Then I see him at the ammo stockpile equipping himself with bolts. I designate some trees. Naturally, he can no longer wield his axe, because he's carrying around his shiny new artifact crossbow. I fiddle with his soldiering preferences for a bit, make him a quiver to free up his other hand. Nothing. He's stuck in a loop currently, attempting to pick up his axe so he can cut down trees, but he refuses to drop the artifact.
Oh well, another interesting Dwarf Fortress lesson learned.
But apparantly the timer bugged out and it rarely if ever works that way.
quote:
Originally posted by Tamren:
<STRONG>It used to be that dwarves would drop/become obsessed with/ect after 5 years.But apparantly the timer bugged out and it rarely if ever works that way.</STRONG>
I belive toady said it takes 72 times as long as it should, so they drop it in 360 years, baring accident or death.
quote:
Originally posted by ktrey:
<STRONG>So I turned on Crossbow-Making for my Wood Cutter to churn out some bone crossbows in preparation for the Dwarven Caravan (I've found offering them crossbows helps attract marksdwarves). He goes fey and creates an artifact crossbow. Awesome, I think to myself.Then I see him at the ammo stockpile equipping himself with bolts. I designate some trees. Naturally, he can no longer wield his axe, because he's carrying around his shiny new artifact crossbow. I fiddle with his soldiering preferences for a bit, make him a quiver to free up his other hand. Nothing. He's stuck in a loop currently, attempting to pick up his axe so he can cut down trees, but he refuses to drop the artifact.
Oh well, another interesting Dwarf Fortress lesson learned.</STRONG>
Can't you make him into a soldier and keep him that way?
quote:
Originally posted by Marsume:
<STRONG>That's exactly what I would do. Legendary guy with an artifact crossbow? Let him train up a bit- he would be a god. Until he got hit by a lucky shot which seem all too lucky.</STRONG>
I was under the impression that the quality/material of the crossbow does not affect the damage done when something is shot with that crossbow; that is decided by the material/quality of the bolt used.
The only context an arifact crossbow is useful in is when the dwarf using it has run out of ammunition and proceeds to used their crossbow as a hammer, in which case you can expect righteous death to be handed to your enemies.
Oh, and my wood-choppers are expendable (There are elephants and big cats outside). My workshop workers, most of whom are legendary, don't do anything that might take them outside.
[ August 27, 2007: Message edited by: Shadowlord ]
quote:
Originally posted by ktrey:
<STRONG>I've found offering [the dwarven caravan] crossbows helps attract marksdwarves</STRONG>
quote:
Originally posted by Savok:
<STRONG>
Read The Wiki</STRONG>
Wow, you managed to link someone to the wiki on a sentence that wasn't even a question. Why would you even attack him on a tactic he believes to be working? Yeah, the wiki is awesome, and it would be beneficial for all players to read it in full. However, a lot of people like to just play and experience rather than perusing a volume of information. Next time you feel like leaving a non-constructive one line reply, try resisting the urge and you might leave a more positive impression.
quote:
Originally posted by sinoth:
<STRONG>Wow, you managed to link someone to the wiki on a sentence that wasn't even a question. Why would you even attack him on a tactic he believes to be working? Yeah, the wiki is awesome, and it would be beneficial for all players to read it in full. However, a lot of people like to just play and experience rather than perusing a volume of information. Next time you feel like leaving a non-constructive one line reply, try resisting the urge and you might leave a more positive impression.</STRONG>
Thanks sinoth, that needed to be said and I was rather hesitant to bring it up. The wiki is a fabulous resource, but many of us already have it a click away in our bookmarks (some of the charts for material values are rather handy, and I can never seem to remember how to keep my Ferite and Berite straight) and the specific topic of this thread isn't really present on the wiki. When I first began to play Dwarf Fortress I was well aware of the wiki, but when I see someone wanting to know how to unsuspend a bridge or cage an animal, it's just as easy to post a quick, helpful reply instead of digging through the wiki and linking it in your response. New players will eventually peruse the wiki on their own time. I'm hardly a new player.
This was posted to DF Dwarf Mode Discussion for that specific reason, to create Discussion on an otherwise odd phenomenon. If I had a question, I'm certain it would have been posted in another thread. Perhaps the DF Gameplay Questions board?
Also, I don't go "digging through the wiki instead of posting a quick, helpful reply." I know exactly where nearly everything is in the wiki; all I need to do is click on a bookmark, type in a name, hit enter, and copypaste the URL of the page.
When there is a quick, short, helpful reply to give, I give it, in addition to the wiki link. I prefer to not copypaste the relevant section of text from the wiki, as the post is static but the wiki is dynamic.
quote:
Originally posted by Havell:
<STRONG>I was under the impression that the quality/material of the crossbow does not affect the damage done when something is shot with that crossbow; that is decided by the material/quality of the bolt used.</STRONG>
Apparantly its both. This is why missile weapons are ridiculously deadly. Of course that how it works in real life. But the problem is the current damage is only a X modifier, when they stack together it gets out of hand.
quote:
Originally posted by Savok:
<STRONG>If something incorrect is said and believed, it will spread, thereby damaging a vast number of fortresses. I correct incorrect things.</STRONG>
Sorry but while your intention is good your method is bullshit. If you to correct people then you should explain exactly why they are wrong instead of just spouting off links to the wiki. Doing so does not even tell people what the problem is and where to find the solution and only serves to increase confusion.
Trading away crossbows will not increase the chance of getting marksdwarves. The wiki does NOT explain this.
And for anyone who is curious, you attract military dwarves of a certain type by making their kind of weapons. So make a mountain of dark stone swords for your traps and you will get lots of swordsdwarf immigrants.
quote:
If something incorrect is said and believed, it will spread, thereby damaging a vast number of fortresses. I correct incorrect things.
See, my friend, that's total bull. How the hell is him talking about trading something away going to "damage" his fortress or any others? I could see your point if he was saying "building doors will make your dwarves eat eachother's eyes" or "Fire is totally cool to have around", but not this junk. What he said isn't even really wrong. The actual act of creating the weapons is what gets you immigrants, so what's wrong with him trading them away.
Stop being so quick to jump on the wiki-bandwagon.
quote:
Originally posted by Slanted:
<STRONG>Are we absolutely sure the time-out period for artifacts is now 360 years? I could swear I had an artifact barrel being used without the creator dying or being attacked.</STRONG>
I'm inclined to think the artifact timer can vary by a great deal, possibly even 4.9 +/- years from the original 5 year timer, since that would explain how someone had their dwarf hit the timer within a month or two after making their artifact. Unless, of course, they were using an older version... even so, that still indicates a great deal of variability. If it were a couple months with the current 72x multiplier, that would mean normally, he would've dropped (or in this case continue to carry) his artifact a few seconds after making it. :P
[Insert essay here about how plain text does a poor job conveying tone, and that often the reader assumes an emotion very different from that of the writer.]
They are short and might come across as terse and well, grumpy, but they are helpful and lots more pleasant than if someone posted "You're wrong! It doesn't work that way! N00b! L2P!" (Please note the preceding quote was meant as a joking example and is not something I would say seriously even in MMOG chat.)
quote:
Originally posted by SnowWhite:
<STRONG>They are short and might come across as terse and well, grumpy, but they are helpful and lots more pleasant than if someone posted "You're wrong! It doesn't work that way! N00b! L2P!" (Please note the preceding quote was meant as a joking example and is not something I would say seriously even in MMOG chat.)</STRONG>
Posting nothing but the link to a wiki directly traslates to "read the manual you stupid noob". They are not helpful in the slightest because you do not point them to the actual information AND explain how it is relevant.
quote:
Originally posted by Tamren:
<STRONG>Posting nothing but the link to a wiki directly traslates to "read the manual you stupid noob". They are not helpful in the slightest because you do not point them to the actual information AND explain how it is relevant.</STRONG>
I don't just post a link to the wiki, I post a link to the section of the page that contains what they are looking for.
quote:
Originally posted by Tamren:
<STRONG>Posting nothing but the link to a wiki directly traslates to "read the manual you stupid noob". They are not helpful in the slightest because you do not point them to the actual information AND explain how it is relevant.</STRONG>
He does link to the actual information.
I do think it's a little blunt, but saying it isn't helpful is a lie.
[ August 31, 2007: Message edited by: Lightning4 ]
To the point: Links are clicked less often than posts are read. A simple "Making the crossbows is enough to attract marksdwarves" would probably be more effective.
EDIT: Additionally, wiki awareness needs to be increased a lot.
[ September 01, 2007: Message edited by: Savok ]
This game is complicated and the graphics alone scare away more than half the potential playerbase. The remainder must be helped along until they comprehend and grow to like the game. Shoving links to the wiki will NOT accomplish this.
People who refuse the wiki link are not stupid. They are smart enough to realize that the wiki is nothing more than a CHEATING TOOL. Reading the wiki in detail destroys the sense of discovery that you would otherwise gain by figuring out a problem by hand, or talking to someone who already knows.
and also i have to disagree with you about the wiki, the wiki is not a cheating tool, it is a help in assimilating new players up the incredibally steep learning curve.
quote:
Originally posted by the Wiki:
<STRONG>It is not known if the number of weapons created matters.</STRONG>
It's entirely possible that churning out extra crossbows to trade to the caravan is increasing the number of arriving marksdwarves.
[ September 01, 2007: Message edited by: Ryven ]
quote:
It's entirely possible that churning out extra crossbows to trade to the caravan is increasing the number of arriving marksdwarves.
And Tamren? "If a wise man has an argument with a fool, the fool only rages and laughs, and there is no quiet."
A similar proverb could also be "If a man has an argument with a fool, the fool only rages and laughs, and there is no quiet."
If you really want anyone to respect you enough to debate with you, don't be the fool in the above proverb. Trust me, I once was in the exact same position as you, except not at bay12games.com.
quote:
Originally posted by Toady One:
<STRONG>Relevant posters: if this discussion is ongoing, please relax somewhat and reflect on the merits of including extraneous insults of either specific people or groups of people in your posts.</STRONG>
[ September 01, 2007: Message edited by: Savok ]
This game has no multiplayer component and must rely on its community to promote talk between players AND to bring new players into the fold. Without a thriving community this game is for all intents and purposes, dead.
You already said, in your own words that people too dumb enough to go the wiki for all thier problems are beneath you and not worthy enough to play this game. Your efforts at cleaning up the supposed "ignorance" on this forum are in responce that percieved need. I can tell you right now that your efforts are nothing but detrimental. If a new player shows up and sees that the only response he can get from other players could have come from a machine. He will not be staying very long. Less players on this forum means less unique voices adding to the community.
Intelligence is knowing that a tomato is a fruit. But it is WISDOM that makes you understand that a tomato does not belong in a fruit salad!
Spouting out links as if you had wiki-tourettes may make people smarter but it will not teach them HOW to apply that knowledge. The only way to do that is to provide the knowlege, then explain why it is relevant, in person.
Again, the wiki does NOT do this. Your intent may be benevolent, but your method is deeply flawed.
Just saying "Read this!" with minimal context or explanation makes you very easy to ignore. Calling other people stupid for ignoring you just makes you seem inflammatory and trollish, making your link even *easier* to ignore. Acting high-and-mighty about it further compounds the problem. Congratulations, you've proven counter-productive.
The only quote that applies here is "pearls to pigs".
The forum has qualities the Wiki doesn't. It's dynamic. It fosters discussion. You don't just get a tersely written theory (there is a lot of "might" and "could" and "is believed to" in the Wiki for some strange reason) but you get a discussion about the subject. People offer their opinions on the subject, you get a lot of different suggestions on solutions, and a lot of the time the discussion gives rise to new ideas on how to do things better.
The Wiki doesn't contain any of this in it's current state. It's just a reference sheet of minimal facts which are usually not complete, which strikes me as odd. There's no need for a "might" or "is believed to" in the case of a software project. Everything is (or should) be documented. Selling crossbows doesn't "maybe" promote immigration of crossbowdwarves, it either does or doesn't - it's in the code.
This aside, I understand if someone doesn't want to take the trouble to sit on a forum and give meaningful answers to people, but I don't understand why someone would want to sit on a forum and give meaningless answers.
quote:
Originally posted by mickel:
<STRONG>This aside, I understand if someone doesn't want to take the trouble to sit on a forum and give meaningful answers to people, but I don't understand why someone would want to sit on a forum and give meaningless answers.</STRONG>
amen, brother. i asked an honest question (that i thought was obscure enough that other people might also want an answer to, and / or to discuss) about a month ago, and some jerkoff gave me a "read the wiki" reply with a link to an article that didnt answer the question. at all.
I didnt want it to devolve into one of these discussions, so I let it slide. But I put the same question to the helpfull blokes on the IRC channel last week, and they were very forthcoming with usefull information.
mickel's is on the point. the community is for people that want to constructively discuss the game and be actively helpfull to one another. if thats not your bag, then take it elsewhere before you harm the game by offending potential players.
if you dont want to answer someones noob question, then just ignore it while someone else answers it. the thread will slide to the back pages soon enough.
OK, OK, perhaps that was uncalled for. But jeez, lighten up people. Some people get over-zealous with slapping wiki links on newbie questions, yes, but that doesn't mean you have to piss all over the wiki. A wiki is essentially just another discussion medium for the game, except structured in a way to facilitate information lookups in a way that a forum/IRC/PMs/IMs are not. If you don't want to use it, don't use it, but don't trash people for trying to build it into something useful.
[ September 02, 2007: Message edited by: RPB ]
quote:
Originally posted by RPB:
<STRONG>If you don't want to use it, don't use it, but don't trash people for trying to build it into something useful.</STRONG>
I never said anything of the sort.
im advocating being helpfull, afterall. and whats more helpfull than contributing to an easily referenced source of information? lets not get carried away here.
quote:
Originally posted by puke:
<STRONG>lets not get carried away here.</STRONG>
Words for everyone here.
I apologize for going off like that, but I was seeing a lot of misplaced criticism about the DF wiki (some of it implicit criticism). Basically, the forum has a wider contributor base than the wiki. That pretty much sums up the advantages the forum has. The forums are "dynamic" and "foster discussion", yes, but that's the point of the wiki as well! The forums simply see more discussion because they have more people on them. Arguments about the forums "versus" the wiki seem pretty ridiculous anyhow since much of the wiki's information was culled from forum discussions. And yes, it's unfortunate that the wiki doesn't get enough attention to live up to its potential, but sitting around complaining that it's got incomplete information is not going to fix the problem. If anything it makes it worse, because to some extent it discourages people from using it at all.
theres not even anything wrong with linking the wiki in a forum response. but its all in how its done, see?
to compare, this isnt a rude post. if this post was replaced with the three word phrase "have some manners" then I think we'd all agree that I'm out of line. Thats all were saying -- that people should think about HOW they say things, especially when it influences how newcomers view the community.
Apart of course from those of you clearly intending to misinterpret what someone has said to portray them in a poorer light.
Some guy made a comment, that as far as Dwarf Fortress knowledge goes was undeniably wrong. So what if all that Savok did was provide a link, it was concise and helpful and got straight to the point. Unlike the page and a half of rubbish after, full of people whining because there 'e-feelings' have been hurt.
P.S. That was a pretty good link, I did not know that what weapons you made effected what soldiers would immigrate over, usefull.
quote:
Originally posted by aeroue:
<STRONG>Some guy made a comment, that as far as Dwarf Fortress knowledge goes was undeniably wrong. So what if all that Savok did was provide a link, it was concise and helpful and got straight to the point. </STRONG>
If you asked me what a Procyon Lotor was, and i handed you a textbook on mammals. That would:
a. Not answer your question.
b. Imply that aswering your question would be a waste of my time.
c. Give you zero indication whatsoever of where the answer to your question lies.
Obviously, that would suck. And fyi A procyon lotor is a raccoon.
The problem with the Wiki is that there is no human element to it. Let me explain.
If someone comes to this community board with a problem, it means that they have had difficulty with some part of the game. This gives the rest of the community a chance to explain the problem to them. By doing so we spread that knowledge around, even to people who have not encountered that problem yet.
What it also does, is indicate that at least 1 person had that specific problem. Lets say there was a bug in the game, to get a dwarves to open gold doors you must engrave the floor on ONLY one side of the door. Any other configuration, and your dwarves will be unable to open the door at all. So a guy figures this out and posts the answer on the wiki.
If everyone checked the wiki first, they would see the fix for the problem and use it. Eventually people will forget to use the fix now and then and get stuck with a door that will not open. Since they already know how to fix it, they will not raise a fuss. Newcomers to the game that run into the problem are directed to the wiki. If they fail to find the fix, they get frustrated and leave. If they do find the fix and learn to use it, they will never post about the problem
What you end up with, is a stupid and annoying bug in the game that NO ONE EVER TALKS ABOUT!. Do you understand the problem here? Without discussion of the problem, Toady might never find out about the bug until he runs into it himself. That there is a way around the problem is irrelevant, the bug must be fixed. The wiki is a great tool but to rely on it too much will only lead to stagnation for both the game and the community.
Let me make something very clear. I have nothing against whats Savok is trying to do, or him personally. I simply wanted to make abundantly clear that his chosen method was not doing any good for this community. Go ahead and call me sanctimonious or a nazi, im just telling it like it is.
quote:
Originally posted by aeroue:
<STRONG>
Some guy made a comment, that as far as Dwarf Fortress knowledge goes was undeniably wrong. So what if all that Savok did was provide a link, it was concise and helpful and got straight to the point.</STRONG>
That has been thoroughly contested in earlier posts, and I don't have anything to add there.
quote:
<STRONG>
Unlike the page and a half of rubbish after, full of people whining because there 'e-feelings' have been hurt.</STRONG>
The only rubbish here is the notion that manners don't matter on the Internet and that people's feelings don't matter if they're not physically present to punch you in the face.
A jerk is a jerk no matter if he's standing three feet away or hiding behind an alias on the Internet - and I mean that in general terms and not pointed at anyone in particular here or otherwise (although some pre-teens in MMOGs come to mind :p )
Most of the people who post in this forum are working hard to improve the game experience to everyone, and I think it's very rude and inconsiderate to disregard what they have to say as "whining".
quote:
If you asked me what a Procyon Lotor was, and i handed you a textbook on mammals. That would:
a. Not answer your question.
b. Imply that aswering your question would be a waste of my time.
c. Give you zero indication whatsoever of where the answer to your question lies.
Obviously, that would suck.
I think the reaction of the person handed the book would be "... I asked you if you knew what it meant, not 'Could you find me a taxonomy textbook or the like and open it to the page about procylon lotor?'"
quote:
Origionally Posted by Ktrey
I've found offering [the dwarven caravan] crossbows helps attract marksdwarves
quote:
Posted by Savok
read the Wiki
First, I'd like to point out that the link to the wiki wasn't even related to the main topic. It was about a small comment somebody made about making crossbows.
Second, I'd like to point out that what ktrey said isn't exactly untrue. Note (s)he said "I've found..." In other words, in ktreys experience trading crossbows has brought marksdwarf immigrants. Well, thats probably correct. I have no doubt that ktrey has played the game, made and traded crossbows and received more than the usual marksdwarf immigrants. It would then be logical to make the connection between the trading and the immigration. So basically I can't fault any of the logic in what ktreys said.
Now, the part where the arguement started. Savok could have pointed out to ktrey that he had made an understandable mistake and then pointed out that it is in fact making the crossbows, rather than trading them, that results in more immigrant marksdwarves. However, Savok instead decided to post a link to the wiki and refuse to explain it himself. When asked why he haden't explained, Savok effectively told us all that he considered sharing his own knowledge to be beneath him and that he didn't think ktrey was worthy of an explanation.
Savok then went on to explain that anyone who doesn't read the whole wiki must be too stupid to play the game and so shouldn't be allowed to. What do you suggest we do then? Make it so that before you can download the game you must complete a written test to ensure that only people of sufficient intelligence can access it? If we seriously went by your opinions on these matters then Dwarf Fortress would be dead. It is a game that relies almost entirely on having a good community to discuss the game and you can't have a good community for a game like this if that community is elitist. It wouldn't work.
Now, Savok... would you care to explain why you see ktrey or anyone else on this forum as inferior to you? Would you care to explain why you think that people shouldn't play the game just because they made a small (and understandable) mistake? Would you care to explain what it is exactly that gives you the right to tell somebody they shouldn't play Drwarf Fortress?
quote:
Originally posted by Tamren:
<STRONG>Go ahead and call me sanctimonious or a nazi, im just telling it like it is.</STRONG>
and THAT is the End of the Thread.
Thanks for playing.
quote:
First, I'd like to point out that the link to the wiki wasn't even related to the main topic. It was about a small comment somebody made about making crossbows.
quote:
Second, I'd like to point out that what ktrey said isn't exactly untrue. Note (s)he said "I've found..." In other words, in ktreys experience trading crossbows has brought marksdwarf immigrants. Well, thats probably correct. I have no doubt that ktrey has played the game, made and traded crossbows and received more than the usual marksdwarf immigrants. It would then be logical to make the connection between the trading and the immigration. So basically I can't fault any of the logic in what ktreys said.
quote:
Now, the part where the arguement started. Savok could have pointed out to ktrey that he had made an understandable mistake and then pointed out that it is in fact making the crossbows, rather than trading them, that results in more immigrant marksdwarves. However, Savok instead decided to post a link to the wiki and refuse to explain it himself. When asked why he haden't explained, Savok effectively told us all that he considered sharing his own knowledge to be beneath him and that he didn't think ktrey was worthy of an explanation.
quote:
Savok then went on to explain that anyone who doesn't read the whole wiki must be too stupid to play the game and so shouldn't be allowed to. What do you suggest we do then? Make it so that before you can download the game you must complete a written test to ensure that only people of sufficient intelligence can access it? If we seriously went by your opinions on these matters then Dwarf Fortress would be dead. It is a game that relies almost entirely on having a good community to discuss the game and you can't have a good community for a game like this if that community is elitist. It wouldn't work.
quote:
Now, Savok... would you care to explain why you see ktrey or anyone else on this forum as inferior to you? Would you care to explain why you think that people shouldn't play the game just because they made a small (and understandable) mistake? Would you care to explain what it is exactly that gives you the right to tell somebody they shouldn't play Drwarf Fortress?
quote:
Now, Savok... would you care to tell us if you see ktrey or anyone else on this forum as inferior to you, and explain your viewpoint?? Would you care to tell us if you think that people shouldn't play the game just because they made a small (and understandable) mistake, and explain your viewpoint? Would you care to tell us what it is exactly that gives you the right to tell somebody they shouldn't play Drwarf Fortress, and explain your viewpoint?
Perhaps the texbook analogy was a bit too general. Lets say someone asked you where the "little dipper" constellation was. Instead of pointing it out to the person and explaining that the little dipper is a pattern of stars, you simply pull out a finger and point UP.
The information is there to be read, but it DOES NOT help them the slightest seeing as they do not even know that the little dipper is a constellation in the first place.
In any case, this is all moot seeing as you are perfectly happy with digging your own grave. Id wish you good luck with that but it seems that your doing just fine on your own.
Oh and btw, i though Godwin's law only applied if someone mentions Hitler specifically? Oh wait :D
/thread
quote:
lol Savok, that you did something rude is no longer in question and no amount of wriggling around will let you off the hook. Attacking the source of an argument does not make it any less valid and only serves to earn you the contempt of others. And that is not something to be hoarded lightly, or with pride.
quote:
Perhaps the texbook analogy was a bit too general. Lets say someone asked you where the "little dipper" constellation was. Instead of pointing it out to the person and explaining that the little dipper is a pattern of stars, you simply pull out a finger and point UP.
quote:
The information is there to be read, but it DOES NOT help them the slightest seeing as they do not even know that the little dipper is a constellation in the first place.
As far as the wiki goes, if someone thinks posting a link to a relevant and helpful page is 'rude', well... :eek:
I for one am grateful that such a resource exists.
"lol Savok, that you did something rude is no longer in question and no amount of wriggling around will let you off the hook."
What a sad person you are, Tamren. You posted that you consider the wiki a cheating tool, but you do not respect your own opinion enough to defend it, so you claim instead that wiki links are unpolite.
quote:
Originally posted by Tamren:
<STRONG>Attacking the source of an argument does not make it any less valid and only serves to earn you the contempt of others.</STRONG>
You do not have much authority to call me a troll seeing as the only posts you have so far made in this thread "only served to attract attention".
As for Savok saying something rude. well.
quote:
Originally posted by Savok:
"If they can't figure out what part of the page is the info they need and how it is relevant, they aren't smart enough to play Dwarf Fortress." "Yes, but if they aren't smart enough to click on the link, then either they are new and will soon learn or they aren't smart enough to play Dwarf Fortress. This isn't a simple, easy game!"[/QB]
If Savok is smart he will continue to spread word of the wiki, which after all does need to be done. However if he is also wise he will work to be a bit more inclusive at the same time.
quote:
Originally posted by Tamren:
<STRONG>I have nothing against it, but I consider the wiki a cheating tool because that is exactly what it is. I already explained how over reliance on the wiki will stagnate this game. Something i notice, that none of you have yet disproven.</STRONG>
This is a statement of opinion, not of fact. You consider the wiki a cheating tool. Others consider the wiki to be the manual for the game. It contains a lot of information in an easily-accessed and well-formatted layout that the in-game documentation does not. It tells you how to build a farm; What rooms are needed and how to define them; Which crops produce what and where. The various exploits and spoilers listed in the wiki in a few places do not make the whole wiki a cheating tool.
In other words, the wiki makes the game more accessible. All those early questions everyone has ("How do I farm?") are answered there. The only thing the wiki stagnates is the plethora of newbie questions here on the forums.
quote:
Originally posted by Tamren:
<STRONG>No matter how much you deny it, there is no polite form of "elitist". Elitism will kill any game in a hurry, and this goes triple for a character based game like DF.</STRONG>
DF is a complex game, burdened with an idiosyncratic User Interface. It does require a certain level of intelligence, memory, attention-to-detail and commitment to learn the game. This game does not have a learning curve. It has multiple learning cliffs. Savok wasn't being elitist. He was being honest.
quote:Oh my! You caught me! I am an elitist because I don't think that a mentally underdeveloped person or a younger child is smart enough to play this very complex game, even though it has a multitude of learning cliffs! I am so sorry. You are right, no matter how justified, any kind of belief that a group one belongs to is better than anyone else is wicked and wrong.
Originally posted by Tamren:
<STRONG>No matter how much you deny it, there is no polite form of "elitist". Elitism will kill any game in a hurry, and this goes triple for a character based game like DF.</STRONG>
Normally, I don't do that, but his statement was just so incredibly... well, I'm not sure; in other threads he hasn't struck me as stupid enough to say the above.
Troll is as troll does, my friend. By the quality of your attempt, you are clearly not a full time troll. I certainly won't go making noise in your threads when you reply to someone with an explanation rather than a wiki link. And I won't call you elitist, even thou i consider expecting someone to deal with you just to get basic information on the game quite elitist in itself.
The wiki is a much faster resource, and i bet a new player stumped at some difficulty like farms will much easier stay in the game if he quickly finds the answer in the wiki than if he has to wait an indeterminate number of hours for a forum contributor to post a reply, specially considering how often a new player may get stuck in this wonderful game.
As for me being a troll, i write clearly and to the point, as you continually evade the points to which you can't reply and make noise.
Also, does "ad hominem" mean ANYTHING to you?
I'm truly sorry that my tiny (parenthetical, even!) aside has spawned this monster.
It works for me, it's part of my "playing style" and I'm of the personal opinion that what works for someone/an individual's playing style shouldn't be immediately stamped "INCORRECT." In fact, I'd go as far to say that they're sacrosanct. Isn't the Wiki itself composed completely of notes and contributions made by individuals who stumbled across them whilst playing the game/digging through code?
I'm not attempting to moderate this thread by any stretch, but three pages? This seems a bit unnecessary. May I suggest that this dogpile resolve itself peacefully by petering out into nonexistence and slowly scrolling off the forum's first page? If not, then at least recall for a moment that all of this rigmarole has almost absolutely nothing to do with the meat of the topic posted.
My Legendary Stone Crafter, Zasit Idenmörul has just churned out a bin full of ☼Felsite Mug☼s. Please take one, fill it up with the brew of your choice (not to be stingy, but please be moderate with the Tuber Beer, Bloated Tubers are import-only on my map and I have a Broker who seems to like to eat them above all other foods). Clang those mugs together in camaraderie, and drink until you forget what all the fighting was about. It's the dwarven thing to do.
quote:
Originally posted by ktrey:
<STRONG>Wow guys.I'm truly sorry that my tiny (parenthetical, even!) aside has spawned this monster.</STRONG>
quote:
Originally posted by ktrey:
<STRONG>It works for me, it's part of my "playing style" and I'm of the personal opinion that what works for someone/an individual's playing style shouldn't be immediately stamped "INCORRECT." In fact, I'd go as far to say that they're sacrosanct. Isn't the Wiki itself composed completely of notes and contributions made by individuals who stumbled across them whilst playing the game/digging through code?</STRONG>
[ September 05, 2007: Message edited by: Toady One ]
Every one of you people are entitled to your unique oppinion, as am I. I strongly encourage people that they should argue for what they believe in, as you have done. A forum is meant and built for discussion. An argument is but a variant of the same, regardless of content.
If you want to skip the discussion for personal attacks, that is fine with me. Life would grow boring otherwise. But you will have no right to blame me for responding in kind.
Now let me spell this out one one last time:
Savok likes the wiki, and rightly so. Savok believes that spreading knowledge of the wiki will improve the overall skill of the community, which it does. On the other hand, I believe that the wiki is a great tool, but is not the universal cure. There are bettter ways to spread knowledge and wisdom than simply directing people to the DF bible. The reasoning behind that belief is that if everyone learns to play the same way, we will figure out nothing new, and want nothing new. Hello stagnationville, population: suck.
The main reason we need the wiki at all is that the in-game documentation has been deemed inadequate. So then, since you are packed to the gills with tasty wiki lore, why not offer to rewrite the in-game manual for Toady?
Now you have 2 choices. You can counter my argument with one of your own. Or troll this post and me. I would advise against the latter because its not a good thing to have bait in your mouth and egg on your face, just sayin.
quote:
Originally posted by Tamren:
<STRONG>Every one of you people are entitled to your unique oppinion, as am I.</STRONG>
I'm not.
Anyway, this thread seems to be tainted, and I'm tired of popping in here. It's locked now.