squirting out of your fort at the drop of a hat, since it would often be a hard journey with an uncertain future, but you should have to work a bit to keep them.
I remember asking Toady about that about 240 pages ago (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=60554.msg1458150#msg1458150):Quote from: Beardlessare you saying that dwarfs may emigrate to the sprawl if fortress housing prices are too high? More broadly, what are your plans for emigration during fortress mode in general?
If fortress housing prices are too high for everybody, they should be lowered. If they are too high just for few dwarves, then yeah, if an affected dwarf has some way/place to survive out in the world and nothing keeping them in the fort then they should leave. In general, a dwarf seeing better opportunity or lack of death elsewhere should go when practical -- some of your initial dwarves especially might feel more bound by loyalty, depending on the start scenario. A start scenario oriented around a temple or something might see many of the dwarves refusing to leave under any circumstances. Overall, the emigration mechanics shouldn't have them squirting out of your fort at the drop of a hat, since it would often be a hard journey with an uncertain future, but you should have to work a bit to keep them.
My interpretation was that it would vary from dwarf to dwarf, but it would most likely not be "at the drop of a hat." (Which was disappointing, but realistic.) This was also a long time ago, so Toady's plans may have evolved since then.
I cant wait to see big citys like Rome or Constantinople emerging from the bigger empires hopefully they include also stuff like viaducts and canalisations (Not to mention piping for proper fountains) at some point. I just hope the building stuff gets more Procedural in terms of style and design - i would like if we could visit a fucking huge cathedral or something that equals the Hagia sophia. On the Other hand some overrun Slums with a mace of shacks, bordellos and slavemarkets would be welcome as well. Also wooooo pictures!
Imagine what the adventurer could possibly be thinking as he approaches the great stone walls of the city, stretching as far as he can see. Once inside, men and beasts fill the streets. He finds himself in a great wooden canyon of stores and shop fronts, all with signs advertising their wares. You should now begin to see the possibilities. Cities are so big you could have as many adventures as before without having to ever leave the city gates. But first the cities must be built and this is but the first stage from which to leap off into glory.
What kinds of structures and buildings do you think you will be adding to make cities happen? Will they be the same square buildings from before, or can we expect something as interesting as the generated castles?
What kinds of structures and buildings do you think you will be adding to make cities happen? Will they be the same square buildings from before, or can we expect something as interesting as the generated castles?
Emphasis mine:
04/01/2011: [...] This month we will be creating new cities with development pictures upcoming. (http://bay12games.com/dwarves/#2011-04-01)
In all seriousness now: The different species of already got theyr distinctions in traits and abilities. They also got and get more over time, so i wouldnt worry about that. Having that said "FotF: The development page" is mostly about the Dev-blog and the roadmap + questions and idle speculation as seen in the last half dozen posts. For suggestion we have the aptly named "Suggestion Forum".
Aboveground building in general should probably be a lot easier; at the moment it's thoroughly impractical to make an aboveground, wooden city.A single wooden building, like an Inn, guardtower or roman-style encampment already deforests an entire 4x4 embark forrest (medium dense), never mind the rest of the city.
Why would humans be any better at farming then other races who farm just as much?Well, the obvious reason would be because humans are tall and have strong backs. Can you imagine a willowy little elf trying to pull a hoe through dirt all day? He could do it, sure, but I,d be surprised if he could get through a third of what a human could each day. What of the dwarf, with his diminutive stature and short arms? Each swing and pull that he makes would be half as long as a human. He's exerting double the effort for the same work. The performance of elves and dwarves in the harvest suffers from parallel issues. Goblins are carnivorous and kobolds scavenge, so they aren't relevant, but they have similar issues.
Is it because they developed greater farming technology? Is it because humans have a natural greater intelligence and instincts? Do they have inherant farming skill they are inately born with or inately talented with?
imo the unique characteristic of humans shouldn't be a single thing like farming or trade, but rather variability. I'd love it if, in contrast to the relatively consistent dwarven, elven civilizations, every world generation resulted in half dozen wildly varying human cultures with randomly or semi-randomly generated ethics, personal appearances, town styles, primary economies, clothing and military strategies.
The variability thing is a myth to. Almost everything smart enough to have a civilization would be just as adaptable and varied.This would be true in a realistic or science fiction setting, where civilized races can all be presumed to have evolved. But it's a pretty common trope in fantasy settings for humans to be uniquely dynamic and adaptable, with elves and dwarves and the like sticking to static cultures taught to them by their creators. At the very least, long/indefinite lifespans would be sure to make a species relatively conservative.
imo the unique characteristic of humans shouldn't be a single thing like farming or trade, but rather variability. I'd love it if, in contrast to the relatively consistent dwarven, elven civilizations, every world generation resulted in half dozen wildly varying human cultures with randomly or semi-randomly generated ethics, personal appearances, town styles, primary economies, clothing and military strategies.
I was thinking the same thing recently, but then I realized that as well as that would work in world-gen and adventure mode, in fortress mode you would be totally swamped with humans.imo the unique characteristic of humans shouldn't be a single thing like farming or trade, but rather variability. I'd love it if, in contrast to the relatively consistent dwarven, elven civilizations, every world generation resulted in half dozen wildly varying human cultures with randomly or semi-randomly generated ethics, personal appearances, town styles, primary economies, clothing and military strategies.
This is a golden idea, and one I've thought of many times. I've started modding in other human races, using entity files from mods like Genesis and changing their names.
I'm thinking of making a bunch of different entity files, one for every civ of humans I'd like on the planet, and then giving them all [MAX_STARTING_CIV_NUMBER:1]. They'd be randomly placed and named, and if I used [CREATURE:HUMAN] for all of them, I think I might be able to make different cultures. I would be nice if they could be randomized, but I find that a few well placed PERSONAL_MATTER ethics get the hair of the other "races" up well enough to cause some intrugue as it is.
Toasy, will we be having cities that extend beyond the walls? or cities without walls?
It seems a bit strange that all cities would have walls that exactly match up with the city boundaries.
It occurs to me that cities may be large enough to get lost in- lost enough to require directions when you are looking for a specific type of shop/market. I hope that functionality makes it in soon.
# Req471, ASKING DIRECTIONS, (Future): You should be able to ask directions more robustly in adventure mode. They should be able to give you directions and location descriptions. You should be able to ask about general or specific items or trades, and various other things. Different creatures might have a broader knowledge of more areas depending on various factors.
When towns have various important buildings in them and other stuff to do, will there be any plans to prevent intra-city walks from being too long and monotonous?
Modern humans and Neanderthals once coexisted in the same place simultaneously. It's not very improbably at all if they are somewhat closely related. At least dwarves, elves and humans seem like they'd have a rather recent common ancestor.
There's an interesting nugget of speculation- the possibility of Planned Communities. Ye Olde cities that grow naturally over time end up looking quite a bit like what those pictures do, but what happens when Rome burns and Nero decides to rebuild it along more organized lines? Given the nature of dwarves (or the immortal races) it is entirely plausible that they would plan their settlements far in advance, regardless of whether they ever expect to be a major city.
These are all cities of the maximum sizeI doubt navigation will really be a problem most of the time.
The buildings often enclose yards where several families will keep their pigs and other beasts and birds.So. Cool.
What I'm most wondering about while looking at those cities is what happens with all that open space in the middle of those buildings... Are they used as neighborhood parks? Or is there no way to directly access them, and nobody uses those open areas?I'm pretty sure that's what he was referring to with the following:
The buildings often enclose yards where several families will keep their pigs and other beasts and birds. Later these yards will be used for additional buildings and they'll also be expanded out in this release and merged with roads to support things like market squares.
Hmmm I thought Cities tended to have Spiderweb designs somewhere and then more organised designs the further out you go.The cities you're thinking off are usually cities build around military posts. The center being the old encampment.
I should start looking it up.
I hope the cities will somewhat respect the surroundings. Or that people will start modifying the surroundings: like channels. (http://medievalcooking.org/wp/wp-content/uploads/2009/08/braun_hogenberg_i_16_b-map-of-medieval-brugge_jjs-08172009.jpg)Toady specifically mentioned working on bridges and channels next after some gate work, so yeah, the cities should be respecting surroundings in a few days. And settlements of all kinds desperately need working bridges right now anyway, so they can follow their soonish-to-come schedules.
Will there be any kind of navigational tools like signposts or slabposts, or perhaps even a system where villages guide adventurers in place so that the player doesn't easily get lost in these cities?I'm sure it's a concern that Toady'll look into. He already mentioned that new conversation options may come in, so that could be one help. I hope you can still (T)ravel in the confines of the new cities like you can in the current towns, though. As long as you can't (T)ravel over the walls, that should be ok.
So one pixel is equal to one in-game tile? That would make these cities the size of a full 17x17 embark area. I wonder how many people these cities will hold.Someone in another thread estimated a good 1500 to 2000 buildings. If that's accurate, we're looking at maps for cities of 10000+ people (assuming an average of 5 to 7 inhabitants), which is much larger than most towns currently get (though caravan improvements may change that).
Toady's got pics of the city up!Those are max-sized cities, so I'm looking forward to them.
And by Armok, they're ENORMOUS! I'm looking forward to doing some exploration.
Another problem with these cities is that there no large buildings: keeps, palaces, town halls and government buildings, grand markets, parade fields (the Romans were big into these), armories, and in the future, museums, libraries, docks, factory-type things or workshop complexes, warehouses, mage towers, and so on.
The different buildings will be workshops and houses -- there aren't any really large ones because we haven't gotten to manors/taverns/inns etc., but the system can easily encompass that sort of thing. Those buildings are for future releases though.
The variability thing is a myth to. Almost everything smart enough to have a civilization would be just as adaptable and varied.
The actual real specialities of humans, the things we evolved to do better than other animals, are endurance running and politics.
heh i can see tons of fetch-quests already :P
The cities look great, but I really think that there should be a radial organization to them. This provides a focus point where most of the points of interest could be found. That way, if a city is large, you don't have to nevigate this inpenetrable maze to conduct your business here. I think this is also why real cities often grew this way in the days before the automobile.
Algorithmically, you would:
pick a city center
grow outwards until the city is attacked in world gen
encase it in a wall
continue to grow outward.
This is going to make the obsessive-compulsive in me that always has to comb every inch of every city and comparison-shop for the very best armor or weapon of the particular kind I really really want because I have to be kitted out as thoroughly as possible . . . just about die. But it looks awesome.
For a city of the size presented, are shops going to be scattered throughout? Is there going to be one great central market? Or little clusters of shops serving different parts of the city? Are cities going to be segregated by individuals of different social class (i.e., the good parts of town, where you can pay extra for the good booze and gem-encrusted duds, and the other side of the tracks where all you can buy are swill and rags)?
- Better town maps involving workshops/markets/shops based on world gen economic activities
Toady's got pics of the city up!Those are max-sized cities, so I'm looking forward to them.
And by Armok, they're ENORMOUS! I'm looking forward to doing some exploration.
I hope they will have more than z-level.
Another problem with these cities is that there no large buildings: keeps, palaces, town halls and government buildings, grand markets, parade fields (the Romans were big into these), armories, and in the future, museums, libraries, docks, factory-type things or workshop complexes, warehouses, mage towers, and so on.
Addressed in the Devlog here:Quote from: DevlogThe different buildings will be workshops and houses -- there aren't any really large ones because we haven't gotten to manors/taverns/inns etc., but the system can easily encompass that sort of thing. Those buildings are for future releases though.
What I'm most wondering about while looking at those cities is what happens with all that open space in the middle of those buildings... Are they used as neighborhood parks? Or is there no way to directly access them, and nobody uses those open areas?I'm pretty sure that's what he was referring to with the following:Quote from: Toady OneThe buildings often enclose yards where several families will keep their pigs and other beasts and birds. Later these yards will be used for additional buildings and they'll also be expanded out in this release and merged with roads to support things like market squares.
Are cities going to be segregated by individuals of different social class (i.e., the good parts of town, where you can pay extra for the good booze and gem-encrusted duds, and the other side of the tracks where all you can buy are swill and rags)?
In regards to the lag concern a few pages back, I recall Toady saying something (I think in a DF talk) about how there isn't much lag because all the city folk just stand around doing nothing all day. Release 2 is Villager/Farmer schedule/activities, part of which is finding ways to make the towns feel alive with people in the streets and such without having to simulate pathfinding for every single resident of the city even when you can't see them.
Is it just me or are the buildings a little out of scale? I think that the rooms are much too large. Most lower-class houses in the middle ages had really tiny rooms stuffed with tons of people, so either the houses should be much smaller, or they should be split into many small rooms (2x3 to 2x4). A bed, a table, two chairs, a cabinet and one free tile should be able to support at least three people. An inn could be about 8x8, inn "hotel" rooms could be 1x2, market stalls could be 2x2, middle-class houses should be about 6x6 inside.
Is it just me or are the buildings a little out of scale? I think that the rooms are much too large. Most lower-class houses in the middle ages had really tiny rooms stuffed with tons of people, so either the houses should be much smaller, or they should be split into many small rooms (2x3 to 2x4). A bed, a table, two chairs, a cabinet and one free tile should be able to support at least three people. An inn could be about 8x8, inn "hotel" rooms could be 1x2, market stalls could be 2x2, middle-class houses should be about 6x6 inside.
Maybe each of these large buildings are many houses packed together.
*lotsa awesome gibberish*NW_Kohaku, how the hell do you know all this?
That scale would make any kind of combat rather boring. You need a little bit of maneuvering room.Why would you want so many variations? A 4x2 room with 5 distinct furniture items already has 13440 variations, which is totally enough for me. And you already have enough maneuvering room in places outside of cities, which make up about 99,5% of any DF world. Ever had a swordfight in your bathroom? Also, support realism, because this totally isn't a fantasy setting.
I don't really see the point of cramming the people in like sardines... you might as well give everyone a little bit of room. That way, you can have more unique randomly generated rooms. There are only two 1x2 bedrooms- one with the bed on the right, and one with the bed on the left. A 4x5 bedroom with a bed, 2-3 containers, a decoration, and some totally random item (chair, table, statue, bookcase, ect...) has at least hundreds of variations.
Anyway, not everyone has to live in the same conditions - there's no reason not to have a 1x2 room for the guys who are basically just the haulers of the town, while having a 3x8 one-floor house (or one floor of a multi-floor house) for the accomplished woodcarver, and then a 4x10 three-story house for the master gemsetter.Totally.
*lotsa awesome gibberish*NW_Kohaku, how the hell do you know all this?
However, there could be tricks to evading that sort of problem. You could wind up with a "Shroedenger's Gun" situation, where random walkers suddenly have their empty backstory filled in if they stay in the adventurer's sight for long enough, or the adventurer actually asks them questions. Basically, the first 150 steps, they are just walking randomly, but then suddenly, they were going to the market that's in the direction they were walking in the direction of, and their home was in the direction they were walking away from, because now that the adventurer is following them and presumably might be looking at them, they have to have a purpose all of a sudden.
That would require a largish reserve of completely ambiguous buildings, where none of the details of who lives there matter until the player is actually looking at them. It might also get complicated if a player can basically set up shop in a single neighborhood, and starts to get to know all the neighbors, at which point a large chunk of territory in the city might become "known", and you can't pull some of these tricks as easily.
Is it me, or are a lot of those roads just too small? I saw a lot of people talking about central industries, and I know that buildings will get larger over time and crafts more centralized, but regardless of whether cities are blocky or spiderweb patterned I still expected to see some regions with massive wide streets and some with two or three tile wide alleys...
Is it me, or are a lot of those roads just too small? I saw a lot of people talking about central industries, and I know that buildings will get larger over time and crafts more centralized, but regardless of whether cities are blocky or spiderweb patterned I still expected to see some regions with massive wide streets and some with two or three tile wide alleys...
Is there some resource gathering going on? Basically, I'm just wondering if it is possible to encounter a city with unfinished walls, or a castle where just the keep has been finished.
Or cities made entirely out of things such as sand or platinum ore.
I've seen fortresses in this version made of lignite and horn silver. Could be interesting to see an entire city made of gold or coal or something.
pick a city center
grow outwards until the city is attacked in world gen
encase it in a wall
continue to grow outward.
But still, some are bigger than others, which is what he was talking about.Is it me, or are a lot of those roads just too small? I saw a lot of people talking about central industries, and I know that buildings will get larger over time and crafts more centralized, but regardless of whether cities are blocky or spiderweb patterned I still expected to see some regions with massive wide streets and some with two or three tile wide alleys...
well, we have lots of medieval town around here and their road are seriously small and twisted. that's to say, two people could not walk along.
look, this is Spello: http://goo.gl/maps/YI4s
you should see the one road, that would give you a sense of scale of the passageways between houses.
Both of these are different from a quest to deliver serious bodily harm to the kobolds living in the sewers.
Both of these are different from a quest to deliver serious bodily harm to the kobolds living in the sewers.
Speaking of that, I have to wonder if the cities are going to eventually have enormous explorable sewer systems. Completely unrealistic, but they're a cherished RPG tradition.
Both of these are different from a quest to deliver serious bodily harm to the kobolds living in the sewers.
Speaking of that, I have to wonder if the cities are going to eventually have enormous explorable sewer systems. Completely unrealistic, but they're a cherished RPG tradition.
I know it was mentioned in the old dev goals- it comes up every now and then when the Poo question arises.
I like fertilizer, animal tracking and sewers. I dislike potty breaks. This is an example of realism that I think has a lot of potential for trouble. Potty breaks in adventure mode might be realistic, but there are immersion issues there. He he he, I mean in the sense of the player being kicked out of their groove. The other kind of immersion wouldn't be so bad, because sewers are common adventure environments. In dwarf mode, dwarves already take a lot of time out for self-maintenance, and this would be a more senseless kind, compared to something like eating.
# PowerGoal153, THE CRACKS OF DOOM, (Future): You flee into the sewer with the baron's ring, but sliding in the muck, you drop it. Try as you might, you cannot locate the precious object in the town's filth.
Rainseeker: So there's no poo creatures either?
Toady: It was a close thing! Because it was literally a decision I had to make, going down this list, because in the Hidden Fun Stuff of course if you get the tentacle demons then you get a layer scattered with various filth on the ground; and there's brown filth and yellow filth and so on and it's not clearly stated but it's a material that I had to put in properties for right? So there's these hard-coded filth materials, and when I was going down the list, you know 'Do I want creatures made out of mud? Do I want creatures made out of vomit? Do I want creatures made out of glass?', there's all these hard-coded materials, and I was just like 'Yeah, yeah, yeah ... No ... No ...' on the filth. But there are creatures made out of the grime, and the grime material is the material that collects on your body slowly over time, and it's also the material that's used in swamp water, so there's this ... I just needed this material called 'grime' for these miscellaneous purposes, it's just crap, just stuff that collects over time and when a creature is made out of that it just says 'composed of grime and filth'. So if you want to call that 'poo' even though it's not it's possible for you to extend your imagination.
Incidentally, some of these small creatures aren't large enough to produce meat when butchered. Any chance of partial meat-units (a la fat's "globs") to make it so killing rabbits eventually nets you enough meat for a +Rabbit Stew+ ?
Toady, will we be having cities that extend beyond the walls? or cities without walls?
Quote from: AqizzarChalk me up for another person who think the cities would likely be a bear to navigate, by the current standards of navigation in Adventure Mode.Quote from: UntelligentWhen towns have various important buildings in them and other stuff to do, will there be any plans to prevent intra-city walks from being too long and monotonous?Quote from: darkflagranceWill there be any kind of navigational tools like signposts or slabposts, or perhaps even a system where villages guide adventurers in place so that the player doesn't easily get lost in these cities?
Will building materials reflect the location of the city and the importance of the building?
I imagine a city on the plains will have mostly brick buildings, with only the city hall and the cathedral made of stone. We just need to get adobe bricks or more charcoal from one log or animal poo fuel, because it'll be easier to build it out of wood now.
Those city designs look crazy awesome! I have to ask though, will we have things like central keeps, inside a second wall?
Also, will the cities get divided into districts? Say a livestock/butchers/tanners section downwind of the city, or cramped and dingy slums/ghettos & more expensive and spacious rich districts?
Also, will there be variations of city layouts beetween different human civilizations? Like, if a civ makes more "organic" looking cities another may make them more rigid (larger roads, no curves, etc.)
How does the building process in world-gen work? Are the large buildings like walls or castles built gradually, segment after segment, or do they just pop into existence overnight? Is there some resource gathering going on? Basically, I'm just wondering if it is possible to encounter a city with unfinished walls, or a castle where just the keep has been finished.
Are all those orange rectangles ALL buildings?
For a city of the size presented, are shops going to be scattered throughout? Is there going to be one great central market? Or little clusters of shops serving different parts of the city?
What models are there governing population growth and decline? Where do you want it to go - a simple and streamlined abstract model of growth and decline based upon a tally of upward population growth forces and downward pressures on populations, or a very gritty and detailed model where every wave of disease is tracked, so that there will be history events of the great city fire of 231?
The problem with that is that starvation doesn't seem to be modelled very well at all - people just keep eating normally right up until there's only food for 30% of them left, and so 70% of the population just sits there and waits to die.
I'm no expert on what a carnivore can or cannot eat (It probably varies between species) but when you get around to getting goblins properly eating in worldgen would any dietary changes have any effect on fortress mode? Or are the checks to see what a civ can eat separate between worldgen and the game modes? Are you satisfied with the goblins' current menu?
the grass raws include now tissues which is nice but could it support more indepth stuff like a simplifyed body-defintion (which would be nice for shrubs too).
Will trees and shrubs ever be expanded on (in terms of the Evil/Good) more so, like grass. We have one Good and one Evil for each, I think, but I it seems we have lots of fantasy-flavored grasses.
When animals get revisited, are we going to be able to designate fodder spaces that get filled? Currently you can't just tie up a grazing animal somewhere and expect it to live long.
Quote from: Captain MaydayHow do Grazing, Hunger, and grass growth work alongside each other?
To be more specific, I can see that the GRAZER:X token allows X hunger to be removed for every unit of grass eaten.
What determines the rate at which hunger increases? Is creature size a factor?
Is a 'unit' of grass simply 1/4 the maximum amount that is growing on a space?
If creature size is a factor in determining rate of hunger, why is there such an enormous difference in how much hunger is removed?Quote from: NW_KohakuThe average creature gets 1 turn every 10 frames, and one of those turns has to be used moving, so any creature with Grazer:19 or less cannot feed itself. An elephant, which only removes 12 hunger per eating of grass, is on a countdown to starvation the instant that hunger is in place.
Are the hardcoded "fire breath", "fireball toss", "dragon fire breath", and "shoot web" behaviours considered complete, or placeholder? I ask because breath attacks and secretions with associated materials have been added. The glittery balls of fire that fire imps toss look pretty, but they don't appear to do anything in arena mode, even if you get hit by dozens. Back in 0.28.181.40d, those balls could be lethal, so the code appears to outdated. Do you intend to merge the hardcoded breath weapons into the material breath system?
Toady, with your mineral veins rework are we gonna see the return of chasms and underground rivers?
For the "explorer/archeologist" adventurer role type... what are the plans for generating ancient ruins and dungeons and so on? Is the ideal something like a random Legend of Zelda, with each room elaborately linked up by your great precursors? Are they going to be anything like the caverns we have today? Or should we expect them to meld into the rest of the world as easily as possible?
will be there a separation between the handling/working of fortress/civilizations relationships and fortress/fair relationship? that is, is in the plans having fair out of fortress control (apart quantity/quality influenced by zones and wealth and stuff like that) and detailed trade agreement between civilizations/important sites (and the keyword here is detailed) or something like that
Are there any plans for an in-fortress economy in the near future (I mean as part of the next few updates)? It's not specifically mentioned on the list but seeing as this is the "caravan arc", i though might be hidden under a larger goal.
When 3D mineral veins are in, how will you know when they go upwards or downwards (without digging stairs everywhere)?
Now that we have bamboo, will we ever be able to chop it down and make bamboo crafts? Currently it is only a grass, which is technically correct, but...
Say, I was thinking of the future multitile trees. Will this mean multiple types of wood from variaous 'tissues' as well?
For instance high quality log, fit for working into anything (or the planks IIRC you mentioned once). and branches/roots (low quality wood/debris), perfect for coalburning, building fences or stuff requiring small bits of wood (bolts, beads etc?).
Quote from: monk12What happens to the hill dwarves when a fortress is abandoned/destroyed?Quote from: nenjinToady: How do you see Fort mode migration waves changing in light of the Hill Dwarf feature, if at all? Would it still be the primary source of new dwarves? Would people migrate to become Hill Dwarves instead of Fort Dwarves?
When the caravans begin to move around the map, will there be caravans for every trade route or caravans that travel along multiple trade routes?
To clarify, if Town A has trade routes with B, C, and D. Will we see three caravans coming and going between the towns or will Town A have a single caravan going to B, C, and D?
Will the caravans be sent by bigger towns going to the smaller towns or will the smaller towns send trade caravans to the bigger towns or will both be possible?
It sounds like there are some geology changes anticipated in Release 2. Is there anything that players could research that would be helpful?
Are you happy with the way Vermin have turned out? Recent updates have brought in very small non-vermin creatures such as rabbits, guinea pigs, chickens, etc. Where does the line fall?
Quote from: DF TalkRainseeker: So there's no poo creatures either?
Toady: It was a close thing! Because it was literally a decision I had to make, going down this list, because in the Hidden Fun Stuff of course if you get the tentacle demons then you get a layer scattered with various filth on the ground; and there's brown filth and yellow filth and so on and it's not clearly stated but it's a material that I had to put in properties for right? So there's these hard-coded filth materials, and when I was going down the list, you know 'Do I want creatures made out of mud? Do I want creatures made out of vomit? Do I want creatures made out of glass?', there's all these hard-coded materials, and I was just like 'Yeah, yeah, yeah ... No ... No ...' on the filth. But there are creatures made out of the grime, and the grime material is the material that collects on your body slowly over time, and it's also the material that's used in swamp water, so there's this ... I just needed this material called 'grime' for these miscellaneous purposes, it's just crap, just stuff that collects over time and when a creature is made out of that it just says 'composed of grime and filth'. So if you want to call that 'poo' even though it's not it's possible for you to extend your imagination.
See also the wiki page on Material Tokens (http://df.magmawiki.com/index.php/Material_token), where they list that brown and yellow filth are indeed one of the few materials that are hardcoded into the game. As in those two materials already exist in the game, it's just that nothing produces them as of yet.
interresting city you have there, would be cool if it weas built on a hill. :)pick a city center
grow outwards until the city is attacked in world gen
encase it in a wall
continue to grow outward.
Excellent idea, but world gen varies enough that different rates of wall-building to different rates of attack would have to be buffered a bit.
To prevent things like
(http://i55.tinypic.com/2laepgg.png)
Thanks for the answers, Toady.
pick a city center
grow outwards until the city is attacked in world gen
encase it in a wall
continue to grow outward.
Excellent idea, but world gen varies enough that different rates of wall-building to different rates of attack would have to be buffered a bit.
To prevent things like
(http://i55.tinypic.com/2laepgg.png)
Oh my Goat! Goblins are autotrophic!
The start situation might involve some notion that links continued play to certain dwarves (one religion, one family, etc.) that takes many of the hill dwarves out of the equation. In that case, perhaps a loss might not involve losing the settlement at all, but I haven't really thought about it much yet.
Good answers Toady.
Although, when were Hilldwarves officialized?
QuoteQuote from: AqizzarChalk me up for another person who think the cities would likely be a bear to navigate, by the current standards of navigation in Adventure Mode.Quote from: UntelligentWhen towns have various important buildings in them and other stuff to do, will there be any plans to prevent intra-city walks from being too long and monotonous?Quote from: darkflagranceWill there be any kind of navigational tools like signposts or slabposts, or perhaps even a system where villages guide adventurers in place so that the player doesn't easily get lost in these cities?
The things we are looking at now are letting people move along roads on the travel map (they already appear there), and where internal walls make that have too small a resolution, to provide a new zoomed-in-3x map splitting the travel map that a resolution appropriate for all city travel. Then there's asking directions. You should not end up having to take 800 steps to get straight across town -- if there is a road without obstacles, it should just be the 15-17 steps on the travel map, and if there's an intervening wall or river, you might have to take ~50 steps on the 3x map. We'll see how these maps interfere with a sense of exploration in new cities, and then uncover them as you move around, perhaps, or limit their use in extreme cases perhaps. In any case, I'm going to try to remain mindful of the annoyances.
Quote from: Jiri PetruHow does the building process in world-gen work? Are the large buildings like walls or castles built gradually, segment after segment, or do they just pop into existence overnight? Is there some resource gathering going on? Basically, I'm just wondering if it is possible to encounter a city with unfinished walls, or a castle where just the keep has been finished.
You can't see anything happen gradually yet. There are stone resource stockpiles, but it doesn't tie into giant constructions yet. Eventually it should work out -- the walls and towers are pretty modular, so having half-constructed buildings that get finished during play outside of view is certainly feasible, though making it happen if you are sitting there staring might not be quite so easy.
Quote from: NW_KohakuWhat models are there governing population growth and decline? Where do you want it to go - a simple and streamlined abstract model of growth and decline based upon a tally of upward population growth forces and downward pressures on populations, or a very gritty and detailed model where every wave of disease is tracked, so that there will be history events of the great city fire of 231?
The problem with that is that starvation doesn't seem to be modelled very well at all - people just keep eating normally right up until there's only food for 30% of them left, and so 70% of the population just sits there and waits to die.
Starvation doesn't work quite that blindly in world gen, but even when they try to save up for hard times and go as far as infanticide (cutting pop growth rate), they can't really forage or disperse right now -- they don't know how to move -- which is when they start to die off. It has all of the food and population tracked numerically, so they just need more methods to deal with unexpected crop failures or missing caravans or overall food shortages. Since it is tracking everything, historical citations of specific instances of famine etc. is just a matter of detecting/adding historical events now when something bad happens over a period of weeks. The new slowness in world gen comes from pushing all of this info around. When we get to disease, I'm sure that'll be tracked site by site, pop by pop, over the years as well.
Quote from: Captain MaydayHow do Grazing, Hunger, and grass growth work alongside each other?
To be more specific, I can see that the GRAZER:X token allows X hunger to be removed for every unit of grass eaten.
What determines the rate at which hunger increases? Is creature size a factor?
Is a 'unit' of grass simply 1/4 the maximum amount that is growing on a space?
If creature size is a factor in determining rate of hunger, why is there such an enormous difference in how much hunger is removed?Quote from: NW_KohakuThe average creature gets 1 turn every 10 frames, and one of those turns has to be used moving, so any creature with Grazer:19 or less cannot feed itself. An elephant, which only removes 12 hunger per eating of grass, is on a countdown to starvation the instant that hunger is in place.
Quote from: UristocratIt sounds like there are some geology changes anticipated in Release 2. Is there anything that players could research that would be helpful?
Hard to say... I'm going to try to add some new overall structures to it, and if people have favorites it might speed things up a bit.
Are you happy with the way Vermin have turned out? Recent updates have brought in very small non-vermin creatures such as rabbits, guinea pigs, chickens, etc. Where does the line fall?
oook it looks like Goblins are going to get more and more supernatural as the game goes on.I think Toady made it pretty clear, that his Gobo do not need to eat, and he has no plans to change.
I have sort of mixed feelings about this.
On one hand Goblins simply do not work as a species in a world of supply and demand since a dangerous population sustained entirely on hunted meat is impossible.
On the other hand Goblins that don't need to eat feels a lot like a cop out to attempt to make them threatening without actually making them threatening (and they are mildly pathetic as it is)
Unless of course Toady was refering to a holdover... hmmm
Toady do you mean Goblins don't need to eat in any future update or that Goblins won't need to eat until you can get it working properly?
oook it looks like Goblins are going to get more and more supernatural as the game goes on.I was wondering about that too. The language made it sound like it was there to stay, but it feels like a complete cop out.
I have sort of mixed feelings about this.
On one hand Goblins simply do not work as a species in a world of supply and demand since a dangerous population sustained entirely on hunted meat is impossible.
On the other hand Goblins that don't need to eat feels a lot like a cop out to attempt to make them threatening without actually making them threatening (and they are mildly pathetic as it is)
Unless of course Toady was refering to a holdover... hmmm
Toady do you mean Goblins don't need to eat in any future update or that Goblins won't need to eat until you can get it working properly?
PowerGoal 111, OFF TO THE LARDER, (Future): The goblins pull an obese child out from under the bed and insult him, saying he isn't fit to a work in the mines before carting him off to the larder.
They are fed by your hatred of elves.And dry up our goblinite mines.
If you find it in yourself to love elves, they will all starve and die.
They are fed by your hatred of elves.And dry up our goblinite mines.
If you find it in yourself to love elves, they will all starve and die.
Do the food production/starvation routines during worldgen factor in any of the actual plant tokens (such as seasons, growdur, etc.)?
I can't wait to get lost in those cities. Way back when I remember Toady saying that he wants you to be able to have a full adventurer without ever having to leave a major city. Wonder what kind of quests will be available... Muggers? Fugitive hunting? Monsters causing trouble in the sewers? Haunted manors need clearing? Pizza delivery?
edit: Any guesses how the city-generation code works? I would like to understand it. I mean i get 90% of the systems behind the simulation more or less But i hadnt time to get into this thing yet. Toady can you help out here?
How long have Toady and Three Toe's portraits on the dev log been on the right? Did that just happen? Because I just now noticed it.
It looks a good bit better this way, I think.
Toady, could not some of these immersive city ideas be delegated through raws? This way, you only need to lay the basics, then add in new content from raw mods that you like at a later date. Seems like a lifetime worth of content for one person to add just inside a city alone.
Quote from: NW_KohakuWill you code in the ability to create our own raw-defined building types for worldgen? Using the Arena Mode and Custom Workshops as a model, we already have most of the pieces to create both custom buildings and define functions for them.
I'm not eager to get into this right now, since I'm not sure what the overall specs need to be and I don't want to tie myself to a raw format early. One of the main things is that I'm not sure I'd be satisfied with static maps of buildings, rather than buildings that are a bit more adaptable. For instance, I'm not sure what raws would look like for the existing temples, which adapt portions of their architecture to the spheres associated to their deities. The raw format would inevitable restrict my ability to do things like that, unless it were really complicated. At the same time, I can see how a modder would want to be able to deviate wildly from what is currently available. It might be most simple to allow static building maps to be used by custom races, but since I won't be using that in vanilla it's difficult to prioritize.
Quote from: B0013Also, will there be variations of city layouts beetween different human civilizations? Like, if a civ makes more "organic" looking cities another may make them more rigid (larger roads, no curves, etc.)
Eventually. First I need to get anything working, and then variety can start to arise, both in the overall layout and in the individual buildings. The number and regularity of intersections, road width, building size etc. is all pretty easy to control now.
It seems to me that a compromise may be to define large scale building types and uses and let the hard code fill the out. So one could say "this civ uses [BUILDING_PLAN:TEMPLE] buildings that have [BUILDING_SPHERE:METAL] and [BUILDING_SPHERE:BY_CIV_PREFRENCE], and it uses them to [BUILDING_USE:MEETING_AREA:ALL], [BUILDING_USE:WORKSHOP:METALWORKING], and [BUILDING_USE:RELIGION:ALL]. Perhaps you might also say [SELECT_CONSTRUCTION_MAT:FLOOR:LOCAL_STONE] and [SELECT_CONSTRUCTION_MAT:WALLS:ANY_METAL].
With enough basic Building plans- they could be anything from sphere-sensitive temples to generic hovels or a variety of workshop plans or castle designs. Then you're free to do anything from making a civ that builds everything with low, adobe buildings to a techie civ with everything made of metal and glass in shiny towers.
well, in most folklore, goblins are faeries of a sort...and thus, nature spirits...i could see this idea as what goblins are more like in dwarf fortress...though, then, they couldnt reproduce...except by "assimilating" others, without technology, more like pod-people, which would explain why they need to abduct people
Because it is a rather large jump for how we understand Dwarf Fortress now.
interresting city you have there, would be cool if it weas built on a hill. :)
While we are talking about composites and content generation: http://designfestival.com/the-cicada-principle-and-why-it-matters-to-web-designers/
Prime numbers beat fractals!
While we are talking about composites and content generation: http://designfestival.com/the-cicada-principle-and-why-it-matters-to-web-designers/
Prime numbers beat fractals!
While we are talking about composites and content generation: http://designfestival.com/the-cicada-principle-and-why-it-matters-to-web-designers/
Prime numbers beat fractals!
While that's a decent summary of an interesting technique for creating "stupid" designs, DF is generally using far better procedural designs that are at least partly "smart". In general, prime-tiled systems are good for making repetitive, unimportant background info look slightly less repetitive; in situations where the material actually matters for gameplay, content-aware procedural generation will give vastly superior results.
The main improvement I'd like to see in the city generator is a focus around what the city is actually *there* for. [...]
make_roads();
make_buildings();
for(int i=0; i<size_of_town; i++){
grow_roads();
grow_buildings();
}
Pardon if this was already asked, but:
Will there be many different city layouts? If so - how many?
Quote from: B0013Also, will there be variations of city layouts beetween different human civilizations? Like, if a civ makes more "organic" looking cities another may make them more rigid (larger roads, no curves, etc.)
Eventually. First I need to get anything working, and then variety can start to arise, both in the overall layout and in the individual buildings. The number and regularity of intersections, road width, building size etc. is all pretty easy to control now.
And second question(not sure if it qualifies as a question or as a suggestion, but here we go):
Also, how many city 'features' will there be? (stuff like markets, wider streets, big manors, etc.)
EDIT:
As to more interesting things to do in cities, I would like to suggest sewers, graveyards(along with crypts and dungeons), cellars under houses, etc.
And maybe multi-store houses(especially the important ones)
Quote from: Osmosis JonesThose city designs look crazy awesome! I have to ask though, will we have things like central keeps, inside a second wall?
Also, will the cities get divided into districts? Say a livestock/butchers/tanners section downwind of the city, or cramped and dingy slums/ghettos & more expensive and spacious rich districts?
I'm not sure when castles will be placed in the towns. It can handle it map-wise, so it's just a matter of time -- world gen would need to respect city+fortress combinations. The cities will have some division to them. I'm not sure if there's going to be a rich/poor distinction until the manor release, and even then I guess it'll be up to the town -- it is my understanding that depending on how property acquisition worked etc., you might have highly integrated towns or towns with separated rich/poor areas. Right now, we just have the division of labor that arises during world gen, which will allow us to divide up the town somewhat based on the workshop types.Quote from: freeformschoolerAre all those orange rectangles ALL buildings?
Yeah -- I haven't done larger buildings or market squares or whatever else, so we just have lots of similar buildings (some of these will have internal walls). It'll be a bit different by the release, but we aren't really going to get into it until taverns/manors/inns a few releases down the line.Quote from: ChthonicFor a city of the size presented, are shops going to be scattered throughout? Is there going to be one great central market? Or little clusters of shops serving different parts of the city?
In the maximal cities presented, there will be at least one giant market, and perhaps some smaller ones -- they'll probably be stalls grouped by type, some permanent. Then there will be shops -- for now, perhaps the majority of the buildings depending on the most prevalent professions.Quote from: freeformschoolerFor the "explorer/archeologist" adventurer role type... what are the plans for generating ancient ruins and dungeons and so on? Is the ideal something like a random Legend of Zelda, with each room elaborately linked up by your great precursors? Are they going to be anything like the caverns we have today? Or should we expect them to meld into the rest of the world as easily as possible?
It's going to be based on what happened in world gen, but some strange things will be added to world gen to make them more interesting -- tombs and prisons, etc., and once a location can be used over time for different purposes, it should be interesting. A given tomb might be sort of weird and Zelda-y in that way, since it can engage in arbitrary trap-and-interesting-thing placement under the guise of keeping out graverobbers and respecting the dead. I think the last two DF Talks had some related Q&A with a bit more detail you can find in the transcripts.
But the houses were not scattered randomly amongst the fields, hundreds of feet apart, with a nice road grid in between them. That's just silly.
The towns in the new post are exciting!
But also a bit disappointing at the same time.
It's now clearly visible that all towns simply plop down a circular web of roads on the map and then start filling it up with buildings. All towns are perfectly circular and look all the same.
There's been a lot of discussion, but about this, but I don't think anyone's asked the question yet;
What's up with sparse outskirt sections of the cities? Is there farming going on out there, and if not, why all the empty space? Are cities ever smaller than a world tile?
I don't really buy that houses were not scattered randomly around fields, if you go walking in England round old farming areas that haven't been significantly developed, you find homes and farms dotted about all over the place, with roads connecting them, within easy walking distance. ???
diverting to the land of nonsense.
diverting to the land of nonsense.
Hyperbole much?
diverting to the land of nonsense.
Hyperbole much?
Heh. But not even dwarves are *that* good at moving earth and stone!interresting city you have there, would be cool if it weas built on a hill. :)
Sounds like Ba Sing Se.
Now where is that Caius Cosades' house?Morrowind didn't have random generated towns..
If were're still taking 1400 like the norm, then there are basically two types of villages,
I don't think the maps will ever be established during world-gen, because that would presumably consume too much resources. The way I see it, worldgen only counts population and the number of buildings to keep it simple. Sites like roads, castles etc. get localised to a map square, but the detailed map isn't actually generated until you visit them in-game for the first time. What I think happens with the cities is that once an adventurer travels there, the game looks at the population, looks at special sites that should be present and the number of buildings and somehow produces a map out of it.
But this shouldn't be a problem, hopefully. Even this retrospective generation can IMHO be fauxed to produce results that look as if they had developed over time.
I think you have some great points about how the towns could evolve through time, but just saying I don't think Toady's pics are as flawed as you're claiming. I've been to plenty of places in Europe (mainly England and France) where there really are solitary (farm) houses every few hundred yards, outlying a nucleated village such as you describe. I could speculate at the logic for that layout, but would rather defer to the more educated, quoted above!
"Two types of villages dominated the European countryside: nucleated and dispersed.
The other point I would like to bring up is the kind of development seen in, for example, this (http://www.bay12games.com/dwarves/imgs/city_37.png) and this (http://www.bay12games.com/dwarves/imgs/city_51.png) screenshot. Look at how the city has grown in those - only one side of the river is being settled (so far), but that side has been built on to it's limit. It looks a bit funny, seeming how people would want to be as close to "fresh" water as possible and should spread out along the river before they start "broadening" it away from the water. It doesn't really look like "natural" growth when it builds mostly on one side first, as it seems to do, judging from the majority of the shots provided.
New city layouts are awesome. Seem to be pretty natural to me. Adding manors and town squares to the mix would make it perfect.
New city layouts are awesome. Seem to be pretty natural to me. Adding manors and town squares to the mix would make it perfect.
Indeed. DF is a Fantasy World Simulator, not a Medieval Cities Generator.
Well, if we assume that DF is modeling the Bad Old Days of Feudalism, then clustering around the keep makes sense- the ability to quickly get inside the keep to safety is much more important than shaving an hour or two off of your walk to work every morning. If goblins and neighboring warlords are showing up to burn things to the ground every few seasons, or even every year or so, then all the buildings will be clustered close to the protection of the castle and its associated military. In short, if you don't feel safe you won't stray far from the keep.
New city layouts are awesome. Seem to be pretty natural to me. Adding manors and town squares to the mix would make it perfect.
Indeed. DF is a Fantasy World Simulator, not a Medieval Cities Generator.
A fantasy world with medieval cities that need some sort of generation to be there...
You can't say you're unappreciative of the new cities, now can you?
New city layouts are awesome. Seem to be pretty natural to me. Adding manors and town squares to the mix would make it perfect.
Indeed. DF is a Fantasy World Simulator, not a Medieval Cities Generator.
A fantasy world with medieval cities that need some sort of generation to be there...
You can't say you're unappreciative of the new cities, now can you?
I'm very happy with the new cities. They don't need to be perfect examples of real medieval cities to fulfil their purpose.
I'm very happy with the new cities. They don't need to be perfect examples of real medieval cities to fulfil their purpose.
In fact, there probably only so much realism that Toady can cram into them at this point. There may be some things that should wait until later on to fix certain qualities of the town. In truth, there are probably things Toady can or already have added that will make it harder for him to expand it later on.
Some thoughts on required stuffs for a working city:
-Square (at least one)
-public official stuff and social gatherings.
-markets (produce from surrounding farmers/fisheries etc,
-a place to locate/cluster public buildings on. (religious, administrative, economic, possibly social like bathhouses)
-statues :)
-fresh water sources. wadeable section/stairs in open water inside city, wells, fountains.
- military buildings like barracks, guardhouses, armouries, etc will likely be located either at outshkirts, near gates, or in a central fortified position within the city.
- industry and trade.
- packhouses, grannaries, storage.
- inns
- shops and workshops
-guildhouses will probably take care of education/science.
-Shops usually have the owner living above them.
-Plantation owners commonly build hovels for their 'employees' near the fields. Plantation owners often build walled manors near their holdings as well.
(I realise much -and more- is already planned and for later dev-cycles at that, so don't bother mentioning that.)
On a different topic than the new awesome cities...
Are we going to have things made from water soluble materials like rock salt and saltpeter degrade and dissolve in the future? Perhaps at a minimum prevent these materials from being used for certain purposes such as making pots which will be exposed to liquids.
iirc the problem was that magma traps and such would be MUCH harder to do (you need to line all your tunnels with magma-proof stuff, yadda yadda) but the water solubility would be nice.
hmm I'm thinking init options :D
On a different topic than the new awesome cities...
Are we going to have things made from water soluble materials like rock salt and saltpeter degrade and dissolve in the future? Perhaps at a minimum prevent these materials from being used for certain purposes such as making pots which will be exposed to liquids.
I would love to see this, along with non-magma safe stone (both natural and contructed stuff) to melt when in contact with magma. This last part could be especially interesting when paired with 3d ore veins of non-magma safe ore. Horizontal lava-tubes, anyone? 8)
you only need to check the walls when the water is spreading, and mark the ones that need to eventually dissolve.
Btw. as this map (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/06/Plan_von_der_Statd_Goerlitz_%28um_1750%29.jpg) shows the these lone buildings out in the fields did exist. If you compare that to the two maps i linked earlyer you can see how the city grows and that toadys estimate isnt that wrong. I think the problem with toadys map is that the divide between town and farmland is a bit to hard.
The other point I would like to bring up is the kind of development seen in, for example, this (http://www.bay12games.com/dwarves/imgs/city_37.png) and this (http://www.bay12games.com/dwarves/imgs/city_51.png) screenshot. Look at how the city has grown in those - only one side of the river is being settled (so far), but that side has been built on to it's limit. It looks a bit funny, seeming how people would want to be as close to "fresh" water as possible and should spread out along the river before they start "broadening" it away from the water. It doesn't really look like "natural" growth when it builds mostly on one side first, as it seems to do, judging from the majority of the shots provided.
This is not actually that unusual; particularly where the river is winding, and the town is situated on the upper side of the river where a bend comes near to the edge of the primary floodplain. One side will be higher, drier ground and a bit better for buildings; the other side will be lower, more frequently flooded ground that is better for farming and grazing. London is the classic example here; the 1300 map of London and surrounding areas of Westminster and Southwark (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:London_1300_Historical_Atlas_William_R_Shepherd_%28died_1934%29.PNG) is instructive. By 1300 London had nearly 100,000 inhabitants, and Westminster upriver and Southwark across the river in the marshes were still considered separate towns.
Another consideration is that crossing a river is likely to be either dangerous or expensive; not something that ordinary folk will want to do every day. Having one or a few folk from the farm paying to ford, ferry, or bridge some of your products to the monthly or maybe even weekly market is probably a reasonable cost of doing business, but it's unlikely even that reduced traffic would be cost-effective daily; and having to "commute" any significant fraction of your stock or personnel would likely be right out in this time period. It would not be uncommon for people to walk several hours to market, but paying rare cash money for a toll (bridge, ferry, etc.) or risking loosing livestock (or yourself) while fording would be something that had to be carefully considered.
The problem is iirc. that the temperature of the magma is uniform thus each tile has the same temperature. This would lead to entire layers melting.
The problem is iirc. that the temperature of the magma is uniform thus each tile has the same temperature. This would lead to entire layers melting.
Easy peasy. Don't have igneous layer stone that isn't magma safe, but ore could very well be. If there is a layer stone that isn't magma safe yet is spawned near magma, it shouldn't melt when you start the map. Rather, it should never generate in that position in the first place! Simple enough to cull during world-gen, I should think.
The problem is iirc. that the temperature of the magma is uniform thus each tile has the same temperature. This would lead to entire layers melting.
Easy peasy. Don't have igneous layer stone that isn't magma safe, but ore could very well be. If there is a layer stone that isn't magma safe yet is spawned near magma, it shouldn't melt when you start the map. Rather, it should never generate in that position in the first place! Simple enough to cull during world-gen, I should think.
The problem arising when you pump the magma to the surface and pour it out onto the battlefield, where it begins melting its way back down to the mantle.
Actually, that shows what I was talking about fairly well - the problem isn't so much that there are houses out there, but the problem is the roads.Might the easiest was to solve this be to have some sort of mechanism that identifies whether or not roads would be used, and destroy them if they are not? Legit question, I'm no programmer.
The roads in the Toady mockup are a grid, as if the city was already being planned out over in the fields.
The roads in the map just stretch past the small clusters of farmhouses and head directly to town. It looks more like a spiderweb, with roads radiating out fo a central point and a cluster of cross-hatched roads in the middle, and then there is just a couple ring roads out beyond that one.
The problem is iirc. that the temperature of the magma is uniform thus each tile has the same temperature. This would lead to entire layers melting.
Easy peasy. Don't have igneous layer stone that isn't magma safe, but ore could very well be. If there is a layer stone that isn't magma safe yet is spawned near magma, it shouldn't melt when you start the map. Rather, it should never generate in that position in the first place! Simple enough to cull during world-gen, I should think.
The problem arising when you pump the magma to the surface and pour it out onto the battlefield, where it begins melting its way back down to the mantle.
Magma should not do this. Think about it. Real world magma is gradually losing heat to the surrounding rock as it approaches the surface. Yes, it melts some rock, but not much--It does far more pushing than actual melting. Unless you want your magma to gradual cool and harden into pumice and lava rock, don't ask for it to melt the walls (even if it did, it wouldn't happen instantly. Melting solid rock takes a much longer time than melting a tinfoil hat. less exposed surface area.)
Actually, that shows what I was talking about fairly well - the problem isn't so much that there are houses out there, but the problem is the roads.Might the easiest was to solve this be to have some sort of mechanism that identifies whether or not roads would be used, and destroy them if they are not? Legit question, I'm no programmer.
The roads in the Toady mockup are a grid, as if the city was already being planned out over in the fields.
The roads in the map just stretch past the small clusters of farmhouses and head directly to town. It looks more like a spiderweb, with roads radiating out fo a central point and a cluster of cross-hatched roads in the middle, and then there is just a couple ring roads out beyond that one.
I'm imagining that, at present, cities claim a certain region of land for "this is my site" early on. External fields are new sites, added as needed. Hence the preplanned look of that city; it has to be, because land is claimed in advance.
Once sites can expand over time, I'm sure cities will do better there.
That said, it's almost unimaginable to me that cities would not be generated during worldgen, but would instead be retroactively created later. That's asking for trouble, because it means a city you've visited as an adventurer will likely develop in a different way over time (once that's implemented) than one you have never visited.
Remember that it's ideal that people will create a world and then play LOTS AND LOTS in that one world, without needing to gen a new one.
As it stands right now, as I remember it, one of Toady's games as an adventurer involved him running away from an alligator to go visit the king of a castle, and get a quest, and when he came back from the quest, the king had been eaten by the alligator, so he recruited all the guards he could from the castle, and went looking for a new castle to get his quests from, because there would never be another king in that castle again. Once something dies, the function it fulfilled is gone forever. The game is built on a massive amount of entropic decay. Societies cannot function, they can only collapse.
...That is really dark.
I am so glad that that's not what the real world is like.
In the real world, behavior like that in DF's AI would never have led to civilization in the first place. It has its ups and downs, but real-life cultures have always generally striven to build and advance. DF cultures do not. They cannot advance, there is no "upward pressure" to innovate or build, and so the "downward pressures" of destruction are completely unopposed, leading to inevitable global extinction.
Killing every living thing (besides vermin) in the entire region is not something epic in this game, it's just hastening the inevitable, completely unopposed entropic decay of a DF world.
Still. Just because that happens now, doesn't mean it will happen in the future. Why write a fancy-pants retroactive town simulator when that entropic decay won't be an issue in the future?
I'm imagining that, at present, cities claim a certain region of land for "this is my site" early on. External fields are new sites, added as needed. Hence the preplanned look of that city; it has to be, because land is claimed in advance.
Once sites can expand over time, I'm sure cities will do better there.
That said, it's almost unimaginable to me that cities would not be generated during worldgen, but would instead be retroactively created later. That's asking for trouble, because it means a city you've visited as an adventurer will likely develop in a different way over time (once that's implemented) than one you have never visited.
Remember that it's ideal that people will create a world and then play LOTS AND LOTS in that one world, without needing to gen a new one.
To an extent, something like that has to be used just to prevent the fact that the player can mess with so many chests, random NPCs, and simply kick over so many chairs or push books off of counters whose positions need to be recorded individually that the save files would become even more horrifically bloated than they already are without them. (Plus, the gameworld is small enough that you would eventually depopulate a pretty wide swath of the world.)
To an extent, something like that has to be used just to prevent the fact that the player can mess with so many chests, random NPCs, and simply kick over so many chairs or push books off of counters whose positions need to be recorded individually that the save files would become even more horrifically bloated than they already are without them. (Plus, the gameworld is small enough that you would eventually depopulate a pretty wide swath of the world.)
Then what about, say, Morrowind? You could store anything pretty much anywhere and it would stay put.
Morrowind was also problematic - there was a major bug that meant the game would be unplayable after certain periods of time because certain characters would gradually "shift" in their positions over time, eventually moving through walls in interior cells where they would become inaccessible. See: http://www.uesp.net/wiki/Morrowind:Glitches#Moving_NPCs
Also, there are problems with that game's saves - go too long without saving and reloading, and the game crashes because of a memory overflow. Also, if you save too many times, the game starts having load errors. See: http://www.uesp.net/wiki/Tes3Mod:Engine_Bugs#Savegame-related_bugs
Beyond that, Oblivion simply was a game with more things to save, IIRC. It used the game engine that let it throw random bits and pieces of objects like carrots and books and cups all over the floor. Tracking the facing and location of each individual radish and fork on random farmer's dining room table adds up to a lot of data in a larger gameworld than Morrowind was tracking.
Btw. as this map (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/06/Plan_von_der_Statd_Goerlitz_%28um_1750%29.jpg) shows the these lone buildings out in the fields did exist. If you compare that to the two maps i linked earlyer you can see how the city grows and that toadys estimate isnt that wrong. I think the problem with toadys map is that the divide between town and farmland is a bit to hard.
As for destruction of property and rebuilding of property i guess you could modulalise it or something. So when a city map is genned, the game could gen several alternate states for said city. It could gen 4 size expansion maps, and 4 ruined versions of the city (far more than this could be genned, this is simply an example). WHen a city goes past a threshold in population or wealth the next phase could simply be loaded from these original gens. This would be very un organic but it would be simple and presumably take less space than a truely organic system, where the state of every building/item is tracked. You could add detail to such a system by giving certain structures within the city several versions which they could move between depending on whether they had been upgraded, or sacked etc.
Can new cities be created after world gen in the current version? Perhaps the game could do a simulation update at the end of every X number of years and add new settlements if some prequisits were fulfilled. Presumably updating the simulation is what is needed for kings to be replaced etc, and entropy to be defeated.
From the way he worded his devlog posts, I think we'll still see cities that are more like the ones in the first set of screenshots than the second set.
EDIT: I just realized the last screenshot from the second set looks a lot like what I was thinking of in the first line up there. So yeah, we'll be seeing those still.
Spoilerite does become boring after a while. I want blue diamonds dammit! and no matter how much I cheat with material scarcity set to 100 and dfprospector and dfreveal, I can't find any. :( I want to believe that the reason for risking an encounter with the dark ones down below, is because of the a large amount of highly varied mineral wonders.
Morrowind was also problematic - there was a major bug that meant the game would be unplayable after certain periods of time because certain characters would gradually "shift" in their positions over time, eventually moving through walls in interior cells where they would become inaccessible. See: http://www.uesp.net/wiki/Morrowind:Glitches#Moving_NPCs
Haha, I remember this. Not sure why that's a necessary aspect of the system, though... sounds like just a weirdass solvable bug to me.
Morrowind was also problematic - there was a major bug that meant the game would be unplayable after certain periods of time because certain characters would gradually "shift" in their positions over time, eventually moving through walls in interior cells where they would become inaccessible. See: http://www.uesp.net/wiki/Morrowind:Glitches#Moving_NPCs
Haha, I remember this. Not sure why that's a necessary aspect of the system, though... sounds like just a weirdass solvable bug to me.
Sounds like the whole GIS positional accuracy problem. When you store a location as a real number it has a certain amount of precision. If your location in reality, does not happen to lie exactly on a spot of this position (imagine a grid of very high resolution, that is your precision, even in a vector storage system), you get rounded to the nearest spot. If you are repeatedly compared/intersected/otherwise interacted with other objects undergoing the same rounding you might get a systematic error (drift).
Neither one of these should be problems in DF due to it's grid system and lack of static animations. Even if they do wander, it won't be due north.
Hehe well lets make some bug-predictions then for the citys. ^^ its a tradition in here before the feature releases anyway.
carp will depopulate a city
Z and X will be occasionally swapped, causing horizontal cities complete with NPCs plunging hundreds of feet down roads before splattering against shack walls.
Megabeast lairs will be in the cities.
Well we are here on something i think. Many citys has its own creatures - good and evil. New York has its crocodiles (and daleks), Prague has skeletons walking certain streets not to mention the Golem, my hometown has (among others) a demonic Monk, a headless Gravedigger, and a restless smith. It doesnt has to be megabeasts but some trolls and asorted creatures and beings might be neat. It would be neat thought if some were still made up hehe.
edit: And dont forget Ankou on every graveyard.
Well we are here on something i think. Many citys has its own creatures - good and evil. New York has its crocodiles (and daleks), Prague has skeletons walking certain streets not to mention the Golem, my hometown has (among others) a demonic Monk, a headless Gravedigger, and a restless smith. It doesnt has to be megabeasts but some trolls and asorted creatures and beings might be neat. It would be neat thought if some were still made up hehe.
edit: And dont forget Ankou on every graveyard.
A titan that has a religious following living in a city, or better yet, a temple built to that titan? Good idea for some city flavor.
People building their city on top of a titan's front doorstep, so that the instant a player starts a game in a random city, he's in the middle of a titan's rampage? Obvious bug.
First, the Romans did not invent sewers. Many ancient civilizations, including the Babylonians had them. There have even been some evidence of small sewer systems in Scotland dating back to 3000 BC.
The Roman system was not always underground. The first sewers were simply open trenches that led to the Tiber River. It was not until around 300 BC that the first underground sewers were built. The main purpose at that time was to carry away runoff rain water from storms. Romans still through their waste into the streets. However, regular street cleanings washed the waste down into the sewers and kept things relatively clean.
After the Empire collapsed, the sewers, which were basically just rock enclosed river beds, continued to be used for centuries. It was not until the 1840's that they began to get updated in any serious way. However, most of the ancient system remained in continuous use.
Many of the larger medieval cities of Europe had some sort of sewage system. Even though they did not understand the health issues, the smell of human sewage was enough to encourage such systems wherever large numbers of people lived together. Paris, for example, had a sewage system by the 1200's and built its first underground system in the 1370's.
storm sewers would make it harder for a player to close up the city wall and flood a city, but i suppose we could just wall up the outflow.
-House In RiverDoes it count as a prediction if it already happens?
Z and X will be occasionally swapped, causing horizontal cities
Well, a little google-fu reveals this: http://en.allexperts.com/q/General-History-674/Sewers.htmQuoteFirst, the Romans did not invent sewers. Many ancient civilizations, including the Babylonians had them. There have even been some evidence of small sewer systems in Scotland dating back to 3000 BC. ...
Mohenjo-daro is located in Sindh, Pakistan on a Pleistocene ridge in the middle of the flood plain of the Indus River Valley. The ridge is now buried by the flooding of the plains, but was prominent during the time of the Indus Valley Civilization. The ridge allowed the city to stand above the surrounding plain. The site occupies a central position between the Indus River valley on the west and the Ghaggar-Hakra river on the east. The Indus still flows to the east of the site, but the Ghaggar-Hakra riverbed is now dry.So one of the most successful large early cities planetwide was at the intersection of a huge river trade network (the Indus valley), and another river system, situated on a geographically prominent ridge. The more I research, the more I'm convinced that the basic recipe for a successful early major city is to place it on (comparatively) high ground along a major river, around or near some other significant trade feature... another river, the ocean, an overland caravan route, etc.
...
Anthropogenic construction over the years was precipitated by the need for more room. The ridge was expanded via giant mud brick platforms. Ultimately, the settlement grew to such proportions that some buildings reached 12 meters above the level of the modern plain, and therefore much higher than this above the ancient plain.
Mohenjo-daro has a planned layout based on a street-grid of rectilinear buildings. Most are of fired and mortared brick; some incorporate sun dried mud-brick and wooden superstructures. The sheer size of the city, and its provision of public buildings and facilities, suggests high levels of social organisation. At its peak of development, Mohenjo-Daro could have housed around 35,000 residents.
The city had a central marketplace, with a large central well. Individual households or groups of households obtained their water from smaller wells. Waste water was channeled to covered drains that lined the major streets. Some houses, presumably those of wealthier inhabitants, include rooms that appear to have been set aside for bathing, and one building had an underground furnace (hypocaust), possibly for heated bathing. Most house have inner courtyards, with doors that opened onto side-lanes. Some buildings were two-storeyed.
...
Close to the "Great Granary" is a large and elaborate public bath, sometimes called the Great Bath. From a colonnaded courtyard, steps lead down to the brick-built pool, which was waterproofed by a lining of bitumen. The pool is large – 12m long, 7m wide and 2.4m deep. It may have been used for religious purification.
...
Mohenjo-daro had no circuit of city walls but was otherwise well fortified, with towers to the west of the main settlement, and defensive fortifications to the south.
...
The city is divided into two parts, the so-called Citadel and the Lower City. Most of the Lower City is yet to be uncovered, but the Citadel is known to have the public bath, a large residential structure designed to house 5,000 citizens and two large assembly halls.
The sewers, covered with a vault of tightly fitted stones, have room in some places for hay wagons to drive through them.The main failing in the overuse of the Absurdly Spacious Sewer (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/AbsurdlySpaciousSewer) trope isn't that they didn't exist (see the extensive Real Life section on that page for some more examples), it's that they were historically a rare feature of the world's major cities only. Too many video games put a Paris-scale catacombs + sewer under some tiny starting town.
The main failing in the overuse of the Absurdly Spacious Sewer (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/AbsurdlySpaciousSewer) trope isn't that they didn't exist (see the extensive Real Life section on that page for some more examples), it's that they were historically a rare feature of the world's major cities only. Too many video games put a Paris-scale catacombs + sewer under some tiny starting town.
The main failing in the overuse of the Absurdly Spacious Sewer (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/AbsurdlySpaciousSewer) trope isn't that they didn't exist (see the extensive Real Life section on that page for some more examples), it's that they were historically a rare feature of the world's major cities only. Too many video games put a Paris-scale catacombs + sewer under some tiny starting town.
Eh, it can work in fantasy games that have a LOOOONG history behind them, where even a dinky town might have been built on ancient ruins (hey! free plumbing!).
Yeah, I'm actually really confused by that, as I can think of no Square-specific examples. I've played FF 1, 4, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, Tactics, and Mystic Quest... I've got nothing.
Secret of Evermore, maybe?... I don't remember that one so clearly, but I think it was in there.
... I'm still confused. Some of those games you list are straight high fantasy, like 1(http://img.ie/ac206.gif)
Quote from: UristocratIt sounds like there are some geology changes anticipated in Release 2. Is there anything that players could research that would be helpful?
Hard to say... I'm going to try to add some new overall structures to it, and if people have favorites it might speed things up a bit.
You need to be well off to have enough free time to be evil. (also small farming villages can MORE then be evil... even outside of the horror genre)*ahem* http://www.classicshorts.com/stories/lotry.html
You need to be well off to have enough free time to be evil. (also small farming villages can MORE then be evil... even outside of the horror genre)*ahem* http://www.classicshorts.com/stories/lotry.html
What? I am the first one?dammit, you ninja!
Happy birthday Toady!
Spoiler: Streets in farmland, now (click to show/hide)Spoiler: Streets in farmland, better (?) (click to show/hide)
I removed part of roads to change road graph into tree. It can be addition to existing implementation.
Why would you voluntarily create road trees and blind alleys? The very purpose of roads is that they enable people getting from somewhere to somewhere else - in case of the farms, the roads should offer a straight and simple connection to the town. Even Toady's original roads were too twisted and nonsensical, why would you complicate them even more?
These roads should not look like a grid in any way
There's lots of other explanations for that bridge, though. Maybe that area used to be more connected, but it was destroyed by a fire and rebuilt oddly. Maybe there was going to be something big built there, but it wasn't. I've seen plenty of really oddly-placed roads and bridges like that...
The 'little bridge' issue isn't really about the bridge itself -- roads and bridges in general should be shoddier when they're serving fewer people. Eventually the game will probably detect that, at which point it'll realize that a bridge like that only serves one person, and make it appropriately small and rickety (along with little dirt roads rather than big paved ones.) But the same argument applies to every road everywhere on that map; that bridge is just an obvious case. They all need to be scaled appropriately for the role they're serving. Obviously not every bridge should be the Brooklyn Bridge, but that's a separate issue.
There's lots of other explanations for that bridge, though. Maybe that area used to be more connected, but it was destroyed by a fire and rebuilt oddly. Maybe there was going to be something big built there, but it wasn't. I've seen plenty of really oddly-placed roads and bridges like that...
The 'little bridge' issue isn't really about the bridge itself -- roads and bridges in general should be shoddier when they're serving fewer people. Eventually the game will probably detect that, at which point it'll realize that a bridge like that only serves one person, and make it appropriately small and rickety (along with little dirt roads rather than big paved ones.) But the same argument applies to every road everywhere on that map; that bridge is just an obvious case. They all need to be scaled appropriately for the role they're serving. Obviously not every bridge should be the Brooklyn Bridge, but that's a separate issue.
Putting your point in slightly different language: it's kind of silly to complain about that bridge being the same size as all other bridges when there's currently only a single size for roads and bridges. Eventually, there may very well be different sizes, which will be nice. But right now there aren't, and so having a less used bridge the same size as a more used bridge is to be expected.
Also, while it probably won't happen—because it probably isn't of interest to enough people to justify the work that goes into it—it would be neat to see a system of property ownership arise, particularly one that takes advantage of how the land gets used depending on the owner's personality. If a certain disliked landowner is surrounded by other landowners with a grudge against her, she may very well not be able to get an easement to build a road across any particular chunk of land. Thus, building the bridge might be the only option left for her. However, if that landowner is a child of the local warlord, the warlord might be able to seize the neighboring land and either turn it over to the disliked landowner, or just seize enough land to build a road.
This, in turn, could lead to interesting politics, as landowners band together to combat the warlord and the warlord's disliked daughter in either legitimate (try to gain the warlord's favor by giving him gifts), or illegitimate (sponsor a coup, or try to make it appear as if the warlord's own daughter is sponsoring a coup, or even just hire bandits to distract the warlord from internal politics) means.
One problem Kohaku is that all rivers are basically streams or creeks rather then anything one would call a river. So people arn't really going to brand it an outright bug since by all means a small bridge to get into a single nondescript house happens in reality.
Also because of how the game handles resources... the roof of the shack they call a house costs more then the bridge.
No, it's silly to defend the bridge as possibly having some other purpose when there can be no other purpose right now.
Sure, you can make a bridge out of some sort of purposeful modeling of government waste or a personally wealthy merchant who just wants a personal bridge for show... but to do that, you have to actually model in government waste, and make the game recognize the difference between being waste and just being stupid AI.
If you don't do that, it's just AI that doesn't recognize what it's doing, and you're just making up stories to try to rationalize a bug.
One problem Kohaku is that all rivers are basically streams or creeks rather then anything one would call a river. So people arn't really going to brand it an outright bug since by all means a small bridge to get into a single nondescript house happens in reality.
Also because of how the game handles resources... the roof of the shack they call a house costs more then the bridge.
and you're just making up stories to try to rationalize a bug.
Also I don't see any reason whatsover to remove a bridge as awesome as that.
There is still a lot of work to do.
Of course we need to remember that is is fantasy. If dwarves can build magma cannons and monstrous adding machines in their spare time, some human hobbyist can probably afford to build a bridge or two.
One problem Kohaku is that all rivers are basically streams or creeks rather then anything one would call a river. So people arn't really going to brand it an outright bug since by all means a small bridge to get into a single nondescript house happens in reality.
Also because of how the game handles resources... the roof of the shack they call a house costs more then the bridge.
that would *not* have been a casual sort of construction; even now, this is not usually the sort of thing a few people throw up for the heck of it.
You know what would be cool? If the game used the bridges already there and made variations between them - like you would have only one stone bridge in town, but a couple of ferries and perhaps a floating footbridge here and there.Or if it varied based on location. The bridges of Venice are not much like the bridges of London, after all. And things can vary more than architectural differences. Perhaps in one city every road has a grand stone bridge. Perhaps in another there is only one bridge in the entire city, but the houses are built over the river so far that they almost touch so people just walk from the roof of one house to another. Even in small towns and farmsteads, one place could toss logs across the creek, one could place stones.
It's characteristic of procedural generation is that you can get complex and organic looking outcomes like that without modeling things like government waste, the same way you can get interesting looking mountain ranges without modeling plate tectonics. As long as the result is plausible (the point Aquillion spoke to), that complexity is one of the whole benefits of doing things procedurally.
and you're just making up stories to try to rationalize a bug.
Haven't DF players been doing that for years?
Also I don't see any reason whatsover to remove a bridge as awesome as that.
It's characteristic of procedural generation is that you can get complex and organic looking outcomes like that without modeling things like government waste, the same way you can get interesting looking mountain ranges without modeling plate tectonics. As long as the result is plausible (the point Aquillion spoke to), that complexity is one of the whole benefits of doing things procedurally.
And once again, you're missing the part about how there has to be some sort of story or reason behind purposeful waste.
When it's a random person building a massive bridge across a river just because this game doesn't yet handle architecture or how to build bridges very well, then we're just making the game look laughable and unrealistic when Toady has clearly worked hard to make the game look realistic and organic.
The cities more or less show up in tiles now, and I've been fiddling with storm sewers under the paved roads for the last few days. They should be entertaining adventure environments, especially if the people forget to grate off the outflow and critters get in from the river.ooooh yeah! awesome!
I'd still rather have the possibility of bridges like that than not have the possibility of bridges like that. Especially if there's no good, reasonable reason to put it there. Just because it's a bug or a flaw in some procedural generator does not mean it needs to be removed or fixed, especially if it adds to the flavor of the game.
No matter how lofty its goals are, the game is never going to be able to fully model all of the things that make humans inefficient and chaotic, especially in something as big and as convoluted as city planning.
So it's not only all-right but desirable for the city-planning algorithm to occasionally make odd decisions. Ideally, yes, it would model everything leading up to those odd decisions, but that's not going to be feasible in all cases.
A random road that has an inefficient path? Fine, it's stupid and gamey, but you could at least see someone clearing a dirt path in an odd direction.
A massive engineering project? No. Those were things of great import, and were done only when it would be proven to be very economically lucrative to build.
The problem with this is that you are completely discounting how massive a project bridge-building is.
Miuramir just went to great lengths to demonstrate how much trouble it is for a medieval society to build a bridge, and how costly they are.
It is not a matter of placing 1 stone for every three tiles of bridge, that's a game mechanic, and it is blatantly unrealistic. Real bridges were serious endeavors that cost significant sums of cash, and were not taken lightly.
A random road that has an inefficient path? Fine, it's stupid and gamey, but you could at least see someone clearing a dirt path in an odd direction.
A massive engineering project? No. Those were things of great import, and were done only when it would be proven to be very economically lucrative to build.
Right now, all you're arguing is that bugs that reveal how unrealistic the game that Toady has worked so hard to try to make realistic is actually a good thing, and shouldn't be fixed.
Also not all bridges were magnificant awe inspiring bridges.Aye, this is a good point.
I don't see why I shouldn't set up a massive industrial mermaid harvesting thing just because Toady thinks dwarves wouldn't do that.
I don't see why I shouldn't set up a massive industrial mermaid harvesting thing just because Toady thinks dwarves wouldn't do that.you are free to mod that. you can also mod dwarves to be cannibalistic, but toady thinks dwarves wouldn't do that, so he turned it off on their ethics
The problem with this is that you are completely discounting how massive a project bridge-building is.
Miuramir just went to great lengths to demonstrate how much trouble it is for a medieval society to build a bridge, and how costly they are.
It is not a matter of placing 1 stone for every three tiles of bridge, that's a game mechanic, and it is blatantly unrealistic. Real bridges were serious endeavors that cost significant sums of cash, and were not taken lightly.
A random road that has an inefficient path? Fine, it's stupid and gamey, but you could at least see someone clearing a dirt path in an odd direction.
A massive engineering project? No. Those were things of great import, and were done only when it would be proven to be very economically lucrative to build.
We already have a way to explain naturally higher dwarven architecture, masonry, forging etc. skills: the natural skill tag in the raws allows all members of a race to start with higher levels in certain skills. I imagine that when dwarves are no longer the primary race and humans/elves are playable too, the natural skill tags will be invoked to differentiate the playing experiences of the various races.Speaking of the other races; who else is really looking forward to what dwarf/goblin/elf (/kobold?) sites are going to look like? Seeing this phase of the game come together is really exciting.
what about those bridges some cities have with a load of houses ON the bridge so you don't even notice you're on a bridge not just a normal street when you're walking over it?
"The U.S. Interstate Highway System uses a 12-foot (3.7 m) standard for lane width. 11-foot (3.4 m) lanes are found to be acceptable by the Federal Highway Administration for automobile traffic, but as lane width decreases (9-foot (2.7 m) lanes are found in some areas) traffic capacity decreases. ... In the United Kingdom, many lanes are found in the countryside, and most of these lanes are wide enough for one car at a time and often have a lay by for cars to pass. In general, European laws and road width vary per country, with the minimum widths of lanes being anywhere between 2.5 m to 3.25 m"
"Historian James Crow, writing about Housesteads (http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/3d/houstead.shtml), the 3rd century Roman fort built along Hadrian's Wall, notes that:QuoteThe wheel rut and gate stop in the north passage are well preserved, and a number of reused stone blocks formed part of the latest surface to survive. The gauge between the ruts is very similar to that adopted by George Stephenson for the Stockton to Darlington railway in 1837, and a 'Wall myth' developed that he took this gauge from the newly excavated east gate. There is a common link, but it is more prosaic, and the 'coincidence' is explained by the fact that the dimension common to both was that of a cart axle pulled by two horses in harness (about 1.4m or 4ft 8in). This determined both the Roman gauge and Stephenson's, which derived from the horsedrawn wagon ways of South Northumberland and County Durham coalfields.
Another, perhaps even simpler, take that would quickly result in increased realism of both the worldgen and fortress mode bridges would be to have a third type of bridge, "static", that works identically to the existing types do when down, but cannot be linked to a lever to raise it. Additionally, the materials requirement and construction time for bridges would go up non-linearly with length; a bridge 10 dwarf-squares long should be considerably more than five times as hard as one 2 dwarf-squares long. Note that when you look at it from a DF view, the Untertorbrücke is really three 8 dwarf-square long static bridges between columns (and originally had an additional several square long raising drawbridge off the end as part of the fortifications, now filled in), because they were unable to span it with two 12 square bridges.
One fairly interesting way to handle both the default DF world and various mods would be to have the material and design requirements for a static bridge based on the compressive strength of the material selected; and the material and design requirements for a retracting or raising bridge based on the tensile strength of the material selected, in addition to a cumulative length factor. By relatively easy tuning of only three or four new numerical parameters per world (in one of the raw files), and the use of existing material information, you could very quickly get something with very interesting results. Hiring dwarves with access to iron or steel suddenly becomes even more valuable if you want that trendy fireproof raising drawbridge. The infamous soap constructions would become far less practical by default, yet those wanting a much sillier fantasy world could either increase the stats on soap, or reduce the material-strength-factor value for their world in the raws. (It could be argued that many fantasy world constructions and illustrations can be rationally explained by a combination of having a much lower exponent for material strength, and ready access to Legendary Architects; all those slender spires and leaping stone arches simply fall out of a couple of equation parameter changes, in a triumph of procedural design.)
Having the human wagons be 2 squares wide would also let them be pulled by two draft animals side-by-side, which is a pretty standard configuration for a wagon (to the point where it generated the width of "Standard" gauge, as cited in your post).
vampires is one of the things i definitely don't want in df
Why not? I don't mean sissy modern sparkly vampires, but medieval shambling fanged, clawed, horse-frightening light-fearing OCD stakeable creatures. Maybe with partially randomised vampire traits.undead night creatures with potential random traits, being bloodsucking one of them are okay in my book, but not vampires. they're not that medieval, actually.
i dislike the idea of a vampire as a defined creature with specified weaknesses and traits, as that often wasn't the case with folkloric monsters. and also, while many creatures were described as being of vampiric nature, the word "vampire" is very recent, and probably just meant "undead" or "witch\ogre" in it's original incarnation
Why not? I don't mean sissy modern sparkly vampires, but medieval shambling fanged, clawed, horse-frightening light-fearing OCD stakeable creatures. Maybe with partially randomised vampire traits.
[NOCTURNAL]
[LIKES_COUNTING]
[PREY:ALL:COMMON_DOMESTIC]
[SPECIFIC_WEAKNESS:SEED_MAT:MUSTARD]
[ALTFORM:MIST:BAT:RAT:SPIDER:WOLF]
[SYNDROME:TUBERCULOSIS]
i dislike the idea of a vampire as a defined creature with specified weaknesses and traits, as that often wasn't the case with folkloric monsters. and also, while many creatures were described as being of vampiric nature, the word "vampire" is very recent, and probably just meant "undead" or "witch\ogre" in it's original incarnation
Yeah, one thing I've noticed about medieval legends is that they are not consistent with this sort of faux-scientific taxonomy we use today. There weren't as much well-defined "vampires", "werewolves", "goblins" and so forth; the concepts were wishy-washy, varied a lot depending on region and decade, and so on. Things weren't so set in stone.
IIrc the Witch and to lesser extend the werewolf (as a form of witchcraft by usage of wolffurs and belts etc.) were fairly well described in the Malleus Maleficarum and influenced good parts of europe.
Vampires as such as well as many wer- creatures (and dragons) exist in many cultures but were very diverse even before the advent of modern media and taximony.
If you have night creatures or procedural undead with procedural weaknesses, though... how do you know what those weaknesses are?
An integral part of those creatures in folklore are their weaknesses, and stories of vampires go hand-in-hand with the stories of what they are weak against.
So how does the player get access to the information on a whatever creatures' weaknesses? Do adventurers hear about them in taverns from strange old men with one giant bug eye huddled over in the corners of taverns?
What about fortresses, if these things lurk in caverns or something? Do they just append the description of the creature with "beware its venomous breath, but strike it down with breath mints!"?
What i am exited about is that if toady works on the undead again they may work in a proper way soon. Thus skelletons etc. may loose theyr "hp".Oh yes, I forgot about this. Working out the 'how to kill a skeleton without just giving it fixed hp' problem would be ace, pretty much #1 on my list of undead improvements. Every skeleton I hit as an adventurer evaporates at the moment, and it's almost as bad in fortress mode.
With the construction of sewers drawing to an end comes the beginnings of catacombs. These will twist and turn and mix with other underground structures creating fertile ground for quests and adventuring.
How would you feel if your loved one was chopped to pieces then incinerated instead of getting a proper funeral ?
How would you feel if your loved one was chopped to pieces then incinerated instead of getting a proper funeral ?
To many cultures, that is a proper funeral. Cremation exists in the real world, as do funeral pyres and that sort of thing.
How will night creature creature weaknesses, important ways to deal with specific monsters, making sure they're permanently dead, etc. be dealt with? Especially for night creatures way out in savage lands where nobody's heard of them and information-gathering might not be possible?
I love the sound of catacombs. One question sticks in my mind:
In a world where undead exist, why would anyone bury their dead at all? Why not just chuck everyone in the crematorium?
I'd love there to be a thematic or logical reason, you understand.
I love the sound of catacombs. One question sticks in my mind:We already know the answer to this from Dwarf Mode. Burning them yields ghosts. It's undoubtedly much easier to just chuck the bodies in a glorified cellar and bolt the door so they stay there. Ghosts can pass through walls, zombies can't.
In a world where undead exist, why would anyone bury their dead at all? Why not just chuck everyone in the crematorium?
I'd love there to be a thematic or logical reason, you understand.
I'd like to see weaknesses and such be procedurally generated, but unique to monster type. So all the hags are weak to oak wood, and the trolls hate honey, or whatever. Of course, right now I think that each individual night creature is unique compared to all the rest, so unless we get one super-successful night creature that takes enough mates and sires enough children to perpetuate itself (a la Dracula), then we have to deal with the odd fact that the peasants somehow know how to defeat the night creature, but are unable to do it themselves.
If monster types do end up being the way Toady goes (or the successful single night creature posited above), then you have the justification that some folk hero has killed one before, and therefore everyone knows the story. This leads to the situation where all the villagers just know that if you carry holly berries around on your person the local monster won't bother you- unfriendly little towns may withhold this information in order to dispose of unwelcome foreigners who wouldn't know the custom. This could lead to the quasi-symbiotic situation where the villagers are afforded some measure of protection from bandits and the like because the outsiders do not know how to defeat the monster, and since this is beneficial to the villagers they never tell outsiders how to defeat it, which helps the monster kill new victims.
I really hope Toady actually reads at least part of this great discussion and suggesting.fixed?
other roguelikes are all about weaknesses. You need intrinsics to stand a chance of surival in nethack, and exploiting monsters weaknesses to fire etc is essential. The danger with this approach is that you need to spend loads of time collecting a kit together to go on your adventures (this isnt necessarily a bad thing but id defo makes the game even less casual and more research necessary).
I support any ideas of giving specific creatures some sort of weakness to certain equipment as well as moves etc. It would give silver weapons, wooden weapons, and potentially carp leather amulets another dimension in the game. If bogey men were afraid of carp leather (for bogey men they could get an extreme random dislike of one material) they might not approach within 1 square of any creature wearing that material.
I know I can't be the only one that's brought this up before, but why in the heck isn't pyrite usable as an ore of iron? It's well known to be one of the primary ores of iron in the real world.
Pyrite enjoyed brief popularity in the 16th and 17th centuries as a source of ignition in early firearms, most notably the wheellock, where the cock held a lump of pyrite against a circular file to strike the sparks needed to fire the gun.
Pyrite has been used since classical times to manufacture copperas, or iron sulfate. Iron pyrite was heaped up and allowed to weather as described above (an early form of heap leaching). The acidic runoff from the heap was then boiled with iron to produce iron sulfate. In the 15th century, oil of vitriol (sulfuric acid) was manufactured either from copperas or by burning sulfur to sulfur dioxide and then converting that to sulfuric acid. By the 19th century, the dominant method was to burn iron pyrite.[15]
Pyrite remains in commercial use for the production of sulfur dioxide, for use in such applications as the paper industry, and in the manufacture of sulfuric acid. Thermal decomposition of pyrite into FeS (iron sulfide) and elemental sulfur starts at 550 °C; at around 700 °C pS2 is about 1 atm.[16]
Pyrite is a semiconductor material with band gap of 0.95 eV.[17]
During the early years of the 20th century, pyrite was used as a mineral detector in radio receivers, and is still used by 'crystal radio' hobbyists. Until the vacuum tube matured, the crystal detector was the most sensitive and dependable detector available- with considerable variation between mineral types and even individual samples within a particular type of mineral. The most sensitive mineral was galena, which was very sensitive also to mechanical vibration, and easily knocked off the sensitive point; the most stable were perikon mineral pairs; and midway between was the pyrites detector, which is approximately as sensitive as a modern 1N34A diode detector.[18][19]
Pyrite has been proposed as an abundant,inexpensive material in low cost photovoltaic solar panels.[20] Synthetic iron sulfide is used with copper sulfide to create the experimental photovoltaic material.[21]
Pyrite is used to make marcasite jewelry (incorrectly termed marcasite). Marcasite jewelry, made from small faceted pieces of pyrite, often set in silver, was popular in the Victorian era.[22]
Pardon my eventual poor grammar, but I'm too lazy to spellcheck it(I spent a lot of time writing this, I have no intention of spending even more on correcting it to sound well).This seems a strange approach to take.
As for vampires, I like their representation in The Witcher(the books, not the game) - they actually come from another dimension to which a rift was briefly opened long ago by magic, and there are many kinds of them:no thanks. why would ripping vampires from crappy fiction be better than base them on actual folklore?
As for vampires, I like their representation in The Witcher(the books, not the game) - they actually come from another dimension to which a rift was briefly opened long ago by magic, and there are many kinds of them:no thanks. why would ripping vampires from crappy fiction be better than base them on actual folklore?
Of course these are just examples, but I would really like to see more kinds of vampires in game - a human-like Nosferatu that the player could eventually even make an ally of(by finding out where a one is, you know, gossip about a strange man that dogs bark at, people with fang marks on their necks, but no casaulties, etc.), some lower, brutal vampires assaulting mainly animals living near villages or in sewers, rich nobles having Bruxes as mistresses and perhaps some other kind of higher vampire that could create new vampires(although perhaps need some special ritual and be limited to one or two in lifetime, so the world does not become full of vampires - perhaps one or two dozens per city on average(with cities with no vampires and ones with tons) forming a strict hierarchy based on who created who)
Seccond, I kinda dislike nethackish adventurer which carries tons of junk around to deal with everything. Gathering said junk can become major checklist pita. (shark leather item against boogey men, check. diamonds against horned women, check, silver whip against ghouls, check ... )
Well, monsters in Dwarf Fortress are rare. In generic roguelike, you kill dozens of monsters per minute. In Dwarf Fortress, you spend a lot of time wandering from town to town and finding a monster's lair and then killing one monster. They are so uncommon they could very well all have distinct disadvantages without you having to have a bloated inventory.
In fact, anything that makes monsters a bit more different from a random goblin is good.
As for my own take, I think weaknesses would be fun as long as one thought is borne in mind: With enough firepower, anything should be removed from the material world. If it is weak against garlic, and I have garlic, cool. If it's weak against garlic, and I have an axe, I should be able to have a shot at mangling it until it's no longer able to physically exist.
Even things like trolls that regenerate unless you kill them with fire or acid should eventually stop regenerating if you chop it into kindling and then mash the kindling into paste enough times. EVENTUALLY, its energy supply or food supply or whatever will run out, and it should just plain starve to death after you keep mashing it into a finer and finer paste faster than it can heal.
Also,As for my own take, I think weaknesses would be fun as long as one thought is borne in mind: With enough firepower, anything should be removed from the material world. If it is weak against garlic, and I have garlic, cool. If it's weak against garlic, and I have an axe, I should be able to have a shot at mangling it until it's no longer able to physically exist.
I definitely agree with this.
Even things like trolls that regenerate unless you kill them with fire or acid should eventually stop regenerating if you chop it into kindling and then mash the kindling into paste enough times. EVENTUALLY, its energy supply or food supply or whatever will run out, and it should just plain starve to death after you keep mashing it into a finer and finer paste faster than it can heal.
An interesting weakness for a monster might be to be beaten with part of its own anatomy.
The vast majority of venomous animals irl are immune to their own poison, so that makes less logic than one would think.This isn't entirely correct, as far as I know.
The question whether individual snakes are immune to their own venom is not yet definitely settled, though there is a known example of a cobra which self-envenomated, resulting in a large abscess requiring surgical intervention but showing none of the other effects that would have proven rapidly lethal in prey species or humans.[8] Furthermore, certain harmless species, such as the North American Coronella getula and the Brazilian Rhacidelus brazili, are proof against the venom of the crotalines which frequent the same districts, and which they are able to overpower and feed upon. The Tropical Rat Snake, Spilotes variabilis, is the enemy of the Fer-de-lance in St. Lucia, and it is said[who?] that in their encounters the Cribo is invariably the victor. Repeated experiments have shown the European Common Snake, Tropidonotus natrix, not to be affected by the bite of Vipera berus and Vipera aspis, this being due to the presence, in the blood of the harmless snake, of toxic principles secreted by the parotid and labial glands, and analogous to those of the venom of these vipers. Several North American species of Rat snakes as well as King snakes have proven to be immune or highly resistant to the venom of Rattle snake species.
The vast majority of venomous animals irl are immune to their own poison, so that makes less logic than one would think.
And then a creature's weakness comes in. A seasoned warrior may be able to handle such creatures with normal methods. However most are not seasoned warriors. A local average Joe town militia would need an advantage. Silver in the case of a werewolf. For example silver could act as a strong anti-coagulant, causing a werewolf to bleed out from even a minor wound. Or a creature with special 'impenetrable' hide's flesh could react chemically with a certain element, causing necrosis. Or it could even just be a simple allergy. Even without magic being involved.
And then a creature's weakness comes in. A seasoned warrior may be able to handle such creatures with normal methods. However most are not seasoned warriors. A local average Joe town militia would need an advantage. Silver in the case of a werewolf. For example silver could act as a strong anti-coagulant, causing a werewolf to bleed out from even a minor wound. Or a creature with special 'impenetrable' hide's flesh could react chemically with a certain element, causing necrosis. Or it could even just be a simple allergy. Even without magic being involved.
This actually got me thinking about different types of heroes- you've got the "seasoned warrior" types who beat down their enemies through legendary strength and battle prowess (Hercules being the classical example, and Superman being a comic book example), and you've got the "trickster" types, who use planning, foresight, and quick wits to out-think their enemies (Perseus being the classical example, and Batman being the comic book example.)
In DF, you can obviously emulate the former by genning a demigod adventurer who is legendary at everything and has great stats, or by training up the skills of a regular hero, and then going and killing monsters. There's basic tactics and skill at fighting at work, and the contest comes down to skill, strength, and a bit of luck. The addition of night creature weaknesses opens up the second type of hero more, allowing the adventurer to do a bit of research and grab the silver sword/random shrub/misc. object that will enable him to easily overcome an otherwise formidable obstacle.
The former type of hero is well modeled (which I actually find rather refreshing, in a very Beowulf sort of way,) while the latter is sorely lacking. Right now, about as tricky as you can get as a hero is to bring half a castle along with you on your adventures. It even (kinda) makes sense for this sort of thing to come in parallel to caravan arc stuff- after all, what kind of city market doesn't have a lovable rogue in it?
Does anyone know what release, if any, Toady plans to implement activities for city citizens ?
like the following:
- walking their dog
- going to the market
- walking down a street, meeting a person they know, then having a conversation
- hobos, (a must in cities). Hobos that get drunk and get taken away by the guards
- They'll be guards or some form of law inforcement right ?
- Some citizens should walk in pairs or as a group. I've yet to see this in games.
after all, what kind of city market doesn't have a lovable rogue in it?
The well-fed and thought-fully policed kind. If there are enough legitimate ways to make money fewer people become criminals, and if law and order is enforced carefully and with planning then fewer criminals stick around.
I'm interested in the chances to be thoughtful and clever legally, and it sounds like that kind of thing is coming up with chances to buy/sell real estate, run caravans, etc.
Believe it or not, not all rogues are criminals. Some rogues are just scouts, army irregulars, or exceptionally multi-talented businessmen.outside of dnd, rogue means a criminal or generally unprincipled person... i don't think people were referring to "rogue" as a character class
scouts, army irregulars, or exceptionally multi-talented businessmenmade it sound like nw_kohaku was talking about the dnd character class or a specific set of skills
well, yeah, butQuotescouts, army irregulars, or exceptionally multi-talented businessmenmade it sound like nw_kohaku was talking about the dnd character class or a specific set of skills
This actually got me thinking about different types of heroes- you've got the "seasoned warrior" types who beat down their enemies through legendary strength and battle prowess (Hercules being the classical example, and Superman being a comic book example), and you've got the "trickster" types, who use planning, foresight, and quick wits to out-think their enemies (Perseus being the classical example, and Batman being the comic book example.)
...
Right now, about as tricky as you can get as a hero is to bring half a castle along with you on your adventures. It even (kinda) makes sense for this sort of thing to come in parallel to caravan arc stuff- after all, what kind of city market doesn't have a lovable rogue in it?
I think Release 9 is going to be the most interesting release. You buy a cottage, and with adventure mode reactions become a crafting or one thing or another -- and then you sell your useless crafts to people for as much gold as you can get, and then you pile your house sky high with gold and swim around in it (half-literally).
That's what I'm gonna do.
No, not really - I'm gonna be a vegetable trader. But I'll try that too.
The fun parts are the parts you just mentioned, but the thing about Fortress Mode is that the dwarves do the tedious "actually doing the labor" part for you. If all we're doing all the manually crafting things and selling them, we're basically playing an MMO or community game except with no "MM" or "O" or community.
Or Urist the resource gatherer/auction house economic speculator.
Really though, the reason to why every MMO bogs down to a lame grind race is because in the end its the numbers on your equipment and not your skill that matters most.
But anyway, having a slice of economy is necessary for the DF roleplaying experience get closer to being complete. Imagine playing as a trader, gathering enough wealth to buy yourself a nice mansion in the richest part of the town, become a member of nobility through your money and influence and eventualy usurp the throne. An RPG doesn't need to consist only of "I HIT ARGUEBARGLE WITH MY STEEL SWORD +3"
Grind also happens when you run out of content. No-one sane will grind that +3 right away. But grinding it when they run out of interesting quests/dungeons/exploration/whatever is natural choice - the only other solution is to quit game. Also noted in GW. People were done playing but did not want to quit so they ASKED for grind.Tom Sawyer Whitewashing the Fence
On the topic of "weird folklore monsters," I just remembered magical penis thieves (http://harpers.org/archive/2008/06/0082063)....if you run Deons, beware.
I think Release 9 is going to be the most interesting release. You buy a cottage, and with adventure mode reactions become a crafting or one thing or another -- and then you sell your useless crafts to people for as much gold as you can get, and then you pile your house sky high with gold and swim around in it (half-literally).
That's what I'm gonna do.
No, not really - I'm gonna be a vegetable trader. But I'll try that too.
I plan to be a cattle rancher, on the theory that once the novelty of being able to ranch in an RPG wears off I can push it to extremes, and try to perform successful cattle raids until I control the worlds supply of beef. Then perform genocide.
I plan to be a cattle rancher, on the theory that once the novelty of being able to ranch in an RPG wears off I can push it to extremes, and try to perform successful cattle raids until I control the worlds supply of beef. Then perform genocide.
I've already been doing something along the lines of making a hunter instead of an adventurer. Killing animals (aggressive and non-aggressive alike) butchering the corpses and selling crafts made from the results(thanks to a home-brew mod). It is actually quite entertaining despite how I expected it to be grindy and boring. And it actually seems to be a reliable and comparatively safe (compared to running into a dragon lair, grabbing loot and running for your life) way to make money. Even without the mod to allow crafting, the raw materials from the butchering like the hide and the meat products seem to fetch a pretty good price in shops for the effort.
Can't wait til I can actually build a hunting hut and stuff like that to store things and act as a safe base of operations more than a day's travel from civilization.
Have you considered the possibiitly that since your making sewers and other building structure about including graveyards?
# Core68, GRAVEYARDS AND TOMBS, (Future): Right now the dead are so dead they don't exist outside of the fantastic memories of the people that have heard of them. There should be various methods of disposal, some adventure-full ones being graveyards and tombs, including large and elaborate tombs with all sorts of treasure and traps appropriate for the civilization that created them. Related to Core67.
Have you considered the possibiitly that since your making sewers and other building structure about including graveyards?
This is from the old dev goals, (http://bay12games.com/dwarves/dev_single.html) but since it's a core item and graveyards are much easier to implement than the catacombs that are currently being implemented, I'd expect it sooner rather than later:Quote from: dev_single# Core68, GRAVEYARDS AND TOMBS, (Future): Right now the dead are so dead they don't exist outside of the fantastic memories of the people that have heard of them. There should be various methods of disposal, some adventure-full ones being graveyards and tombs, including large and elaborate tombs with all sorts of treasure and traps appropriate for the civilization that created them. Related to Core67.
I plan to be a cattle rancher, on the theory that once the novelty of being able to ranch in an RPG wears off I can push it to extremes, and try to perform successful cattle raids until I control the worlds supply of beef. Then perform genocide.
I've already been doing something along the lines of making a hunter instead of an adventurer. Killing animals (aggressive and non-aggressive alike) butchering the corpses and selling crafts made from the results(thanks to a home-brew mod). It is actually quite entertaining despite how I expected it to be grindy and boring. And it actually seems to be a reliable and comparatively safe (compared to running into a dragon lair, grabbing loot and running for your life) way to make money. Even without the mod to allow crafting, the raw materials from the butchering like the hide and the meat products seem to fetch a pretty good price in shops for the effort.
Can't wait til I can actually build a hunting hut and stuff like that to store things and act as a safe base of operations more than a day's travel from civilization.
Not really. Guild Wars - MMO where you could not really improve character with grinding also ended up being grindfest because people still wanted pretty items (even if they were sometimes less powerfull that ordinary ones) and nice title under character name.
Grind also happens when you run out of content. No-one sane will grind that +3 right away. But grinding it when they run out of interesting quests/dungeons/exploration/whatever is natural choice - the only other solution is to quit game. Also noted in GW. People were done playing but did not want to quit so they ASKED for grind.
On the topic of "weird folklore monsters," I just remembered magical penis thieves (http://harpers.org/archive/2008/06/0082063).
QuoteNot really. Guild Wars - MMO where you could not really improve character with grinding also ended up being grindfest because people still wanted pretty items (even if they were sometimes less powerfull that ordinary ones) and nice title under character name.
Grind also happens when you run out of content. No-one sane will grind that +3 right away. But grinding it when they run out of interesting quests/dungeons/exploration/whatever is natural choice - the only other solution is to quit game. Also noted in GW. People were done playing but did not want to quit so they ASKED for grind.
I can think of precisely one online game that isn't a grindfest, and it's the only MMO I've ever paid for. These days it's gone a bit downhill in terms of the size and quality of the population (which more or less makes or breaks the game) and the implementation of a whole variety of features (although the new devs say they'll be fixing that, eventually) and a very, very small grind that only a small portion of the population partakes in for any length of time, but it's still reasonably decent.
Anyway, on to the point of that lot. Grinding isn't absolutely necessary in a game, but it is very, very difficult to avoid. With sufficient levels of depth and complexity and / or a reliance on the abilities of the individual sitting at the screen above and beyond stats within the game, it is doable, but it will need an awful lot of thinking and planning in advance to make it work at all (as shown by the above example - a series of very minor adjustments utterly destroyed the balance that had previously existed for a long while (years), that it's only just beginning to recover from).
Or Urist the resource gatherer/auction house economic speculator.
Really though, the reason to why every MMO bogs down to a lame grind race is because in the end its the numbers on your equipment and not your skill that matters most.
But anyway, having a slice of economy is necessary for the DF roleplaying experience get closer to being complete. Imagine playing as a trader, gathering enough wealth to buy yourself a nice mansion in the richest part of the town, become a member of nobility through your money and influence and eventualy usurp the throne. An RPG doesn't need to consist only of "I HIT ARGUEBARGLE WITH MY STEEL SWORD +3"
Well toady has mentioned a fast forward feature for stuff like meditating under a waterfall for a week or hanging out in giant tree for 3 days. Given that you have the tools and corresponding rooms i could imagine the same would apply to farming. And you could still hire some people to help you out with the farming given that you have some cash.
You have to remember that this is Dwarf Fortress, if something feels like grind you do it slightly differently.
Do I herd the cattle around the elven commune or through it? Do I attempt to herd badgers instead? Do I now herd the badgers into the night creatures lair? Do I sell badger and night creature corpses for fun and profit?
Even this doesn't compare to creating a farm dedicated to making Rhesus-Pieces.
I was wondering: Will night creature generation ever be able to produce night creatures that feed on/are repelled by abstract concepts, such as happiness, the laughter of children, contentement, rage, etc.?
I was wondering: Will night creature generation ever be able to produce night creatures that feed on/are repelled by abstract concepts, such as happiness, the laughter of children, contentement, rage, etc.?I'm not Toady, but I don't think so. Perhaps sounds and scents, maaaaybe stuff like hunger, but I doubt about abstract concepts. That would require a very complex AI system, and processing all kinds of sensory data by every creature would be pretty expensive, especially if we'd want them to analyze it carefully to detect abstract concepts.
I was wondering: Will night creature generation ever be able to produce night creatures that feed on/are repelled by abstract concepts, such as happiness, the laughter of children, contentement, rage, etc.?
I'm not Toady, but I don't think so. Perhaps sounds and scents, maaaaybe stuff like hunger, but I doubt about abstract concepts. That would require a very complex AI system, and processing all kinds of sensory data by every creature would be pretty expensive, especially if we'd want them to analyze it carefully to detect abstract concepts.
You know the idea of a night creature feeding off of an emotion would be very amusing. In fact that would be something I'd want to see happen! Cause if there were such night creatures like for example "Feed off of scaring people by surprising them" I could see a whole lot of interesting ideas that could come together for new night creatures.
One case can be the "Dream Eater" a japanese mythical creature that's sort of like a dream catcher, that generally eats peoples dreams (usually nightmares from what I remember). This is the kind of stuff fantasy is made for!
Please make this possible Toady!
Unless I'm gratly mistaken, the number of toes a person has is noth variable.
Unless I'm gratly mistaken, the number of toes a person has is noth variable.
"I don't feel like sewing cloth anymore, I want to sew a garment made of live badgers!" is an option
you have to somehow do battle against the curds and whey to complete the cheese making activity
Sir Toady
Will wild animals favor targeting certain bodyparts. Like how most large predators go for the throats of creatures? And would we get to mod creatures to tell them what bodyparts they would prefer to target.
Additionally
Will modders ever have the ability to mod other features of ranged weapons? Like reload time or inherent speed of the shot? This could have uses for moders who have modded guns into the game. But also make the game more realistic as Crossbows take longer to reload then bows, but packed more of a punch.
Pink is awesome! <3
So is Jungle Green!*
:P
* (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jungle_green)
Seeing how now cities "grow" buildings alongside roads, can we expect to see some kind of inns/taverns/hotels and small, few-house large cottages aligned alongside normal roads and paths?
Perhaps also trading posts?
Caravan Arc Releases
[...]
* Release 3
o Taverns
o Basic hirelings
o Manors
* Release 4
o Dwarf mode inns
o Adv mode inns
o Fairs
o Merchants moving around from place to place during play
[...]
* Release 8
o Renting/buying cottages and other properties
Pink is awesome! <3So is Jungle Green!*
:P
* (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jungle_green)
Don't spam.Seeing how now cities "grow" buildings alongside roads, can we expect to see some kind of inns/taverns/hotels and small, few-house large cottages aligned alongside normal roads and paths?
Perhaps also trading posts?
Dev page: (http://www.bay12games.com/dwarves/dev.html)QuoteCaravan Arc Releases
[...]
* Release 3
o Taverns
o Basic hirelings
o Manors
* Release 4
o Dwarf mode inns
o Adv mode inns
o Fairs
o Merchants moving around from place to place during play
[...]
* Release 8
o Renting/buying cottages and other properties
Dev page: (http://www.bay12games.com/dwarves/dev.html)QuoteCaravan Arc Releases
[...]
* Release 3
o Taverns
o Basic hirelings
o Manors
* Release 4
o Dwarf mode inns
o Adv mode inns
o Fairs
o Merchants moving around from place to place during play
[...]
* Release 8
o Renting/buying cottages and other properties
Aren't these dev goals in-city features?
# Core85, CHOP, DIG, BUILD!, (Future): As an adventurer, chop down trees, dig channels, mine into a cliff face, build whatever structure you have the patience for. Your efforts should be saved as a proper site or at least some similar notion (whatever inns and so on along roads end up using), and the contents should remain relatively undisturbed with proper precautions.
Aren't these dev goals in-city features?In addition to what Footkerchief quoted, the dev page specifically mentions "Inns associated to roads and entity pop sprawl where you can stay and get information about the surroundings" as part of the Thief adventurer role. I'd imagine these sites could possibly turn up in the "army arc" releases at least.
# Core85, CHOP, DIG, BUILD!, (Future): As an adventurer, chop down trees, dig channels, mine into a cliff face, build whatever structure you have the patience for.
DWARFCRAFT
Well, no I guess that not really it...
MINE FORTRESS
That's closer... but it's not likely to be a big fortress most of the time. So how about
MINE CAMP
Wait-
Aside from some general busy-ness, I managed to bump my head up against the wall a bit trying to get the dungeons and catacombs and sewers and underground layers and topography and rivers and buildings to all play nice together, but I think I've got it working now. I need to mess with the dungeon layout a little more and then that'll finally be done. World gen tracks crops of the dead now, numerically and by cause for each site, so if all the starved dead from the last hundred years in a city happen to be raised, it can only happen once, and the catacombs should reflect their populations correctly.
I managed to bump my head up against the wall a bit trying to get the dungeons and catacombs and sewers and underground layers and topography and rivers and buildings to all play nice together
dungeons and catacombs and sewers
Sir IT000,
Will you ever learn about the Suggestions forum?
That's a good point. Who the hell inters their dead intact, in simple wooden boxes, if there's some threat of zombie uprising?
I can't see anything about this on the dev page, but is it gonna be possible to eventually control the equipment of your companions in Adventure Mode? I want to be able to assemble my own mercenary band and train them up in different formations and tactics like Mount and Blade.
Quote from: FuzzyDoomWill there be a way to give items to our companions? And perhaps an easier way to equip weapons? (Just had to wiki it.)
We have to get to companion equipment sooner than later, since it can be very frustrating to either lose a weapon or just have lots of excess armor that shouldn't be excess. It isn't in for 0.31.17 though.
DWARFCRAFT
Well, no I guess that not really it...
MINE FORTRESS
That's closer... but it's not likely to be a big fortress most of the time. So how about
MINE CAMP
Wait-
DWARFCRAFT
Well, no I guess that not really it...
MINE FORTRESS
That's closer... but it's not likely to be a big fortress most of the time. So how about
MINE CAMP
Wait-
I feel a horrible, horrible need to hail the joke that went right over everyone's head.
I'm not saying that we shouldn't have the dead rising from graves, but it seems rather odd that people under such threat would bury their dead to begin with, unless other methods of burial/disposal carry risks of their own. It's not an unanswerable question, and I think potential answers could be interesting.Because other methods of burial/disposal carry risks of angry ghost.
I'm not saying that we shouldn't have the dead rising from graves, but it seems rather odd that people under such threat would bury their dead to begin with, unless other methods of burial/disposal carry risks of their own. It's not an unanswerable question, and I think potential answers could be interesting.Because other methods of burial/disposal carry risks of angry ghost.
...bone everyone?I'm not saying that we shouldn't have the dead rising from graves, but it seems rather odd that people under such threat would bury their dead to begin with, unless other methods of burial/disposal carry risks of their own. It's not an unanswerable question, and I think potential answers could be interesting.Because other methods of burial/disposal carry risks of angry ghost.
Well, not incineration and slab engraving.
Also, iic, all you need to properly burry dwarf is one bodypart. One bone for example. Single bone becoming undead is not all that scarry. What's it going to do?
...this topic just turned waaaay strange....bone everyone?I'm not saying that we shouldn't have the dead rising from graves, but it seems rather odd that people under such threat would bury their dead to begin with, unless other methods of burial/disposal carry risks of their own. It's not an unanswerable question, and I think potential answers could be interesting.Because other methods of burial/disposal carry risks of angry ghost.
Well, not incineration and slab engraving.
Also, iic, all you need to properly burry dwarf is one bodypart. One bone for example. Single bone becoming undead is not all that scarry. What's it going to do?
Well, not incineration and slab engraving.I'm actually pretty sure that Toady mentioned that potentially even properly buried dead might rise as undead, so even incinerating and slabbing the dead might not be enough at some point. Might as well just bury them. I'm sure religion will also come into play with burial practices and the rising dead at some point later, perhaps even conflicting practices in a single religion depending on the deity - one god wants the dead being incinerated, another buried with all body parts, a third mummified, and whomever you followed most ardently is the one whose practices need to be used for proper burial.
Also, iic, all you need to properly burry dwarf is one bodypart. One bone for example. Single bone becoming undead is not all that scarry. What's it going to do?
I feel a horrible, horrible need to hail the joke that went right over everyone's head.I didn't speak out, because I wasn't a mermaid.
I feel a horrible, horrible need to hail the joke that went right over everyone's head.I didn't speak out, because I wasn't a mermaid.
Do the various under-city structures sometimes meet with the highest underground layer? It sounded like the first bit was a "yes" from the devlog, but I'd like confirmation.It's just as possible Toady was having to code defensively to stop them interacting.
Do the various under-city structures sometimes meet with the highest underground layer? It sounded like the first bit was a "yes" from the devlog, but I'd like confirmation.It's just as possible Toady was having to code defensively to stop them interacting.
Also, would Toady accept contributions if somebody made code that can easily be integrated into DF? Like bitmap-outputting map generators(for example a tower/village/temple generators) or conversation AI algorithms?
We do not accept submissions for the official Dwarf Fortress releases. Please do not ask for your code, art, sound or raw/objects txt files to be incorporated into the official releases.
Once caravans and such get tracked on the local map, will things be flexible enough that you can do things like... go in with a flying adventurer, wall up the entrances to a city, wait for them to starve because food caravans cant get it, then buy the food from those caravans, fly over with it, and sell it on the black market for insane amounts of money?
The actual walling-up sound slike it would be difficult, I can imagine the horrible Adventure-walling problems.Once caravans and such get tracked on the local map, will things be flexible enough that you can do things like... go in with a flying adventurer, wall up the entrances to a city, wait for them to starve because food caravans cant get it, then buy the food from those caravans, fly over with it, and sell it on the black market for insane amounts of money?
The last DFTalk mentions that in the release after they start moving, change in supplies and such will actually affect things after worldgen ("Changing populations, food use and other world gen stuff moved to actual play"), so yes.
I read "other underground structures" as other things which were actually structures, so catacombs, sewers, and dungeons all interact with each other.Do the various under-city structures sometimes meet with the highest underground layer? It sounded like the first bit was a "yes" from the devlog, but I'd like confirmation.It's just as possible Toady was having to code defensively to stop them interacting.
This sounded like a confirmation: (http://bay12games.com/dwarves/#2011-04-20) "04/20/2011: With the construction of sewers drawing to an end comes the beginnings of catacombs. These will twist and turn and mix with other underground structures creating fertile ground for quests and adventuring."
There's no indication that doing this will involve pathfinding. It's entirely possible that once you leave a site, the locals will forget that they are trapped, and just go right ahead with trading.Once caravans and such get tracked on the local map, will things be flexible enough that you can do things like... go in with a flying adventurer, wall up the entrances to a city, wait for them to starve because food caravans cant get it, then buy the food from those caravans, fly over with it, and sell it on the black market for insane amounts of money?
The last DFTalk mentions that in the release after they start moving, change in supplies and such will actually affect things after worldgen ("Changing populations, food use and other world gen stuff moved to actual play"), so yes.
And I would imagine that someone would just grab a pickaxe and knock the wall downThat would require specific code allowing them to identify what the problem was and remedy it.
well yea,k you'd have to stay there the entire time to guartd the gates so that they werent demolished or path-ignored due to abstraction.You'd have to stay at all four gates simultaneously.
Well, not incineration and slab engraving.I'm actually pretty sure that Toady mentioned that potentially even properly buried dead might rise as undead, so even incinerating and slabbing the dead might not be enough at some point. Might as well just bury them. I'm sure religion will also come into play with burial practices and the rising dead at some point later, perhaps even conflicting practices in a single religion depending on the deity - one god wants the dead being incinerated, another buried with all body parts, a third mummified, and whomever you followed most ardently is the one whose practices need to be used for proper burial.
Also, iic, all you need to properly burry dwarf is one bodypart. One bone for example. Single bone becoming undead is not all that scarry. What's it going to do?
As for a single bone is going to do - take up sorcery, and become a demilich. Find a few other likeminded bones, and form a cabal of demiliches that looks like a single skeleton. (Then throw dice at the DM for such a cheesy idea) ;)
World gen tracks crops of the dead now, numerically and by cause for each site, so if all the starved dead from the last hundred years in a city happen to be raised, it can only happen once, and the catacombs should reflect their populations correctly.
On another note, will we see some new AI in this release? Crowd simulation or at least caching common paths. Simply digging into caverns can sometimes result in fps-death, and with 2k+ people in a city this might be enough to bring a 666 core(or so) 10.0GHz PC to a crawl...
I'm basically always going to be extra mindful of the speed concerns that come with having cities with large populations, and there's basically going to be a lot of people hanging out in their houses, and a lot of people walking along roads, and that's not bad, because that's what happens in cities, so I think we'll end up in good shape. The vast majority of the people aren't going to be loaded at a given time so it's pretty easy to keep it under control, I think, as long as the cities don't get larger than they are now. But even if they do ... you could have a world spanning city, it just doesn't have all the people loaded.
So I again asked a question that was practically already answered? :/
This thread is only for people who read every single word ever written by Toady...
Stop making stupid questions and you will be fine. The first one was fine, but the second... If I were developing a game I would stop answering questions at all.
Eight days without a proper devlog. I need my fix!
Stop making stupid questions and you will be fine. The first one was fine, but the second... If I were developing a game I would stop answering questions at all.Eight days without a proper devlog. I need my fix!
All these people pressuring him to keep putting things out... If I were making the game, I would stop devlogging at all.
Stop making stupid questions and you will be fine. The first one was fine, but the second... If I were developing a game I would stop answering questions at all.Eight days without a proper devlog. I need my fix!
All these people pressuring him to keep putting things out... If I were making the game, I would stop devlogging at all.
...The devlog and the forums are very stress relieving.
That and naming a dwarf after your supervisor/most annoying employee and trowing them off a really tall tower and watching them blow into components. HOW DO YOU LIKE THAT DON! YOUR UPPER LEG IS IN A TREE! HUH DON? HUH?
I've got to say, it must be a little dispiriting to be putting these neat things in the game - cities, adventurer skills, the restless dead - and then just have everybody complain about them in the dev thread.
Without critique, systems couldn't improve, and we all want the game to be awesome, totally and completely. That's why discussions about the mechanics happen, not to say the current system is bad, just that there is room for improvement.Criticizing a developer makes him correct and improve his programs, but it does not make him want to work more, praise is necessary as well, even if useless. That said I in no way treat Toady like such a simpleminded creature, I couldn't imagine working on one thing for so long(I usually get bored with writing a game/program after around 3-4 days) :p
Hang in there Toady One! You can be such a trooper sometimes.
Umm, not to be smart-ass know-it-all, but moss needs sunlight. It is a plant, after all.
Heh. Then it wouldn't be a plant.Umm, not to be smart-ass know-it-all, but moss needs sunlight. It is a plant, after all.
This is DF, it's probably methane powered moss.
Rivers with walls and floors look lame, also, corridors should be longer. Besides that it looks a bit too bright and not regular enough.
Rivers with walls and floors look lame, also, corridors should be longer. Besides that it looks a bit too bright and not regular enough.
Those 'rivers with walls and floors' are sewer channels. Y'know because of them being in sewers and all that jazz.
err..CITIES,SEWERS,CATACOMBS AND DUNGEONS?Spoiler (click to show/hide)
WOO!
Am I the only one who finds it ironic that the sewer map is the only one without water?
I think the first map is catacombs and sewers (big tomb rooms aplenty). The second map: dungeons and sewers? Third map?
I like how the sewers only connect to the other underground structures in a few select places.
On the other hand, why exactly would undead attack living beings? Malice and hatred of spirits bound to bodies?
Hehe to bad we dont have torches at the moment.
How far away, tentatively, is adventurer-enabled mining and constructing?
Hehe to bad we dont have torches at the moment.
Can we have torches included in the update,PLEASE?:3
Or are they added later?
Adventurer Role: Treasure Hunter
# Lighting
* Proper environmental lighting
* Construction and use of torches
* Candles/lamps/lanterns
I was rather interested in an in-engine evaluation rather than time, I know it won't be around the bend for a while. Such as, what are the biggest things in the way at the moment. I can guess handling the random small sites is one such thing, since the actual mechanics already exist in Fortress mode.How far away, tentatively, is adventurer-enabled mining and constructing?
As usual, unless the feature is directly mentioned in the upcoming releases, (http://www.bay12games.com/dwarves/dev.html) nobody can give you a meaningful answer for when it'll be implemented, not even Toady. It could sneak into release 2, 7, or 9, or it might be even later. Releases will probably each take at least a month. So, I would guess between one month and one year from now.
Does anybody else find the new dungeon/sewer/catacomb maps a little excessively chaotic? I just can't imagine any real person designing or building anything with that shape. They kind of remind me of those experiments where they give spiders drugs and see how messed up their webs are as a result.
I mean, I like where this is going, but it looks to me like a little more navigability and geometric regularity would be somewhat more realistic and fun here.
As far as I know there will(or might be) magic in the future, so concerning magic towers(and all other kinds of towers), will we get something more than big stone bricks? For example tower and walls being random regular polygons made of random material, with hidden artifacts, etc.?
Ah, just wait for adventure mode building and larger elf populations :>As far as I know there will(or might be) magic in the future, so concerning magic towers(and all other kinds of towers), will we get something more than big stone bricks? For example tower and walls being random regular polygons made of random material, with hidden artifacts, etc.?
Now I want to see a tower made entirely out of elf bones...
In the cities there will be haunted houses
I hope they intersect with the caverns and with house basements.I hope not. Perhaps only sewers and only with certain houses.
Does anybody else find the new dungeon/sewer/catacomb maps a little excessively chaotic? I just can't imagine any real person designing or building anything with that shape. They kind of remind me of those experiments where they give spiders drugs and see how messed up their webs are as a result.Pretty sure that drugs+spiders making funky webs video is a comedy sketch/propaganda and not actually a real experiment..
I mean, I like where this is going, but it looks to me like a little more navigability and geometric regularity would be somewhat more realistic and fun here.
Looks to me like there are basements in those maps..I hope they intersect with the caverns and with house basements.I hope not. Perhaps only sewers and only with certain houses.
And maybe the sewer water should have another color.Maybe plumbing will happen.
Pretty sure that drugs+spiders making funky webs video is a comedy sketch/propaganda and not actually a real experiment..
I hope not. Perhaps only sewers and only with certain houses.
Maybe plumbing will happen.
Just a thought.
Might have a need.
Might not....Spoiler (click to show/hide)
Not in every basement, but in some. What I think is that in some old houses falling in desrepair sometimes a breach to the underground would be opened. Maybe when we have digger monsters.Ok, that doesn't sound bad and brings me to ask the question I will ask next:
Pretty sure that drugs+spiders making funky webs video is a comedy sketch/propaganda and not actually a real experiment
Pretty sure that drugs+spiders making funky webs video is a comedy sketch/propaganda and not actually a real experiment
It was a parody of real drugs+spiders experiments.
Maybe awakening the king as a monster as a result of disturbing his stuff (like it hints at in the devlog).I'm hoping to see powerful creatures like LOTR barrow-wights, or D&D liches. In as far as that is possible before we have magic.
You will not be safe in either adventure or dwarf mode as you are beset by vampires, werewolves and vengeful ghosts. Entire armies of walking corpses will besiege you, led by undead phantoms. (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=83680.0)
GIGGITY!Quote from: ThreetoeYou will not be safe in either adventure or dwarf mode as you are beset by vampires, werewolves and vengeful ghosts. Entire armies of walking corpses will besiege you, led by undead phantoms. (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=83680.0)
whaaaaaaaaa? I sincerely hope this means what I think it means.
Maybe world gen should limit megabeast attacks while the world is young, and ramp them up when there are great empires? That would allow more interesting interactions between great civilizations and powerful monsters.
A) Arn't interested in small villages
or
B) Actually would create a "No civ" zone
...The devlog and the forums are very stress relieving.Indeed. I quite agree. The... forums, yes.
That and naming a dwarf after your supervisor/most annoying employee and trowing them off a really tall tower and watching them blow into components. HOW DO YOU LIKE THAT DON! YOUR UPPER LEG IS IN A TREE! HUH DON? HUH?
B SHOULD be the case, as nobody would live near an active megabeast cave.Except for a certain group of seven dwarves that is.
Quote from: ThreetoeYou will not be safe in either adventure or dwarf mode as you are beset by vampires, werewolves and vengeful ghosts. Entire armies of walking corpses will besiege you, led by undead phantoms. (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=83680.0)whaaaaaaaaa? I sincerely hope this means what I think it means.
Quote from: ThreetoeYou will not be safe in either adventure or dwarf mode as you are beset by vampires, werewolves and vengeful ghosts. Entire armies of walking corpses will besiege you, led by undead phantoms. (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=83680.0)whaaaaaaaaa? I sincerely hope this means what I think it means.
Does anyone know whether toady has mentioned whether we will be able to become vampires or werewolves ? I've seen it being mentioned in this thread before.. maybe Toady took our enthusiasm into consideration then.
Vampires, were-beasts and armies of the living dead will terrorize adventurers and fortresses alike. These creatures can pass on their curse, condemning their victims to a half-life of suffering and dread.I wonder, will this be an actual gameplay mechanic, or another worldgen-only feature?
In Adventure Mode, will we be able to control the equipment of companions and maybe even spar with them to improve skills?
I can't see anything about this on the dev page, but is it gonna be possible to eventually control the equipment of your companions in Adventure Mode? I want to be able to assemble my own mercenary band and train them up in different formations and tactics like Mount and Blade.Quote from: FuzzyDoomWill there be a way to give items to our companions? And perhaps an easier way to equip weapons? (Just had to wiki it.)
We have to get to companion equipment sooner than later, since it can be very frustrating to either lose a weapon or just have lots of excess armor that shouldn't be excess. It isn't in for 0.31.17 though.
Simple questions: are there plans for PCs be infect-able by night creatures in upcoming versions? If so, will there be a way for PCs to cure themselves, and upon succumbing will infected PCs remain under player control, or will the transformation be considered equivalent to death, converting the PC to a (potentially brutal) NPC for a later adventurer to eliminate?I also really want to know this!
Except for a certain group of seven dwarves that is.
Quote from: ThreeToeVampires, were-beasts and armies of the living dead will terrorize adventurers and fortresses alike. These creatures can pass on their curse, condemning their victims to a half-life of suffering and dread.I wonder, will this be an actual gameplay mechanic, or another worldgen-only feature?
For the most part it isn't that tough for people to survive.
Generation goes WAAAY out of its way to ensure that megabeasts and semimegabeasts live. I mean if a hydra attacked your town would you solo it or get the entire town watch on it? It also goes out of its way to make Megabeasts and Semimegabeasts oddly harmless... Rampages feel more like Sunday Brunch and I would have no problem with less frequent megabeast attacks but with a lot more damage.
A group of 5 soldiers can dogpile and kill megabeasts in adventure mode (disapointingly)
For the most part though as powerful as a creature is, an army is a good deterrant.
If anything I'd like to know how different races could actually, reasonably, die.
I can't tell sewers apart from catacombs, but I guess they are supposed to be this way. Being lost in a dungeon is exciting !
Also, if you look closely, you'll see that the sewers don't really communicate with anything. There are several stairs leading up, and then things are organized in clusters of reasonable size (unless they connect at a lower level I didn't see).
Honestly, I think it will be manageable.
By the way, can you tell catacombs from dungeons ?
what, exactly is stopping them from rampaging out through your house, and then on to the streets?
Quotewhat, exactly is stopping them from rampaging out through your house, and then on to the streets?
For the most part desire and nature though intellectually a sudden uprising would gain the attention of a stronger force.
Though for nature:
It is like for example: "What is stopping a vulture from just killing its prey?"
Really nothing a vulture has more then enough power to kill its prey, I believe some do.
As well Cats live in communities but they arn't a coherant unit (or rather... they live together but they don't do things together). So just because creatures live in large communities with eachother it doesn't mean they are all watching out for eachother's interest or working together.
Not that I wouldn't want to see Nightcreatures just up an deciding they more then overpower a town and uttarly destroy it over night.
The river ran pretty close to the gates, and when I walked out, we had a little alligator trouble. Well, the swordsman had more trouble than I did and ended up in the middle of the river where I couldn't help. The alligator became Skinnyrends and I left on my quest. I found a bronze breastplate in the first chamber, with no sign of the bridegroom other than the mess. I found him in the next room and lopped his head off with my axe. He wasn't alone however. The dark creature was still living there! This would be much more difficult. After getting my weapon stuck in her shoulder, she bit my arm and kept shaking it repeatedly. I broke free after losing a lot of blood, and that's when she took her copper meat cleaver to my toe. I fled, leaving my toe and axe behind.
I made it to a market just before nightfall and the shopkeeper graciously let me sleep on the floor overnight. In the morning I gave up my coins, my breastplate and half of my clothes to get a bronze great axe. My right arm was still useless, but I could manage the weapon with one hand. I went back to the castle by the river to report my success... a technical success, anyway, since the quest was for the bridegroom. As I stepped through the doors of the keep, I witnessed a scene of horror. The alligator Skinnyrends was inside, and the lord was next to his own head on the bloody stone floor. One of the lord's soldiers was holding his own, but I managed to put down the murderous beast myself. I reported my news of the spouse to the soldier, and with my late rescue in the keep, I became a greatly respected figure. Unfortunately, I would need to travel to a castle far away to quest for further glory. Outside the keep, I noticed an elf prisoner. I also noticed his nose was missing. A forensic examination of the keep revealed the body part among the remains. I needed somebody to travel with me in the wilds to help dissuade night attacks on the long journey, so I invited the prisoner along. We made it to the second castle after sunfall and slept in one of the towers.
Quote from: devlog 11/07/2010Devlog stuff.
So, basically, an alligator, because there was nothing particularly stopping it from doing so, just happened to amble into the lord's court and eat the lord...
The alligator is supposed to only eat the things that come close to its river, but apparently, it just randomly wandered while still "within range" of the game to keep calculating, and happened to randomly wander close enough to the lord to get a kill, and nobody happened to stop him beforehand.
That's a bit of a problem if every single random critter down in the catacombs can just amble on up and eat half the town while you're taking a snooze. (Especially if it only happens in the parts of town you happen to occupy, because those are the only ones where the simulation is running.)
It's not an organized or intentional behavior, it's just that the game right now doesn't recognize there's a problem when there are hippos in the river until one hippo gets it in its mind that it feels like human tonight.
It's hard to tell apart catacombs from dungeons because there is no coffins or chains.
most or even all of the curses will be randomly created during world generation
Will the new night creatures be hardcoded (like the current ones) or will they be placed in the raws (and thus be removable for modders)?ahum...
05/02/2011 The first step is to add "curses", which might be based on or a subset of the current syndrome system used for poisons, and to use these to replace the skeleton and zombie flags. Even though most or even all of the curses will be randomly created during world generation, there should still be raws for them that support everything that's going on for modders as well. The old skeleton and zombie flags should be able to be legacy'd in for old saves. Once the framework is done, we'll start adding new sorts of night creatures.That means "No, the nightcreatures will be procedural and their condition equivalent to a syndrome."
Alligator concerns
Yeah, I remember an older version where I was chased to a fort by a band of goblins attacking me. I made it inside the fort full of humans, slept, and when I woke up there were goblins all over the place inside the keep. Thinking back, this was almost certainly the same bug. Presumably the devlog entry we are referencing about the alligator indicates that this behaviour is now fixed.Quote from: NW_KohakuAlligator concerns
This issue is not fundamentally related to the current one. In that version, alligators were not fundamentally intended to exist in forts. That alligator became a historical figure by killing someone, and a naive simulation meant that historical figures got corralled into forts. These kinds of creatures will exist for the fundamental purpose of occasionally terrorizing the city-folk, and while Toady's code is scarcely bug-free, I think we'll probably see that happen to a reasonable extent.
Devlog:The first of the test interactions is underway, recreating the animated dead that are already in the evil regions, with the additional effect of intermittently raising any corpse that is in its area of influence during regular play. I suppose without a specific flag, it'll reraise defeated corpses that are still intact after a while, but that's not necessarily a bad thing.
Wonder if "it's influence" refers to the influence of other undead, or just the entire evil region."its" is singular, and thus would seem to indicate that he's referring to the region, as there will presumably be many undead in evil regions.
I agree-- definitely allow re-raising, but require a corpse to have a minimum level of "intact-ness" before being raised. Having a head that is attached to a body might be an okay minimum standard, for example.
I wonder what we might get for the "good" places.
We already get unicorns. They gore dwarves to death.I wonder what we might get for the "good" places.
Ponies, hopefully.
But not the dead turning into unicorns.
Do the food production/starvation routines during worldgen factor in any of the actual plant tokens (such as seasons, growdur, etc.)?
Quote from: NeonivekToady do you mean Goblins don't need to eat in any future update or that Goblins won't need to eat until you can get it working properly?Quote from: MephansterasToady: Could you clairify a bit on the "Goblins don't need to eat" bit? Just curious how that's going to play out and what the reasoning behind it is (from a world lore perspective). Also, even if goblins don't eat what about any other future carnivorous civs? Wolfmen or the like? Do you see yourself adding in herding-based civilizations to accommodate that? Even in our history we have examples of very successful civilizations that did very little actual farming and mostly just herded animals around. The Mongols are probably the best example of that.
Have you thought about whether dwarves should have an advantage to accessing resources that are deep underground? Do you think this should this be a purely cultural affinity for digging, or should there be some physiological reason why men and elves can't dig down and mine the spoilerite?
How will night creature creature weaknesses, important ways to deal with specific monsters, making sure they're permanently dead, etc. be dealt with? Especially for night creatures way out in savage lands where nobody's heard of them and information-gathering might not be possible?
Are there plans to have some entities inhabit the sewers and catacombs (as opposed to just wandering around like the undead), if so what kinds? eg. sewer hermits, black market traders.
And...
Will the undead be given life by a necromancer of sorts, or a god, or the spirits of dead entities, or just.. something else? (I'm thinking of Threetoe's story, Warriors of the Dead, where the soldiers who come back to the "real world" have returned from a kind of hell, could the undead be populated from entities who have actually already died in worldgen history?)
Edit - Have been going through all Threetoe's stories recently, and another question popped into mind...
How can one access the catacombs? In Dragon Quest the priest accesses the catacombs from a church, will it be like this, or through the sewers, or something else?
Quote from: tigrexIn a world where undead exist, why would anyone bury their dead at all? Why not just chuck everyone in the crematorium?Quote from: NW_KohakuWill a city surviving a zombie apocalypse have an effect on burial practices in-game? Do they "learn" to do something different in how they bury their dead using some sort of method to stop another mass rising?
Also, will there be a "safe" method of burial, such as incineration and slabbing, or will that just produce some other kind of undead in a zombie apocalypse?Quote from: PTTG??Undead uprisings are extremely rare events. It is rational that a culture will generally take only the minimum level of burial protection.
Are the quest givers going to reward us with anything beside fame and glory in the near future ? (Urists, Weapons, Amulets and different useless/useful stuff.)
What sort of situation is likely to prevent bodies from being laid to rest properly? Or are these walking dead active for some other reason?
Have you considered the possibiitly that since your making sewers and other building structure about including graveyards?
Perhaps even a possibility that the graveyard could be haunted you maybe you'l have to go extermine the undead? I think that would be sort of fun.
Quote from: VorthonI was wondering: Will night creature generation ever be able to produce night creatures that feed on/are repelled by abstract concepts, such as happiness, the laughter of children, contentement, rage, etc.?Quote from: AsmageddonAssuming that someday there will be monsters feeding off emotions and other abstract concepts, do you think we could have creatures that simply prefer or dislike people with certain personality or appearance traits to some extent(for example some creatures could eat only people with scars, some would prefer people who get angry easily, some would completely avoid people with 6 toes and drop dead upon touching them, etc.)?
With settlements back into adventure mode, will we see thirst and hunger be added in during the next release or a subsequent caravan arc release?
Once caravans and such get tracked on the local map, will things be flexible enough that you can do things like... go in with a flying adventurer, wall up the entrances to a city, wait for them to starve because food caravans cant get it, then buy the food from those caravans, fly over with it, and sell it on the black market for insane amounts of money?
Do the various under-city structures sometimes meet with the highest underground layer? If so, how common is it? And will Forgotten Beasts and other subterranean creatures eventually come up through such connections to live in sewers (and whatnot) or attack the town? It sounded like the first bit was a "yes" from the devlog, but I'd like confirmation.
On a similar, but ultimately separate note:
You didn't mention basements or cellars. Does that mean you weren't working on them, or were they just simple enough that they didn't contribute to the complications you mentioned?
It seems like it would be somewhat silly to include all the awesome fancy underground stuff and not include simple underground stuff too.
Also, what factors will influence undead activity? Will there be sudden undead outbreaks?
Will road (and other civil construction) materials vary with local/economic availability and/or class/economic districts within urban areas?
Will there be a HAS_SEWER_LAIR or similar tag so that modders can specify that certain creatures like crocodiles or grimelings inhabit sewers?
Toady, does this mean we can create zombie viruses in fortress mode?
How far away, tentatively, is adventurer-enabled mining and constructing?
...
I know it won't be around the bend for a while. Such as, what are the biggest things in the way at the moment.
Simple questions: are there plans for PCs be infect-able by night creatures in upcoming versions? If so, will there be a way for PCs to cure themselves, and upon succumbing will infected PCs remain under player control, or will the transformation be considered equivalent to death, converting the PC to a (potentially brutal) NPC for a later adventurer to eliminate?
These underground features will have coffins, doors, statues, small bridges over the sewer channels, or they will be bare for now? And the houses in the city? There will be furniture?
Quote from: AsmageddonHow many houses will be abandoned and ruined and how will it eventually look? Will some of them be falling apart enough to breach underground? Will there be any kind of creatures(or just bands of outlaws) living in them?Quote from: AngleWill cities occasionally perish, leaving infested ruins that we can embark upon?
With all the new monsters, night creatures, undead, titans, and demons... is there any consideration being given to how the different races are actually going to survive? Will there be great heroes, other than the player character, that actually stand a chance against these threats? Or can we look forward to entire worlds dying off by the year 200?
Alternately, if we can look forward to massive death from armies of undead, will these creatures take over and form a new society that we can then interact with in some way other than killing them?
Will curses be associated with particular creatures, or will they be associated with particular areas, or both?
For example, lets take the obvious "living death" curse. Do creatures suffer from the curse because they have been attacked/cursed by a certain creature (as is the case with most "infection" kinds of zombie apocalypse, or vampires) or do they suffer because they died in a certain area, perhaps without taking precautions (burial on unhallowed ground in an evil biome, for instance)?
Will the new night creatures be hardcoded (like the current ones) or will they be placed in the raws (and thus be removable for modders)?
Quote from: hermesAre there plans to have some entities inhabit the sewers and catacombs (as opposed to just wandering around like the undead), if so what kinds? eg. sewer hermits, black market traders.
The easiest non-animal/non-monstery thing that fits in with what we already have would just be a bandit analog.
I doubt there's going to be a 100% safe burial method for your dwarvesFun!
There might also be problems that arise inevitably from criminals that are executed2x Fun!
There will be giant crypty pyramidy sites independent of the towns again3x Fun!
...
It'll either have something already awakened in world gen, or just a giant place on the map where you are like, yeah, I'll go there and disturb the dead and take their things.
A powerful "contagious" curse could also be a problem. Ideally, you'd want situations where you can sometimes play in a half-dead world, but not so much a fully dead world. There could be something analogous to the megabeast percentage for world gen stoppage -- it could just stop world gen if it detects that the world is a zombie infested hellhole where humanity and dwarfdom are just barely clinging to life, so you can have fun there. It's not difficult to cap outbreaks to keep the world under control, through params probably.
Though the "interactions" as the curses are currently called are rawable, the ones in the game will almost all be randomly created for each world and thereby dependend on world parameters. You'll probably be able to turn them off entirely, although the parameters might not be fine-grained at first to preserve some surprises at first.
Temples are back in this version, ...Yay!
There will be giant crypty pyramidy sites independent of the towns again, on the other hand, but unlike the old ones they'll have a proper world gen tie-in with historical undead (in part).Yay!!
I took this macabre break from the sewers right before I added critters, so I don't have the clear answer yet, but I imagine it'll be something like that, since we're only going to want certain vanilla beasts to be down there, and different than the river critters that sometimes get in there naturally.Seems to me that sewers and the like could be treated as additions to the biome tags. I guess that it could generate some weirdness if you give it to megabeasts, and they lair under the city then, but I think that could happen with other implementations, too.
Though the "interactions" as the curses are currently called...Since that opens up the possibility of non-evil "curses" without sounding silly, I kind of hope that name sticks, even if there are none of those in the initial release. Which reminds me - Since current deities occasionally use the zombie and skeleton flags when their spheres are compatible, will the deities in the upcoming release use certain or all curses in their description? Such that, if there was a "winged zombie" interaction associated with sky and death, a deity of sky and death might be depicted as a winged zombie human?
Will it be possible for there to be multiple demographics in a single city?Such migrations are already in the game where people of all races settle in major sites (such as towns) - but there seems to be a problem that makes Dwarf Fortress only place a single race in the site in question (usually humans, but occasionally goblins), and I suspect that it could extend to only placing members of a single descend. And even without that problem, I suspect it will be hard to tell that a given human('s ancestors) originally came from a different civ unless there was some kind of common knowledge regarding prevailing tissue colors in your culture or if people said things like "I have no family to speak of, but I am a descendant of immigrants from the Nation of Gardens".
Aside from the civ owning the city there would probably be cultural minorities, including dwarves and elves.
Temples are back in this version, ...Yay!There will be giant crypty pyramidy sites independent of the towns again, on the other hand, but unlike the old ones they'll have a proper world gen tie-in with historical undead (in part).Yay!!
Temples are back in this version, ...Yay!There will be giant crypty pyramidy sites independent of the towns again, on the other hand, but unlike the old ones they'll have a proper world gen tie-in with historical undead (in part).Yay!!
Yeah this is going to be rad.
Quote from: OrkelHell yeah! So many new Total Conversion mod possibilities and DF tunings :). I am more than happy to hear that!
Toady, does this mean we can create zombie viruses in fortress mode?
Yeah, curses will be able to give rise to curses in various ways, and something relatively like some existing varieties of zombie apocalypse should be possible, even in vanilla DF. In general with all this stuff, there is a danger with the world dying, which on its face increases as the dead come to outnumber the living more and more (although the game can place arbitrary controls on these things to prevent too much going on). Could be up to world params, or chance, or be tightly controlled. But from a mod perspective it should be possible to get something done. In some broad way, it's going to be able to treat different sorts of curse behavior in all three modes (world gen, adv mode, dwarf mode), so it is hoped custom curses will at least somewhat work as expected. Obviously there will be bugs and oversights and incomplete portions to revel in.
Thanks for the answers Toady!I think those things have been mentioned in conjunction with fighting styles, actually. These skills existed in Armok as well, I'm pretty sure.
New one that one of my friends (Goast) thought up, so I'm asking on his behalf:
A Zombie Goast: That makes me wonder
A Zombie Goast: Why isn't there a skill for fighting certain animals?
A Zombie Goast: It would certainly give using arenas added incentive
So basically, will there ever be small skills that increase per fought creature? Like, "novice at fighting goblins" or "competent at fighting hedgehogs".
Rainseeker: ... Is there any plan to implement experiences with particular types of enemies.
Toady: The original Armok had this unimplemented knowledge system for creatures, and I was definitely thinking about doing that in dwarf mode, you could be an excellent dragon fighter, that kind of thing, and the knowledge could be about their behaviour, it could be about how to butcher them in particular, and so on. So your dwarf mode guy might be excellent at butchering all the deer and cows and things that your guys bring to him, but then you bring him some kind of giant spider and he's supposed to do something with that and he's like 'What is this? I don't even know where anything is' and would spoil the thing even if he's pretty good at butchering in general. So I'm for that kind of thing, I don't think it would be unnecessarily complicated. There are some questions about what it means to be a goblin fighter versus an elf fighter if they're humanoids or whatever; is that more learning about a culture or a species or whatever, if their anatomy is roughly the same. There are questions to answer there but in general I think the more knowledge types and things that there are for fighters and the more different skills and so on that they learn the more they could be differentiated, and that's always good. I think it's good to have particulars like that, and that one in particular is something that's planned. Not planned as in completely planned out, but something we definitely want to do.
Rainseeker: Let's talk about martial arts. So I see that you have specific skills for fighting monsters, you have a skill for hand-on-hand combat against a dragon ...
Toady: I'm not sure how specific it's going to be, but once we put in things like if you're fighting a giant who's way taller than you then it would make sense that if people have been doing that for centuries then they'd have strategies. I'm not sure what those are going to be specifically, if it just gives you a knowledge against a monster and a bonus then that would be the easiest way to do it, but it would be way more fun to have particular things that you can do, to jump up on them, or attack them when they're swinging down at you, people practicing strikes to hack a dragon in the head when it comes down to bite them or whatever. There might be stereotyped ways of doing that, although I don't think enough people fight dragons and survive to really learn that stuff ... it'd be kind of weird to see the training facilities with the giant cardboard dragons, people practicing against them ...
Rainseeker: Well you never know when a dragon's going to show up ...
Deonapocalypse in DF, fuck yeah.Quote from: 'Toady One'Quote from: OrkelHell yeah! So many new Total Conversion mod possibilities and DF tunings :). I am more than happy to hear that!
Toady, does this mean we can create zombie viruses in fortress mode?
Yeah, curses will be able to give rise to curses in various ways, and something relatively like some existing varieties of zombie apocalypse should be possible, even in vanilla DF. In general with all this stuff, there is a danger with the world dying, which on its face increases as the dead come to outnumber the living more and more (although the game can place arbitrary controls on these things to prevent too much going on). Could be up to world params, or chance, or be tightly controlled. But from a mod perspective it should be possible to get something done. In some broad way, it's going to be able to treat different sorts of curse behavior in all three modes (world gen, adv mode, dwarf mode), so it is hoped custom curses will at least somewhat work as expected. Obviously there will be bugs and oversights and incomplete portions to revel in.
Making ghosts undefeatable and having the dead goblin siegers just come back as vengeful ghosts to pick off your dwarves one-by-one at their leisure like after-dinner mints because you have no recourse against them doesn't sound fun at all, it sounds like the game just forces you to abandon a perfectly good fort for no reason.
[giant Toad-quote]
Awesome! ^_^Quote from: ArmokOnce caravans and such get tracked on the local map, will things be flexible enough that you can do things like... go in with a flying adventurer, wall up the entrances to a city, wait for them to starve because food caravans cant get it, then buy the food from those caravans, fly over with it, and sell it on the black market for insane amounts of money?
There was already a discussion about the pathfinding component, and that's the main obstacle in this case, if you aren't there babysitting the gate. If we simplify it to say, waylaying the caravan as it travels then yeah, people will have a high demand for food eventually, and it'll probably take a much longer time for their suspicion of you to be put in the game, unless they are your enemies automatically due to some magical factional thing from the caravan murder.
I think I'll drop the goblin thing. Unfortunately I cannot think of equally evil and freightening alternatives unless Goblins harvest large fleshlike creatures that they forever rip open and devour or they have the ability to grant their prisoners eternal life at which they can constantly eat their limbs and organs forever (or demons...). So yeah no ideas.
Will there ever be "benign" undead or cursed people who do not automatically enemies of the entity they came from? Like for example, undead from an [undeath][good] sphere land or somehting that just go back to their old life?
Quote from: NeonivekI know your removing Good and Evil in the not so distant future... but what would be your guess of the Spheres which would be closest to good and evil? Actually undertaking all the Sphere related Spherical Land conversion of the Evil/good lands seems like a lot. I am guessing the dev item refers to you taking the first steps? What exactly does that entail if I am allowed to ask.
You mean not close to good in the moral/whatever sense but in the close to good in terms of having unicorns and fairies and fluffy wamblers occur as they do now? If a unicorn is associated to particular spheres (luck, say) then it would be luck-lands that get them, rather than anything else (unless luck is linked to other spheres, then there's some chance of pulling them over to those as well). The evil lands either get the "evil" creatures or the undead curses, so when those are sphered out, it would be handled that way. Of course, since there are like 100 spheres (and will be many more no doubt), yeah, this is a large project overall, especially when you get away from the stock raw monsters and ask which random creature/veg/etc. traits should be linked to spheres and try to do every sphere justice. If it also gets deity links at that time, you have the local civilizations associated to the deities to consider as well, so an "evil" god sphere-related land near a human civ might take the human body definition and then sphere-twist it into something that is meant to be a mockery of human form (good ones do the same thing but the twists would not be seen as a negative thing, though they could still be terrifying). In real-world mythological examples, a lot of this depends on the cultural values associated to certain animals, though simple things like stripping off the outer layer (ie skin) or adding fire breath or making the skin a different color etc. all work as well, and I've got the tools to do all of that now with this revision. As long as the sphere/cultural links are reasonably maintained, I think it won't devolve into a sea of garbage slush (as a more trivial but current example, take god names vs. some of the other names -- sphere-links tend to make the god names "better", in one sense at least, though clearly it all needs work).
It would be cool if goblins raised ogres/trolls for meat, or maybe giant cave spiders for eggs. I understand Toady's stance against goblin ranchhands, but if the "cattle" are sufficiently hardcore and dangerous, I think it works thematically.
Will cursed areas have physical effects on dwarves? Like randomly bursting in hives, starting to vomit from nausea, bleeding from the mouth, or something more serious like a dwarf suddenly going blind in one eye or both? These would be rare events, maybe similar in frequency as artifacts.Effects like this would be cool in spheres. Assuming spheres will not be binary, the frequency and severity of such effects could be dependent on the strength of the sphere.
I am mostly dropping it Footkerchief because I know I can complain about the goblins ability to get all their nutriance from the particles in the air pretty much forever.Consider the following points:
Actually... technically the scientific reasoning for Goblin's lack of need to eat... is that they eat the air.
If I was REALLY vindictive and a horrible person... I'd give the Goblins the name the "Air Eaters"
Which to admit isn't that far off from historical mythology. Snakes ate dust for example and Fish spawned from nothing.
Goblins eat fear. This is why they attack your fortress and take your children.
If goblins won't need to eat, they will need to feed the kidnapped children somehow. How you will deal with this problem?
Quote from: MephansterasConsidering that the goblins snatch a lot of non-carnivorous folk, have you considered adding in slave-run farming villages for the goblins?
They don't snatch any strict herbivores, so the most simple option is just to force their captives to eat hunted meat as the goblins will themselves. This wouldn't be practical if the captive numbers got way out of control as they do now, but I don't expect that to last in the new system.
goblins are green n' stuff
The monsters are all undead/ghosts, the global church conspiracy is run by ghosts, the villains are all undead, Bruce Willis was a ghost all along, and the total global population of actually living people shrank down to about 50 while nobody was looking.
Goblins eat fear. This is why they attack your fortress and take your children.
If goblins won't need to eat, they will need to feed the kidnapped children somehow. How you will deal with this problem?
Presumably they have both chlorophyll and some degree of other pigment.goblins are green n' stuffNot all goblins are green. Some are grey. Grey skin is the dominant skin coloration trait in goblins actually, IIRC.
Or the best of both worlds: goblins are magical monsters that don't need food to survive, but they'll feast on trollflesh once in a while just because they feel like it.
Dwarves, elves, and humans are meat too. Goblins are already snatching babies, why can't they designate some of their booty to be cattle instead of forcing them all into slavery? Sounds scary to me.
Can someone point me to where Hill Dwarves were first mentioned? I searched for it on the forum and didn't find an explanation, so I assume it must be on DF Talk?
But not the dead turning into unicorns.In my mind, there is a whole field of corpses after a siege, and as Ursit McGreedy runs out to claim some really nice socks he suddenly finds himself in the middle of a field of unicorns, clawing their way out of the husks of the fallen like butterflies from a cocoon.
They are very angry unicorns.
Of course, if goblins don't need to eat, and therefore don't spend their time farming or hunting or herding or fishing or what-have-you, what DO they spend their time doing?The first thought that came into my head was "masturbating", and I imagined towers full of goblins just whacking it 24/7.
Of course, if goblins don't need to eat, and therefore don't spend their time farming or hunting or herding or fishing or what-have-you, what DO they spend their time doing?
As it is, all they would have to do to take over the world is just hide in one place until their population grows to insane numbers. I feel like goblins would be more believable if it were somehow in their best interests to constantly pick fights.
I am imagining damming every river in the world so that only dwarves have water and live. There can be only dwarves!
Will their be an ability to replace stone and soil in future? ie: fill square with stone to form a rought stone wall, or fill a square with gatherd soil - or night soil -farmers workshop- to make arable land? or fill with sand for the same effect?FTFY
Just because with this ability ripping down buildings for arable land becomes an option. it also helps players in dwarf mode to get their farms going in a realistic way.
I am imagining damming every river in the world so that only dwarves have water and live. There can be only dwarves!
If you dam a river, where does all the water go?
Also, will the next version have better garbage handling? Currently, in fortress mode, all units that are deceased or traded away in cages remain in memory until you quit the game. Can the next version simply cull deceased and traded units every season and just generate a condensed list of important dead figures without taking up unit slots?
And on a related note, how will the next version handle undead units in memory?
You'll probably have to elaborate on this. Do you mean flags that mem hackers can use, or performance concerns or what?
Mostly performance issues, particularly when creating undead from existing dead figures in history.
Quote from: hermesWill the undead be given life by a necromancer of sorts, or a god, or the spirits of dead entities, or just.. something else? (I'm thinking of Threetoe's story, Warriors of the Dead, where the soldiers who come back to the "real world" have returned from a kind of hell, could the undead be populated from entities who have actually already died in worldgen history?)
There will be some pseudo-justifications for the initial undead stuff, and a lot of them will be previously living world gen people -- the historical ones are tracked, and all the entity pop ones are now too, by cause of death and location. We've been exploring and doing some code on a large variety of afterlife stuff for some months now, but there's no concrete timeline on that, so likely they'll just return from "the dead" if they are being brought back as themselves (rather than just an animated corpse).
Now, I'm not sure if any of this has been asked before, but
In the next version, will all the non-human civilizations have actual, thriving sites based on the model for human cities and fortresses, in lieu of actual city designs unique to each race?
Now, I'm not sure if any of this has been asked before, but
In the next version, will all the non-human civilizations have actual, thriving sites based on the model for human cities and fortresses, in lieu of actual city designs unique to each race?
Non human races get sites in the army arc, probably at least a year from now. Just give non humans the same site tags in the raws until then and they'll work on the exact same mechanics.
Non human races get sites in the army arc, probably at least a year from now. Just give non humans the same site tags in the raws until then and they'll work on the exact same mechanics.
Quote from: B0013Also, will there be variations of city layouts beetween different human civilizations? Like, if a civ makes more "organic" looking cities another may make them more rigid (larger roads, no curves, etc.)
Eventually. First I need to get anything working, and then variety can start to arise, both in the overall layout and in the individual buildings. The number and regularity of intersections, road width, building size etc. is all pretty easy to control now.
I doubt there's going to be a 100% safe burial method for your dwarves, but being respectful will almost always be the better choice (although being respectful and also placing the coffin in a sheer pit might be the best choice in certain areas).
In a future release, if world gen events get simulated during normal play, will it occur in real-time or after a game has ended? I would imagine the latter is more viable at this stage of development, but is having real-time world growth a future goal?http://www.bay12games.com/dwarves/dev.html
I don't know... even when people did believe in the undead they didn't go through such lengths to destroy bodies.
Especially since depending on the culture a proper burial actually IS the best deterrant for the undead. Plus not all undead are "bad".
Though I do notice by my own limited observation that in mythologies that don't explain ghosts strongly tend to focus more on the "that is just how things are" in a similar way you wouldn't write an extra page about why the sky is blue.
Though I do notice by my own limited observation that in mythologies that don't explain ghosts strongly tend to focus more on the "that is just how things are" in a similar way you wouldn't write an extra page about why the sky is blue.
This is caused by the oxygen-rich atmosphere we have, created by the planet's abundant plantlife, first starting with ancient stromatalites. The--- oh, wait, you DIDN'T want a page on why the sky is blue?
As for the undead thing, this seems like guaranteed fun. Especially if you have a particularly bad siege involving a demon lord (will demons come back from the dead too - that'd be scary) and are in a race to stuff as many corpses as you can into coffins and then sealing the tomb areas.
Actually, that makes me wonder if there will be tags to prevent certain types of creatures from getting certain kinds of curses. If I mod in angelic beings, I'm not sure if they should become holy zombie angels. (No, wait, they definitely should; pretend I came up with a better example.)Well, there's already a CANNOT_UNDEAD tag, so I imagine if there are interaction/curse classes (a la creature classes and "reaction (material)" classes), that tag could be generalized into a new tag (NO_CURSE:UNDEAD perhaps).
Could we get some more detail about effects of curses on bodies?We're only at the start of curse development. I'm certain Toady wants to do all of the above and work out multi-cursed creatures as well, but chances are that he can't promise what details will be in definitely until he codes some more - and he may very well post what curses can do (and whether these things are creature effects that work in syndromes as well) on the dev log as the implementations come in (as he did with syndrome effects), long before he posts another "wall of answers".
I think Legion has broke out of Mass Effect....I don't know... even when people did believe in the undead they didn't go through such lengths to destroy bodies.
Especially since depending on the culture a proper burial actually IS the best deterrant for the undead. Plus not all undead are "bad".
Those are the words of someone who hasn't lost 6 dwarves to a zombie plague.
Actually, I think that having crypts that are giant mazes and crammed with traps makes perfect sense in a world where those crypts are filled with mindlessly wandering zombies - the maze keeps them lost, and they'll wander back and forth over the giant serrated blade traps.
When you get right down to it, crypts and the like can only serve two real purposes - A) to give some kind of solace/closure to the living, and B) To keep the dead IN their "final" resting places.
Now then, since we don't need A, because coping with grief is what legendary dining rooms are for, all that matters is B, making sure the dead stay dead. As such, it is not only rational to invest in booby-trapped and drawbridge-enclosable crypts (and making sure your dead are corporeal), it is actually completely irrational not to ensure that you are prepared for the attack you know will be coming, eventually.Though I do notice by my own limited observation that in mythologies that don't explain ghosts strongly tend to focus more on the "that is just how things are" in a similar way you wouldn't write an extra page about why the sky is blue.
This is caused by the oxygen-rich atmosphere we have, created by the planet's abundant plantlife, first starting with ancient stromatalites. The--- oh, wait, you DIDN'T want a page on why the sky is blue?
WHAT DON'T YOU KNOW
I think this could be a really bad idea. It's going to result in magma-frying the dead asap to prevent their zombification...
I doubt there's going to be a 100% safe burial method for your dwarves, but being respectful will almost always be the better choice (although being respectful and also placing the coffin in a sheer pit might be the best choice in certain areas).
I think this could be a really bad idea. It's going to result in magma-frying the dead asap to prevent their zombification...
I doubt there's going to be a 100% safe burial method for your dwarves, but being respectful will almost always be the better choice (although being respectful and also placing the coffin in a sheer pit might be the best choice in certain areas).
If there's no 100% safe burial method, magma-frying will present problems too. Probably ghosts.
in the long run we'll probably see some sort of safe burial to be done, by today or modders.
like a crematory workshop, making hashes that then are to be put into a coffin. zombie ashes are way less troublesome.
but, well, magma plus a better slab interface will do right now.
I'd definitely like to see different types of dead dependent on how they died. Like starvation leading to unending hunger that must be satiated, even by HUMAN FLEEEESH. And you know other stuff.
I'd definitely like to see different types of dead dependent on how they died. Like starvation leading to unending hunger that must be satiated, even by HUMAN FLEEEESH. And you know other stuff.
So a zombie elf is just a regular elf, then?
I'd definitely like to see different types of dead dependent on how they died. Like starvation leading to unending hunger that must be satiated, even by HUMAN FLEEEESH. And you know other stuff.
So a zombie elf is just a regular elf, then?
A slow, stupid, very aggressive elf with hygiene issues.
Also, I wonder if zombie and skeleton curses are going to be in the raws.
in the long run we'll probably see some sort of safe burial to be done, by today or modders.
like a crematory workshop, making hashes that then are to be put into a coffin. zombie ashes are way less troublesome.
but, well, magma plus a better slab interface will do right now.
You seem to forget about ghosts. The main reason toady is making undeath more prevalent now is so that you don't have to be completely negligent to encounter it. Challenges seem less fulfilling if you have to go out of your way for them.
*shudder* stuff like the old "Spirits of fire" would be interesting.
Can we more often expect daily updates, now? It's nice to read a paragraph about the assorted hijinks Mr. Adams gets into in the course of his craft.He updates when he thinks there's something worth sharing; I doubt he can predict that much more accurately than we can.
Can we more often expect daily updates, now? It's nice to read a paragraph about the assorted hijinks Mr. Adams gets into in the course of his craft.He updates when he thinks there's something worth sharing; I doubt he can predict that much more accurately than we can.
Will you take a look at the nobles bugs in the next few updates?
Like, for example bugged king- and dungeon master- arrival.
Do you have plans to put slade into the crafting system?
slade war hammers for my dwarfs! :D
For myself, and I'm sure for others, there comes a time when reading the Dev log that the promised new features just drain my patience, and makes me really excited for the next release.Second that! This release starts something BIG for adventure mode fans, however promises of Release 5 really puts me on the edge here. Finally the world will come alive, and I seriously hope it will survive being alive. I already can't wait for each one of those upcoming releases. It's like when I look on the list of those "Nine" scheduled, I almost can see my 'patience bar' on each of them and for the first one that bar is already empty for two weeks, that's why I shudder when remind myself of the fifth one :D
This last dev post, I dont know why exactly, but it made me really want the next release.
I cant wait for it any longer.
in the long run we'll probably see some sort of safe burial to be done, by today or modders.
like a crematory workshop, making hashes that then are to be put into a coffin. zombie ashes are way less troublesome.
but, well, magma plus a better slab interface will do right now.
You seem to forget about ghosts. The main reason toady is making undeath more prevalent now is so that you don't have to be completely negligent to encounter it. Challenges seem less fulfilling if you have to go out of your way for them.
no, that's the point of slabs.
unless you talk of wandering ghosts, then those are a problem indeed, but for fortress/civ population a burial would prevent ghost and incineration would prevent zombie.
so right now magma+slab is a safe burial mechanism.
*essay about good and bad games*
I do hope, however, that Toady is making all these devlog comments because he is having fun and wants to share it.
We have had an awful lot of complaint threads or paranoid accusations that Toady wasn't posting because someone has offended the Gods, and we must make a ritual sacrifice to appease them, or some other nonsense.
Full list of newly syndromable tags, mayhap?
Toady, with the unusually high frequency of devlogs, I bet you're having way more fun making these curses and undead, than some of the previous stuff you've worked on. Right?
Toady, with the unusually high frequency of devlogs, I bet you're having way more fun making these curses and undead, than some of the previous stuff you've worked on. Right?
Man it makes me a little uncomfortable when people get this meta about the dev process.
Hehe the newest (06/05) devblog is nice. So we will be able to add and remove certain tags? I wonder if that includes the gender respective-tags (no fantasy-world is complete without Genderbender ^^) and the "Prone to rage" tag. The later would be nice to get "rabbies" in for animals, pets and farmers. I wonder also if we could change different things like the regeneration speed or the musclemass of a creature - these two would be nice for a "positive curse" within "good" places.
Toady, with the unusually high frequency of devlogs, I bet you're having way more fun making these curses and undead, than some of the previous stuff you've worked on. Right?
Man it makes me a little uncomfortable when people get this meta about the dev process.
I suppose. But in the end, it's really just a more elaborate way to say "y'all having fun coding this?" which seems innocent enough.
Hehe the newest (06/05) devblog is nice. So we will be able to add and remove certain tags? I wonder if that includes the gender respective-tags (no fantasy-world is complete without Genderbender ^^) and the "Prone to rage" tag. The later would be nice to get "rabbies" in for animals, pets and farmers. I wonder also if we could change different things like the regeneration speed or the musclemass of a creature - these two would be nice for a "positive curse" within "good" places.
Interesting ideas, I would love to know more about what the using the interaction/curse framework for new things means because there are so many cool possibilities. I guess the best part about this is, as was mentioned in DF talk IIRC, the curses are kind of like the first stage of magic in the world, so it really is cool to start having this stuff make an appearance. It feels like this question should have been asked before, but I'll try it anyway...
Will curses extend to inanimate objects such as swords, thrones and socks? If so, could they "transfer" kind of like contact poisons (eg. from sword to wielder)?
Toady, you mentioned that we may request certain geological structures for the next releases. Can you expand on that?
Do you have plans to put slade into the crafting system?
slade war hammers for my dwarfs! :D
Toady, you mentioned that we may request certain geological structures for the next releases. Can you expand on that?
I must have missed this -- where did he mention that?
Quote from: UristocratIt sounds like there are some geology changes anticipated in Release 2. Is there anything that players could research that would be helpful?
Hard to say... I'm going to try to add some new overall structures to it, and if people have favorites it might speed things up a bit.
NW_Kohaku, for the sake of our peace of mind, can you confirm that you are a human by writing down 5 things you don't know?
Right now there is only one way ghosts arise on DF, and it is by unburied corpses. There is ways of dealing with them, and it is by burying the corpse or engraving a slab.
We should wait the release to judge the new features, instead of writing pages and pages of replies based off a line or a picture on the devlog.
...
Even if these complaints threads demanded your blood it wouldn't be as nonsense as complaining about a bridge on a picture showing a work-in-progress.
NW_Kohaku, for the sake of our peace of mind, can you confirm that you are a human by writing down 5 things you don't know?
What Toady doesn't need are people that make two-word lip-service praise comments at every one of Toady's posts just to act as a smokescreen for every comment they make everywhere else in the forum being thinly veiled griefing or insults of the entire community, so as to either openly or implicitly discourage all forms of discussion that they don't personally approve.
NW_Kohaku, for the sake of our peace of mind, can you confirm that you are a human by writing down 5 things you don't know?
...
You just have to want to do the research.Yeah, I know. I love reading about all kinds of stuff concerning informatics. Guess I could use widening my horizons a bit.
That is not what the turing test is.NW_Kohaku, for the sake of our peace of mind, can you confirm that you are a human by writing down 5 things you don't know?
...
You just failed Turing test... ;)
No. While this was not official, I'm pretty convinced that zwei is human while NW_Kohaku might not be.That is not what the turing test is.NW_Kohaku, for the sake of our peace of mind, can you confirm that you are a human by writing down 5 things you don't know?
...
You just failed Turing test... ;)
Toady, you mentioned that we may request certain geological structures for the next releases. Can you expand on that?
I must have missed this -- where did he mention that?
I believe that refers to this quote, by Uristocrat, who was and is working on a suggestion relating to doing more thorough research for material properties (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=80022.0):Quote from: UristocratIt sounds like there are some geology changes anticipated in Release 2. Is there anything that players could research that would be helpful?
Hard to say... I'm going to try to add some new overall structures to it, and if people have favorites it might speed things up a bit.
I went and did some research, and came up with some in this suggestion thread (http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=82309.msg2183808#msg2183808) because of that.
I'm definitely looking forward to having a dwarf's zombie and ghost get into fights, and/or team up and become a wacky crime-fighting duo.
The rookie ghost really gets into the spirit of being a vigilante. The zombie has seen too many good cops un-die, and has a rotten sense of humour as a result.I'm definitely looking forward to having a dwarf's zombie and ghost get into fights, and/or team up and become a wacky crime-fighting duo.
But... which one's the brains of the operation?
The rookie ghost really gets into the spirit of being a vigilante. The zombie has seen too many good cops un-die, and has a rotten sense of humour as a result.I'm definitely looking forward to having a dwarf's zombie and ghost get into fights, and/or team up and become a wacky crime-fighting duo.
But... which one's the brains of the operation?
The rookie ghost really gets into the spirit of being a vigilante. The zombie has seen too many good cops un-die, and has a rotten sense of humour as a result.I'm definitely looking forward to having a dwarf's zombie and ghost get into fights, and/or team up and become a wacky crime-fighting duo.
But... which one's the brains of the operation?
><
Don't take this too far, there could be some adaption decay.
So Footkerchief is the forum search system turned sentient, NW is... I dunno, probably like a brain hooked into a USB port, being fed pure protien from a complex machine system locked away in the basement of some area 51 lab.
Anyway they are like some kind of dynamic duo.
Will Dwarf moods be affected by the activities of souls or gods?
i.e. a master armorsmith dwarf dies and because he is buried in a lavish tomb
his soul is at rest and he inspires a novice armorsmith to make
a masterwork plate item.
This is a random fact, but I am a Baha'i and Baha'is believe that creativity is guided by those who have passed on.
And I like the idea of the dwarves being inspired by specific dwarves from their city's history to make artifacts.
To avoid crossing various streams...-- from Dev Log
I wouldn't mind seeing the ability for ghosts to possess their original corpse, creating some kind of super-zombie-undead. Sort of, having the strength and physical presence of a zombie, but requiring whatever special steps ghosts need to deal with it. If, for example, spectral undead can be fought only with silver, then you'll need a silver weapon to deal with this "zomghost" (or banish/calm the ghost portion via proper burial rites). Dismembering the zombie may still remove the physical part, but the spectral part will still exist and may still allow for physical activity.
Perhaps this could also allow for things like floating heads/skulls, headless corpses?
You do realize this means I shall have to go to an evil area and build a Zombie Mosh Pit to throw goblins in, right?
I had a vision of a fortress made up of the seven original dwarves chopped into bits, each bit now an individual unit.
QuoteTo avoid crossing various streams...-- from Dev Log
It is indeed wise to avoid crossing streams when dealing with ghosts (and other undead creatures).
And whatever you do, if somebody asks whether you are a god, YOU SAY YES!:v
For example, a zombie might not actively seek out relatives, but still freak out relatives if they happen to meet. If possessed by their ghost, they might gain the ghost's ability to seek out and haunt relatives. Which even if the zombie doesn't do anything to the relative (due to being controlled by a benign ghost) might freak out the relatives even more. It's one thing having an old friend come after you in his hunger for brains, but this one might want to chat about old times. A more violent ghost could target the friends and family to first get them to feel real depressed and then kill them, specifically so that their friends and family come back as violent ghosts.
Seems like plenty of ways to torture and maim those poor little dwarves.
There are various kinds of moods, and one of them is the possessed mood. I hope Toady has time to bring this on this release, but as the name of the mood indicates, this was already planned.
Here is the scenario: long ago a powerful king discovered the secrets of life and death. Whether it was from an evil god or his own nefarious research, none can say. All the people knew is that while he reigned, the dead walked the earth. Legions of undead zombies risen from ancient battlefields built him a mighty tower from which his ghastly armies stalked the land. Will the dwarf fortress be next? Happy Mother's Day!
That's not where the game is going, Toady has said plenty of times that it's going towards more procedural generation, and things that aren't procedurally generated tend to be placeholders. Presumably this was but one possible scenario that could occur during worldgen or (eventually) during play.Quote from: Threetoe devpageHere is the scenario: long ago a powerful king discovered the secrets of life and death. Whether it was from an evil god or his own nefarious research, none can say. All the people knew is that while he reigned, the dead walked the earth. Legions of undead zombies risen from ancient battlefields built him a mighty tower from which his ghastly armies stalked the land. Will the dwarf fortress be next? Happy Mother's Day!
... exactly what I think of when I think of mother's day...
(Don't let my mother see that.)
This implies something different about the way that the game's "story" works, however. Right now, there really isn't a consistent story between game worlds, besides dwarves and goblins and elves, and with modding, even that isn't consistent.
If we have this as a "backstory" for every randomly generated world it means that every game world had the same king of the undead (or perhaps different kings who behaved in so identical a fashion that they are individually fungible) or whatever he is called.
This is as opposed to simply having some sort of "undead energy" that just innately causes dead to rise, which could potentially work the same between worlds.
That's not where the game is going, Toady has said plenty of times that it's going towards more procedural generation, and things that aren't procedurally generated tend to be placeholders. Presumably this was but one possible scenario that could occur during worldgen or (eventually) during play.
You did notice that it's actually one of ThreeToe's statements, right? ThreeToe generally posts things phrased to be entertaining rather than to most precisely represent the state of things. And his little stories never represent something that happens in all worlds ever.That's not where the game is going, Toady has said plenty of times that it's going towards more procedural generation, and things that aren't procedurally generated tend to be placeholders. Presumably this was but one possible scenario that could occur during worldgen or (eventually) during play.
That's why I bring it up: It's incongruous with what I remember of Toady's statements.
I had a vision of a fortress made up of the seven original dwarves chopped into bits, each bit now an individual unit.
I once read a story where a demigod once cut up and recombined his three followers into ten lesser beings. If you did this with every migrant, you could have a fort of efficient, emotionless, non-tantrumming dwarves, who don't spawn useless children to boot!
That's why I bring it up: It's incongruous with what I remember of Toady's statements.
I remember one Toady quote floating around in a signature saying something to the effect of "I don't want to create crappy fiction, I want to create a crappy fiction generator".
I would rather like the notion that we have a way to roll up different scenarios, especially if worldgen were to somehow become interactive, so that you can have some "buy in" with the way that worldgen turns out, but having the same scenario every time seems like something very odd for what DF is supposed to be.
This opens the question: Would goblins accept different forms of power apart from raw strength? Say political power or someone who has a powerfull trait/abilty/knowledge/whatever?
This is a random fact, but I am a Baha'i and Baha'is believe that creativity is guided by those who have passed on.
And I like the idea of the dwarves being inspired by specific dwarves from their city's history to make artifacts.
Would goblins accept different forms of power apart from raw strength? Say political power or someone who has a powerfull trait/abilty/knowledge/whatever?
What would drive them to look for a quality leader?I think the goblin word for leader is also their word for 'Somebody that will kill you if you don't do what he says'
I must say that I am concerned that there are still enormous issues with the nobility and the military, even a year after DF2010's release. These issues will be solved at some point, won't they?
These issues will be solved at some point, won't they?Well if they're issues, they're likely bound to be solved at some point.
I must say that I am concerned that there are still enormous issues with the nobility and the military, even a year after DF2010's release. These issues will be solved at some point, won't they?
Dwarf Fortress is a work in progress. Many bugs are in fact placeholder features which will be finished properly in the future, and others are in fact constantly being fixed. Recently we had more than five releases with mostly bugfixes.
Currently the development includes a feature release (new stuff) followed by a release fixing the bugs brought by the new features, followed by a release (or more) fixing old bugs. The next release will be a feature release, so you should expect new bugs with it (which will be fixed shortly after, as with the last cycle of releases).
By the way, the last cycle of bugfixing saw next to 150 issues fixed in about a month and a half.
Will adventures be able to learn these new "secrets"?(really want to play as a necromancer)I can't speak for Toady and ThreeToe, but they want adventurers to be interactionable, and secrets are really just a special type of syndrome; it sounds like low hanging fruit, and the engraved secret slabs seem like a step towards it.
I'd like me some undead-raising-secret inscribed artifact bed. Raise skeletal armies from the comfort of your bedroom.
A bed would be impractical, as rarely there are corpses over them. An artifact coffin, however...
I also had a zombie hydra defending the kobolds that killed it.Kobold necromancers.
This is not a bug, it's a feature. An awesome feature.
As much as I'd like undead megabeasts to come back and lead kobold armies, it's a bug.
Knowing about a secret and using said sectret could be two very separate things.Possibly. I think Toady is taking a more Lovecraftian approach though, in which knowledge of the mythos is corrupting and transformative in itself. Since these are things the gods want kept secret, and which are often told to mortals by demons, I think that's thematically appropriate. It could vary by the secret of course.
...a syndrome which negates aging...
bathing in kittenblood does not work...Quote from: Toady One...a syndrome which negates aging...
Well, there's at least one thing people (including myself) have suggested over and over again.
knowing about a sectret and using said sectret could be 2 very separate things.
Knowing about a secret and using said sectret could be two very separate things.Possibly. I think Toady is taking a more Lovecraftian approach though, in which knowledge of the mythos is corrupting and transformative in itself. Since these are things the gods want kept secret, and which are often told to mortals by demons, I think that's thematically appropriate. It could vary by the secret of course.
There's no reason why a historical figure that gains immortality and the power to animate the dead should immediately become an antisocial evil tower-living guy, but we'll have to wing that part until we get to the personality rewrite in Release 6.
A bit meta, but I must wonder why there's been such little discussing over the last few hours. The devlog is in its most active state in ages,
I guess Toady is going to need to impart "Secret Ethics" so that people who gain knowledge of some secrets won't nessarily like to use it.Ideally this should function as an outgrowth of the personality system in general, without requiring a specific thing of its own.
and possibly some changes these secrets force upon the hearer. If this was a Lovecraftian universe each secret would impart insanity.Just hearing a secret shouldn't usually do anything beyond granting the capacity to use it. Maybe in some particularly unusual instances it would, but I wouldn't care to see that be the norm.
Actually I wonder why he doesn't just call it "The Arcane" (given it is the same thing)Connotation. Calling it "arcane", while technically accurate, implies it is generic magic and separate from the normal rules of the universe, due to the use of that word in fantasy.
Just hearing a secret shouldn't usually do anything beyond granting the capacity to use it. Maybe in some particularly unusual instances it would, but I wouldn't care to see that be the norm
Connotation. Calling it "arcane", while technically accurate, implies it is generic magic
Can you cite any examples other than the Lovecraft mythos? Historically, I'm pretty sure such ideas are almost nonexistent.QuoteJust hearing a secret shouldn't usually do anything beyond granting the capacity to use it. Maybe in some particularly unusual instances it would, but I wouldn't care to see that be the norm
It is a common theme that arcane knowledge were not meant for mortals to have. Either the power corrupting them or the secrets by their very nature corrupt those that know it. For example in Lovecraftian universes it is that the true knowledge of the world is inherantly maddening and we remain ignorant for our own safety/sanity.
I don't see an implication of cheating. I don't see where you're coming from on this at all. Perhaps our cultural backgrounds differ in this.QuoteConnotation. Calling it "arcane", while technically accurate, implies it is generic magic
But instead it is "Secrets" which implies 'cheating'.
I am just surprised because it is probably the MOST accurate use of "Arcane" I ever seen and yet it isn't going to have its name. It is almost disapointing. It is like seeing someone use classical fairies and call them "Pranksters".Sadly I feel that "arcane" has drifted too far from its original meaning. Considering classical fairies are often called "the fae" in modern times, significant drift of meaning appears to have happened there too. Language changes. You may not like it, but it happens.
Yes, So I guess you like "Pranksters" Nenjin :PHe is not necessarily ignorant of it. Consider that he may have ignored your argument as uncompelling, or even have been responding to it, ignoring your comparison as irrelevant.
Eat that! Previous page ignorance!
Can you cite any examples other than the Lovecraft mythos?
I don't see an implication of cheating. I don't see where you're coming from on this at all.
He is not necessarily ignorant of it. Consider that he may have ignored your argument as uncompelling, or even have been responding to it, ignoring your comparison as irrelevant
Language changes. You may not like it, but it happens
On a positiv note: Zen-buddhism. Suddenly understanding for eaxample a Koan can lead to "enlightment" or atleast to much more wisdom.
Cite instances of this, please. As far as I'm aware, this is not a tenet of Abrahamic religions. Being somewhat educated in history and theology, I would be quite surprised to learn of something of this nature.QuoteCan you cite any examples other than the Lovecraft mythos?-Catholocism, Christianity, Judaism, Islam... So them
-Dungeons and DragonsThe Far Realm does this, but it's Lovecraft with a coat of paint, so that hardly counts. Other than that, Arcane power doesn't corrupt any more than other sorts of power do.
-Dr. WhoI'm not particularly familiar with the franchise, so I'll accept this as probably valid, but a show about fighting aliens and time traveling isn't really the same tone as DF.
It is possible I am misunderstanding this. If you mean what I think you mean:QuoteLanguage changes. You may not like it, but it happens
Actually in this case it didn't. The only difference is the people who will jump on the word Arcane.
"Cite instances of this, please"
Other than that, Arcane power doesn't corrupt any more than other sorts of power do
The change is to the connotation and perceived meaning of the word. Because language is formed by consensus, if the word is perceived to have different meaning, it does have different meaning. Hence, change.
He is not necessarily ignorant of it. Consider that he may have ignored your argument as uncompelling, or even have been responding to it, ignoring your comparison as irrelevant.
They gained the knowledge of good and evil and thus were able to do good and evil.Quote"Cite instances of this, please"
While I could get into other examples including writings on the corrupting nature of demonology. The EASIEST example would be "Adam and Eve" with the "Fruit of knowledge of good and evil".
Other than that, Arcane power doesn't corrupt any more than other sorts of power do
This is of course ignoring the many powers in dungeons and dragons that ARE knowledge that kills, drives people insane, and stuuf.Oh, that's true. There are some spells like that, especially in 4e.
Whether you think it's required or not, it makes the word carry extra meaning which it now carries. The meaning now encompasses additional information. Hence, it is altered.QuoteThe change is to the connotation and perceived meaning of the word. Because language is formed by consensus, if the word is perceived to have different meaning, it does have different meaning. Hence, change.
Yes but in this case the conotation didn't alter the meaning of the word. It only made it carry extra meaning that isn't required.
it's often because I can't understand what s/he's trying to say.
They gained the knowledge of good and evil and thus were able to do good and evil.
Quote"Cite instances of this, please"
While I could get into other examples including writings on the corrupting nature of demonology. The EASIEST example would be "Adam and Eve" with the "Fruit of knowledge of good and evil".
They gained the knowledge of good and evil and thus were able to do good and evil.
Cite instances of this, please. As far as I'm aware, this is not a tenet of Abrahamic religions. Being somewhat educated in history and theology, I would be quite surprised to learn of something of this nature.QuoteCan you cite any examples other than the Lovecraft mythos?-Catholocism, Christianity, Judaism, Islam... So them
There's also plenty of examples in the bible and in catholic writings, such as the arc of the covenant, which contain the ten commandments, write by the hand of god himself, whose power is so enormous and incomprehensible that merely touching it can kill a man, and seraphims who cover themselves with 2 of their 3 pair of wings, apparently because their form is beyond human understanding that merely gazing at it would mean ruin, and they are described as the creatures most similar to god.
Do you foresee secrets playing a role in the formation/abilities/motives of cults in world-gen?
Obviously the Lovecraftian mythos is big on the "learn secret of the Old Ones, go mad from the revelation, work to summon them so they can kill us all and end our miserable insignificant existences" kind of cult, but I for one would like to find cults based on secrets learned from other spheres. Glancing at the list (http://df.magmawiki.com/index.php/Sphere), I can imagine some kind god giving a mortal the secret of Happiness at which point he goes spreading it around, causing all kinds of shenanigans. And some of the weird ones could be quite entertaining- having to foil the machinations of the Cult of Muck as an adventurer could be all kinds of amusing, not to mention baffling once you make it to the head of the cult and he whips out whatever secret is associated with that sphere.
Will there be different kinds of immortality? Like the plain old "You never die of old age" but also things like "Bodysurfing" or leaching "Years" from someone.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bodysurfing
My immediate impression of that idea is that-
*puffs pipe*
- you're taking things a wee bit too far.
Sorry, that was directed at Fieari. Your points are valid.My immediate impression of that idea is that-
*puffs pipe*
- you're taking things a wee bit too far.
It makes sense.
A demon could bring you great wealth... but a demon does not need wealth (except to bribe humans I guess).
A dragon could teach you the roar that gives you great strength. Though a dragon already has great strength. Perhaps the secret is that of the dragon rather a secret that the dragon contains itself.
My immediate impression of that idea is that-
*puffs pipe*
- you're taking things a wee bit too far.
It makes sense.
A demon could bring you great wealth... but a demon does not need wealth (except to bribe humans I guess).
A dragon could teach you the roar that gives you great strength. Though a dragon ali thinkready has great strength. Perhaps the secret is that of the dragon rather a secret that the dragon contains itself.
Will it be possible for there to be multiple demographics in a single city?
Aside from the civ owning the city there would probably be cultural minorities, including dwarves and elves.
On the same topic, will we see any cultural/racial discrimination? I'm mainly talking about humans who are racist in nature, but as well as about dwarv-elf conflict.
Can we see sections of city dedicated to a subculture, you know, ghettos and the like. Perhaps genocides and civil wars in the future that shift balance of the city, perhaps going as far as the city changing it's owner civ?
In such cases, will there be any undead cases in which defeated defenders of the city and their ancestors raise to exact revenge on them?
Will there be in general any racial/cultural preferences among undead? (eg.: dead dwarf attacking elves rather than humans, dead human not attacking his family if there are other targets, etc.)
Since current deities occasionally use the zombie and skeleton flags when their spheres are compatible, will the deities in the upcoming release use certain or all curses in their description? Such that, if there was a "winged zombie" interaction associated with sky and death, a deity of sky and death might be depicted as a winged zombie human?
Will some of the new night creature behaviors work for other creatures as well, whether civilized, wild, mega, or procedural (I could certainly see demons spreading curses, and if transformation effects were to come in, that could be very interesting for mods)?
With night creatures, you mentioned that you might need to do some questing to find a weakness to a night creature. Will it actually be impossible to kill night creatures without exploiting their weaknesses? (As in, is there no way to simply chop them into a fine enough paste faster than they regenerate, or just drag them away from whatever magical power source they have to kill them "the hard way", so that we must rely upon finding a weakness, no matter the difference in strength or skill our characters have with our enemies?)
Likewise, if some sort of religious practice to divine weaknesses or to exorcise undead must happen to kill certain creatures, will we, as players, (at least some point in the future, perhaps having to wait on general magic system) have the ability to become one of those religious figures, capable of divining or performing exorcisms of ghosts or reversals of curses on our own, and can our fortresses train exorcists or the like to combat un-slabbable ghosts? Or do we have no power to fight these things on our own?
Will regeneration of any sort be possible as a syndrom of a curse/"disease"/something.
Will there ever be "benign" undead or cursed people who do not automatically enemies of the entity they came from? Like for example, undead from an [undeath][good] sphere land or somehting that just go back to their old life?
A question on curses: Will curses be able to just alter certain attributes or do they turn anything in the same "nightcreature"? For example could we make a curse that makes the victims skin fall off, turns the the nails/claws and teeth to iron and replaces eyes with fire so that a dog and human both affected by said curse are similiar but still different creatures? Or does the "turning" curse make anything it hits into same beasty, say a 5 meter tall head-crap? Both options would actually be neat.
Will cursed areas have physical effects on dwarves? Like randomly bursting in hives, starting to vomit from nausea, bleeding from the mouth, or something more serious like a dwarf suddenly going blind in one eye or both? These would be rare events, maybe similar in frequency as artifacts.
Player-run fortresses can potentially have a powerful impact on geography, e.g. by damming rivers and such. Will players be able to influence wider geography over time through such actions in future releases? Will damming a river starve human settlements downriver, contribute to desertification, or have similar effects?
Regarding the future bloat implementation below, and seeings that ghosts are now getting attention from you, can we expect to see some ghost based lever pulling soon?
Also are there any plans to have ghosts be active AND invisable some of the time, so then when poltergeist type activities occur, it would add some mystery to how those events actually happened? Adventure mode with ghosts could be quite creepy and cool if instead of seeing the ghost every time, you instead see a chair slide accross the floor, or get a message saying you felt a cold shiver(ghost passing through you/trying to interact with you)
Toady will monsters (Night creatures, Megabeasts, semimegabeasts, named creatures) still get along perfectly happy with eachother for quite some time? I am only wondering because with sewers I was sort of wondering if one type of night creatures could somehow claim dominance over the sewers and beat out the others, or suppress them.
But does the whole cursing thing apply to severed body parts as well? With our hypothetically decapitated elf, is there a chance of the the severed head also rising as a zombie? For that matter, if you chop the arm off the elf after it's become a zombie, will you have a severed arm that is a zombie? Or will you just get the severed arm of a zombie?
Could we get some more detail about effects of curses on bodies?
Will curses extend to inanimate objects such as swords, thrones and socks? If so, could they "transfer" kind of like contact poisons (eg. from sword to wielder)?
Is the current mechanic for night creatures kidnapping spouses in world gen going to be incorporated into the curse/interaction system, or will it remain separate, like fire breath is separate from material breath?
Will Dwarf moods be affected by the activities of souls or gods?
Would goblins accept different forms of power apart from raw strength? Say political power or someone who has a powerfull trait/abilty/knowledge/whatever?
has any formal modeling been done of the various new curses or other "contagious" effects? Can you present mathematical conditions under which the undead, werewolves, night creatures, and plague will (probably) not destroy the world by accident during worldgen?
Will adventures be able to learn these new "secrets"?
Is the raw implementation of necromancy a special case, or do we have an arbitrary interaction-effecting tag for creatures/syndromes? On that note, I take it that interactions have a fairly flexible raw framework themselves?
If secrets are transferred by an artifact slab, is the ownership of the slab required to use the secret?
Will possessed dwarfs have a chance to inscribe secrets on slabs instead of creating an artifact? Or maybe inscribe secrets whispered by the demon on the artifact itself? Also: will secrets be found only on slabs (and later, books) or will it be possible to find a secret on a sword blade, like a power word to make this sword ignite?
Will demons and megabeasts with the death sphere be able to raise the undead? Will the undead megabeasts (Zombie Dragons for example) appear from the beggining or be raised after being killed?
What's the time table for spheres other than Death granting transformations and secrets? I know it's a long-term dev goal, I'm just curious to know if we can expect non-necromantic secrets and alterations next release.
What's the difference between Inns and Taverns in DF?
Will secrets make an appearance in dwarf mode any time soon?
Lets say that a demon relates a secret to a man in world gen. That man writes it down on his fancy stone tablet. A megabeast then steals that tablet and takes it back to his lair. World gen ends, and the player embarks with their dwarves on that lair. Will the tablet be there for the dwarves to find? When can we expect some kind of meaningful interaction with that kind of world-gen artifact?
Do you foresee secrets playing a role in the formation/abilities/motives of cults in world-gen?
Is this going to become the framework for a magic system in the future, with every sphere having its own secrets, which can be used for a variety of ways, with its own risks and benefits? Like, using the secret of deformity to alter your own body, gaining extra limbs, giving yourself wings, scales, tails, increasing/decreasing your size, and doing the same to others, or using the secret of strenght and being able to wrestle a bronze colossus to the ground?
With secrets giving the gods tangible roles in the world, will the temples or religions have an increased functionality in the near future?
Will the followers of a deity have any special relation to the secrets granted by that deity? For example, will followers of a religion seek to recover or destroy the tablets recording their god's secrets that fall into the hands of non believers?
Will there be different kinds of immortality? Like the plain old "You never die of old age" but also things like "Bodysurfing" or leaching "Years" from someone.