thats a helluva lot more complicated than just adding in a new negative thought.
[CAVE_ADAPTION] = Trump thisNot really. Can you imagine being a guard, locked in a fort, with little more than the occasional beating to keep things interesting? Dwarves aren't automatically cave adapt. If one gets enough of the outside world, they might like it.
---As an aside, I think it's high time that somebody, somewhere, mods in an Amontillado reaction.
For the love of Armok, Montresor!
(Yes, Uristnado, for the love of Armok.)
[CAVE_ADAPTION] = Trump thisNot really. Can you imagine being a guard, locked in a fort, with little more than the occasional beating to keep things interesting? Dwarves aren't automatically cave adapt. If one gets enough of the outside world, they might like it.
Actually, certain personalities should affect this too, like adventure and excitement seeking... sitting around and getting bored to death = melanchony
and/or
The extra social butterflies who also like 'contact' with the outside world.
Would work the other way too for those not adaptable to caves...
There's a huge difference between being locked inside a chamber barely big enough to sit down in, and locked inside a luxurious fortress. I posit that the main difference, at least for a dwarf that cares little for sunlight, is size. And I think there's a pretty easy way to find the size -- the game can track the size of map areas during the connected-component rebuilds that it already does during map changes. This would allow any dwarf to know how large of an area they can traverse at any given time.Soooo...legendary dinning room?
The unhappy thought associated with being "trapped" could scale with the size of the accessible area, so that a small area would result in claustrophobic madness, a larger area in depression, and a sufficiently large area in no unhappy thought at all.
Cave adaptation already does the job.
Cave adaptation already does the job.
The OP is basically talking about claustrophobia. Cave adaptation is more like claustrophilia.
As an 'acquired' trait? >.>
From that perspective.... its even worse of a reason to give to dwarves... as for non-Dwarves... that is fine.
I'd say its more of a go stir crazy cause you are stuck in the same hole for a long time with no way out?
Either way... make
A: legendary/masterpiece dwarf fortress
B: very little idling dwarves
C: very drunk dwarves
A+B+C= negate?
As an 'acquired' trait? >.>
From that perspective.... its even worse of a reason to give to dwarves... as for non-Dwarves... that is fine.
Acquired? Which one? If you're talking about cave adaptation, I was only saying it's closer to claustrophilia than phobia, not that it's the same thing. It makes plenty of sense that dwarves could develop cave adaptation while still being prone to claustrophobia -- cave adaptation is obviously a physiological reaction to protracted darkness, while claustrophobia is a psychological reaction to protracted confinement. They're practically orthogonal.I'd say its more of a go stir crazy cause you are stuck in the same hole for a long time with no way out?
"going stir crazy cause you are stuck in the same hole for a long time with no way out" definitely falls under the umbrella of claustrophobia.Either way... make
A: legendary/masterpiece dwarf fortress
B: very little idling dwarves
C: very drunk dwarves
A+B+C= negate?
I really can't tell what this ABC thing means. What's being negated?
In a gist, my problem with this:
Cave Adapt: Urist McDwarf learns to love living in a 'small' dark hole.
(A cave is considered a 'small' dark hole right? Or what do you define it as...? Cause the way you just described it sounds more like 'Darkness_Adapt'...)
Claustrophobia: But, oh no... game mechanic rears its head, Urist McDwarf has gained a fear of living in said 'small' dark hole...
You and I clearly arn't seeing the same thing...
Caves don't have to be small. Dwarves get cave adaptation whether they're living in a gigantic cavern or a tiny cellar. The common factor is darkness. So yes, by all indications it could be called "darkness adaptation."
I agree that there needs to be some way of making sure that dwarves aren't completely cut off from the rest of the world - dwarves can drown, after all, which means (presumably) that they need to breathe, which means they shouldn't be able to wall themselves off underground.
This suggestion would be far less CPU intensive & far simpler than tracking air loss/flows, so I think it's a good idea.
In any case, I think the idea that more space equaling a smaller chance of going crazy isn't necessarily the only logical solution. You're assuming that dwarven psychology matches human psychology closely (which isn't true in the case of DF dwarves - see dwarven reaction to socks, their happiness with dining rooms, &c. &c.) - perhaps it is the 'unable to leave' part that makes them go crazy rather than the 'enclosed space' part. In other words, it doesn't matter how much space there is underground, if a dwarf can't leave the fortress and strike out for some distant outpost to start afresh, he goes berserk.
My prefered solution to the siege thing would be to allow creatures to climb up and down cliffs, albeit very slowly. Thus, goblins could climb down airshafts into your fortress, and if you don't have any airshafts, pretty soon you won't have any dwarves either.
tracking air would be an amazing additionShouldn't and couldn't this go in with the addition of poisons? Or should it go with the expansion of liquid types?
Caves don't have to be small. Dwarves get cave adaptation whether they're living in a gigantic cavern or a tiny cellar. The common factor is darkness. So yes, by all indications it could be called "darkness adaptation."Actually, cave adaptation is caused by the presence of a roof. In one of my forts, I have barracks under a constructed roof (marked as inside/light/above ground). When they get out from under it (outside/light/above ground), they get sun-sick.
Can't we just use the different probability for each race to get certain phobias at birth? That would mean that dwarves are much more likely to get agoraphobia. The founding dwarves still would like to be outdoors, otherwise they wouldn't go hiking across the land. Their descendants, however, are just as likely as - or slightly less than - the average dwarf to get agoraphobia as an inborn trait. That would mean they would avoid coming outside, and are practically stuck at their fortress, which they don't mind, since there's mining to do. Comfortable travel to other fortresses would only be possible with special wagons (for nobles, who have to) or tunnel.Caves don't have to be small. Dwarves get cave adaptation whether they're living in a gigantic cavern or a tiny cellar. The common factor is darkness. So yes, by all indications it could be called "darkness adaptation."Actually, cave adaptation is caused by the presence of a roof. In one of my forts, I have barracks under a constructed roof (marked as inside/light/above ground). When they get out from under it (outside/light/above ground), they get sun-sick.
If the idea of this is to impose some harmful morale effect from a long-term siege, then the rule ought to say exactly that: your dwarves get morale problems during a long-term siege. None of this "no available path to the edge of the map" business, and no goddamn claustrophobia. The problem isn't the physical confinement, it's the stress of being surrounded by guys that want to kill you.
And here's how you do that: As long as a siege is going on, dwarves don't get positive thoughts. At all. Happiness is suspended for the duration. Negative thoughts, however, have the usual effect. The only exception to this could be "taking joy in slaughter", because kicking some goblin ass might be therapeutic.
When the siege is lifted, everyone gets a massive morale boost.
This seems like a better model for the kind of tense tedium that goes on in a threatened city, and since your Legendary Dining Rooms and other stupid crap no longer work, you have to switch to keeping morale up by satisfying basic needs and making sure everyone keeps busy with work.
If the idea of this is to impose some harmful morale effect from a long-term siege, then the rule ought to say exactly that: your dwarves get morale problems during a long-term siege. None of this "no available path to the edge of the map" business, and no goddamn claustrophobia. The problem isn't the physical confinement, it's the stress of being surrounded by guys that want to kill you.
And here's how you do that: As long as a siege is going on, dwarves don't get positive thoughts. At all. Happiness is suspended for the duration. Negative thoughts, however, have the usual effect. The only exception to this could be "taking joy in slaughter", because kicking some goblin ass might be therapeutic.
When the siege is lifted, everyone gets a massive morale boost.
This seems like a better model for the kind of tense tedium that goes on in a threatened city, and since your Legendary Dining Rooms and other stupid crap no longer work, you have to switch to keeping morale up by satisfying basic needs and making sure everyone keeps busy with work.
It was just a possibility and example of a mechanism for producing that effect with minimal framerate issues. The calculation for seeing if a dwarf cannot reach the edge of the map is the same one that the trade depot uses. If a dwarf cannot reach the edge of the map, goblins cannot reach said dwarf. Thus, a penalty for having a retractable bridge over a 1 tile wide channel and relying on that for defense. And limiting the checks to every time they go on break would be to save CPU cycles.
Ehh, that would only work if the fortress is filled with miasma or hateful vermin.
In a decently designed fortress, even with no positive thoughts at all, it would take a very long time for anything really bad to happen due to unhappy thoughts. Probably too long for it to be really urgent.
I dislike this suggestion because it artificially limits what the player can create.
I like the idea of creating entirely self-contained, utterly cut-off underground empires with no surface contact at all. It's interesting. Using 'your dwarves suddenly go insane if you close the floodgate that they have never, ever, ever walked over at any point in the past ten years' to prevent that strikes me as heavyhanded.
The game isn't complete yet, not by a long way. There will be additional things to do and challenges to meet beyond angry groups of goblins halfheartedly milling about outside and wandering through your traps. Don't think of ways to make the existing challenges harder or more unavoidable; focus on the entire new types of challenges and dangers that will be added in the future.
Um ...
If you want dwarves to crack under siege pressure, why just not give those who can't handle pressure unhappy thoughts from the siege?
Dwarves know they are safe from the attack... Why would they even care?
Because they know they can't contact their family back at the Mountainhomes any more. Because that +green glass corkscrew+ they'd ordered from the traders won't arrive as long as the goblins are there. Because they can't strike out with six chosen buddies to make a new start. Because the goblins are the enemy, and they should be fighting instead of hiding, no matter the odds. Because refusing to deal with problems is fundamentally un-dwarven.Dwarves know they are safe from the attack... Why would they even care?Exactly. If your Dwarves are sitting inside their fort inside totally safe from Goblins, what do they care if some Goblins (which they wouldn't know were there anyways) are sitting around outside the fort?
Because they know they can't contact their family back at the Mountainhomes any more. Because that +green glass corkscrew+ they'd ordered from the traders won't arrive as long as the goblins are there. Because they can't strike out with six chosen buddies to make a new start. Because the goblins are the enemy, and they should be fighting instead of hiding, no matter the odds. Because refusing to deal with problems is fundamentally un-dwarven.
Dwarves know they are safe from the attack... Why would they even care?
Exactly. If your Dwarves are sitting inside their fort inside totally safe from Goblins, what do they care if some Goblins (which they wouldn't know were there anyways) are sitting around outside the fort?
New challenge: Dwarves start to get twitchy and paranoid from being surrounded by a hostile army for too long. Now you actually have to do something!Yes, but this is a challenge that radically forces people to play the game in your preferred way.
Ahem.The question of whether the dwarves are in danger or not is a matter for the player's defenses and the fortress. If the enemy can break through... then they'll break through, and there's no need for a hamhanded magic force that makes your dwarves go insane, because they'll go insane as a result of the enemy shooting at them.
Goblins will not always be able to be deterred by a small moat. In fact, at some point in the future, they may even be able to get through constructed walls. So no, "they're on the other side of the moat, what's there to be afraid of?" is not a valid argument.
... but it shouldn't hamhandedly be made impossible by making it so that when you have an invulnerable fortress, your dwarves still go insane from the non-existent pressure of enemies who can't hurt them.
... What you're asking for here is just that -- a mechanic to ensure that no fortress, no matter how well designed, is ever able to be (near-)perfectly defended against sieges.
... but you shouldn't be magically forced to rush out of your fortress and attack them -- that's silly and unrealistic.
Yeah. That's all well and good, but when did I say all dwarves go insane from having goblins outside? Nope. I said that the current game structure of goblins having no way to cross a moat doesn't really trump the idea of there being a penalty for lockdown, because goblins eventually will have a way to get across the moat.
...what if I mine away the top of a mountain, smooth the cliff face so nobody can get anywhere near it, and set up a meeting spot there, far out of reach of non-flying enemies? Would that avert cabin fever?Dwarves crack more easily than most real people in DF. No, that wall would not avert cabin fever, because methods for AIs to get over walls will eventually be implemented.
(Cabin fever seems undwarven, though.)
...what if I mine away the top of a mountain, smooth the cliff face so nobody can get anywhere near it, and set up a meeting spot there, far out of reach of non-flying enemies? Would that avert cabin fever?
(Cabin fever seems undwarven, though.)
On the other hand, if your sitting in your house that has bomb proof walls, steel shutters with firing slits over the windows and what basically amounts to a vault door as your front door, and you've got about ten guys in there with you who are militarily trained who have the armour, guns, ammo and "kick-your-face-in" attitude and hordes of loyal attack dogs to fight off the enemies. And you've got enough provisions to last a few years; I doubt you'll be that on edge.
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
The initial post gave me the strong impression that it was intended to make sealing the entrance impossible, I get the feeling that few participants want this. Can we change this from a discussion about preventing a sealed fortress, and turn it into a discussion about the potentially insignificant psychological impact of this?
I would want this to be relative to the greatness of the fortress, if the initial 7 seal themselves off from a 20 goblin ambush, then that will be a serious threat. If 20 goblins are camping outside of a 200 dwarf strong settlement then, even with no military at all, locking them out is likely to be seen as more of a convenience than desperation...
There should be many more ways to maintain morale than just military. Traps and ballista should count. Stockpiles of high quality armour and weapons should encourage people who are facing military conscription. Fortifications, especially those that are raised relative to one of their facings should multiply the effects of archers and siege weapons. Not to mention what happens if a goblin paths over a tile that has a clear line between it and a floodgate that is holding back a large quantity of magma...
I think this whole "morale bonuses for having military/traps/weapons/fortifications" idea is a mistake. Seriously, you want a morale boost for a goblin walking in front of a floodgate?That doesn't make any sense. Soldiers used to get huge moral boosts if they thought the location they were in was difficult/nigh impossible to capture by the enemy, as would civilians.
During a siege, you should get morale penalties for getting killed or wounded, and morale bonuses for actually killing or capturing invaders, by whatever means, but not for anything else.