Bay 12 Games Forum

Dwarf Fortress => DF Dwarf Mode Discussion => Topic started by: Satlan_Leng on February 01, 2011, 08:15:53 pm

Title: Why 40d?
Post by: Satlan_Leng on February 01, 2011, 08:15:53 pm
I know it is a vauge question. I have been playing on and off for a few months now, always the newest update. I always see people comment on thing in the new update and say they will still stick with 40d. My question is why. What are the major diffrences?

When i learned to play it was with this guide http://afteractionreporter.com/2009/02/09/the-complete-and-utter-newby-tutorial-for-dwarf-fortress-part-1-wtf/ This is 40d right? or is it some set between 40d and .18 we have now?
Title: Re: Why 40d?
Post by: abadidea on February 01, 2011, 08:18:56 pm
1) Stability. 40d is nearly bug-free.

2) Much easier (and basically ridiculously overpowered) military.
Title: Re: Why 40d?
Post by: Dwarf on February 01, 2011, 08:21:01 pm
3) PERFORMANCE.
Title: Re: Why 40d?
Post by: Girlinhat on February 01, 2011, 08:23:05 pm
Essentially two major things, that I've noted at least.  I haven't played 40d, but I've been hearing about it.  The big differences are

1) Everything kills you.  Always.  Elephants in 40d would massacre whole civilizations, dragons would eat elephants as snacks, and carp would kill dragons on accident!  You think skeletal giant tigers are tough now, go fight a 40d goat.

2) Economy was in place.  Economy is much like capitalist economy, once you get a manager and a bookkeeper, economy is activated, where dwarves get paid according to their work, and they use that payment to rent their living space and other such.  You had to mint coins for them, so you could control the economy much like the government simply by minting more coins, and different jobs get different payments.  A legendary armorsmith could make a suit of armor and rent the best room in the fort for a year, or a plant processor could make some thread and he wouldn't have to sleep on the ground.

also
3) Mermaid bone farms.  Epic.
Title: Re: Why 40d?
Post by: Particleman on February 01, 2011, 08:23:46 pm
Yes, that guide was written for the old 40d version.

The biggest differences between 40d and the most recent versions are:
- Totally redone military and injury systems.
- 2010 versions have burrows and underground caverns.
- 40d limited the number of Z-levels below the lowest surface tile on the map to 15, while the 2010 updates can have upwards of a hundred.
- 40d had very few underground features (underground pools and rivers of magma or water, and cotton candy- no caverns to speak of.)
- 2010 versions have a CRAPTON of bugs. 40d had bugs, but they were of the annoying variety, not the game destroyers that the 2010 versions throw at you.
Title: Re: Why 40d?
Post by: NewsMuffin on February 01, 2011, 08:44:17 pm
But most, if not all of the game breaking bugs have been fixed.
Title: Re: Why 40d?
Post by: Urist Imiknorris on February 01, 2011, 08:47:25 pm
- 40d had very few underground features (underground pools and rivers of magma or water, and cotton candy- no caverns to speak of.)

Chasms and bottomless pits.
Title: Re: Why 40d?
Post by: NecroRebel on February 01, 2011, 08:57:08 pm
The primary complaint people have with old forts (and, indeed, new ones) is related to low frames per second. Simply put, when the game runs too slowly, it really isn't fun anymore. Some people find that 40d runs significantly faster than the newer versions, even discounting the change in the size of any given map, so they find their forts remain fun longer on 40d than in 31.x. Given that creatures were increased in complexity as well (so, presumably, each individual dwarf causes more FPS drop due to tracking body parts) it isn't really surprising.

There's also the matter of increased complexity. Many people find the military and alerts system in 31.x to be hopelessly complicated, and either cannot or will not learn how to use it. Military was vastly simpler in 40d (and far more powerful, as mentioned). Health care was made more complicated as well, which is an additional worry for many people.

Also, in 40d, the megabeasts were both less common and less powerful. It's uncommon, but not unheard of, for a single Forgotten Beast to wipe out an entire fort with a deadly syndrome, but in 40d they didn't actually exist, and dragons, hydras, bronze colossi, and... I want to say there was another form of megabeast, but I'm blanking on it... Anyway, megabeasts were about equal to a reasonably-competent, decently-equipped dwarf in a one-on-one fight. Now, a reasonably-competent, decently-equipped dwarf is likely to die against a megabeast (they're more powerful in combat), but even a legendary hero with fantastic equipment might do a mutual kill against a Forgotten Beast with deadly dust or other deadly syndromes.
Title: Re: Why 40d?
Post by: Jacob/Lee on February 01, 2011, 09:07:21 pm
-The military was very, very basic to the point where assigning the proper equipment was a serious pain.

-More stable.

-Basic healing system.

-Titans were basically an organic BC.

-HFS wasn't present on all maps.

-Much faster on weaker systems.

-Economy, immigrant nobles and clothing swaps worked correctly.

-Less creatures.

-No caverns.

-Skeletons and zombies were nearly impossible to kill.

-Adventure Mode was even less complete.

-No Syndromes (effects still existed, like the GCS bite and such)

-Traders brought wagons.

-You could fight off whole sieges with 10-20 legendary wrestlers.

-Sparring was lethal.

-Ranged weapons were auto-loading chaingun/railguns that fired spears.

-Anatomy was extremely basic.

-Other crap.
Title: Re: Why 40d?
Post by: Sizik on February 01, 2011, 09:45:55 pm
-Economy . . . worked correctly.
Hah! Ha ha ha! Haa...
Title: Re: Why 40d?
Post by: Jacob/Lee on February 01, 2011, 09:48:00 pm
-Economy . . . worked correctly.
Hah! Ha ha ha! Haa...
Well, it did.
Title: Re: Why 40d?
Post by: Sizik on February 01, 2011, 09:53:06 pm
-Economy . . . worked correctly.
Hah! Ha ha ha! Haa...
Well, it did.

Not in any useful manner. And Armok help you if you mint coins and don't lock them up.
Title: Re: Why 40d?
Post by: Jacob/Lee on February 01, 2011, 10:02:00 pm
-Economy . . . worked correctly.
Hah! Ha ha ha! Haa...
Well, it did.

Not in any useful manner. And Armok help you if you mint coins and don't lock them up.
I might be a dwarf, but do you think I'm crazy? I will let somebody mint coins in my 40d fortresses over my dead body.
Title: Re: Why 40d?
Post by: Jusman on February 01, 2011, 10:29:00 pm
Does anyone know where I might get a graphics pack for 40d, or will I finally have to figure out how to decipher the original tileset?
Title: Re: Why 40d?
Post by: Jacob/Lee on February 01, 2011, 10:45:31 pm
Try here (http://df.magmawiki.com/index.php/40d:Graphics_set_repository).
Title: Re: Why 40d?
Post by: Jusman on February 01, 2011, 10:50:39 pm
Ah yes I always forget you can switch to the 40d version of articles, thanks  :)
Title: Re: Why 40d?
Post by: Urist Da Vinci on February 01, 2011, 11:14:06 pm
I know it is a vauge question. I have been playing on and off for a few months now, always the newest update. I always see people comment on thing in the new update and say they will still stick with 40d. My question is why. What are the major diffrences?

When i learned to play it was with this guide http://afteractionreporter.com/2009/02/09/the-complete-and-utter-newby-tutorial-for-dwarf-fortress-part-1-wtf/ This is 40d right? or is it some set between 40d and .18 we have now?

The version number for "40d" was 0.28.181.40d
It was the last of the 0.28.xx versions. The next updates were 0.31.xx.

The current version is 0.31.18

The very old 2D dwarf fortress was 0.23.130.23a

The wiki http://df.magmawiki.com/index.php/Main_Page has a selector on many pages that allows you to view the 40d versions of many pages.


Title: Re: Why 40d?
Post by: Tallefred on February 02, 2011, 08:02:54 am
40d. I could never go back now that I've gotten used to the new features. I love the new military, I love caverns, I love healthcare, I love elevating my own nobles, and I love the magma sea, but god damn is this game slow. We're back to where we were before the OpenGL fixes, and I can't stand it.
Title: Re: Why 40d?
Post by: Africa on February 02, 2011, 08:35:57 am
Essentially two major things, that I've noted at least.  I haven't played 40d, but I've been hearing about it.  The big differences are

1) Everything kills you.  Always.  Elephants in 40d would massacre whole civilizations, dragons would eat elephants as snacks, and carp would kill dragons on accident!  You think skeletal giant tigers are tough now, go fight a 40d goat.

2) Economy was in place.  Economy is much like capitalist economy, once you get a manager and a bookkeeper, economy is activated, where dwarves get paid according to their work, and they use that payment to rent their living space and other such.  You had to mint coins for them, so you could control the economy much like the government simply by minting more coins, and different jobs get different payments.  A legendary armorsmith could make a suit of armor and rent the best room in the fort for a year, or a plant processor could make some thread and he wouldn't have to sleep on the ground.


Neither of these are true. Elephants and carp used to be overpowered in way older versions, but were toned down. There's nothing that especially tough in 40d from what I can remember.

As for the economy, it was completely broken; that's why Toady just took it out. You didn't have to mint coins, and nobody did since as soon as you did, dwarves would spend all their time hauling individual coins from place to place. Otherwise the system worked on credit, but given the level of chronic unemployment in any fort, and how messed up the "prices" were, most dwarves couldn't afford a room (even though it was never clear who they were paying for their room) and would be thrown out (even though nobody threw them out, they just stopped sleeping in their old room). And nobles would CONSTANTLY "change the prices of goods" and spam you with messages about it. Basically, a few small fragments of an economy were implemented in a really half-assed way, and since Toady isn't developing that part of the game right now and nobody played with it on anyway, he just took it out for the time being.
Title: Re: Why 40d?
Post by: Jusman on February 03, 2011, 05:24:06 pm
Two questions, is it possible to change the key bindings or something, because the back button for 40d is the spacebar so it unpauses the game every time I back out of a menu, which is kind of annoying. But more importantly question number 2 how do I get to the combat logs, if there even are any?  :o
Title: Re: Why 40d?
Post by: NecroRebel on February 03, 2011, 05:56:22 pm
Two questions, is it possible to change the key bindings or something, because the back button for 40d is the spacebar so it unpauses the game every time I back out of a menu, which is kind of annoying. But more importantly question number 2 how do I get to the combat logs, if there even are any?  :o
It is possible to change the key bindings. You go to the main menu (with ESC), go to the option that says Key Bindings, and then change the key bindings.

There are no combat logs available in 40d in fortress mode. That's a feature that wasn't implemented until 31.01.
Title: Re: Why 40d?
Post by: MarcAFK on February 04, 2011, 10:52:37 am
Combat logs alone make for a far more entertaining game in my opinion =D
Title: Re: Why 40d?
Post by: warlordzephyr on February 04, 2011, 01:59:11 pm
To sum up. 40D was more FUN.
Title: Re: Why 40d?
Post by: Fayceless on February 04, 2011, 04:51:48 pm
The one and only thing I miss from 40d was the speed of the game.

However, I recently started a 3x4, 60z-level (total!) embark in the new version.  60 dwarves, 100 fps.  Haven't breached any caverns or started pumping magma though, so we'll see how long that lasts. (Magma cannons are a must - it's named Flameshot!)
Title: Re: Why 40d?
Post by: MC Dirty on February 04, 2011, 06:43:36 pm
One reason that hasn't been mentioned yet is that 40d works on the basic Windows XP. So does 31.03, but that one's pretty buggy. I haven't played Dwarf Fortress in a while because the newest version just won't work.
(Please don't tell me to update Windows XP. It doesn't work. I need to reinstall Windows ASAP. The point still stands.)
Title: Re: Why 40d?
Post by: EddyP on February 04, 2011, 08:25:27 pm
The 40d military gave you far more bang for far less buck, whereas for the current military you'll spend half an hour organizing them only to see them slaughtered by the first ambush that comes your way. Meanwhile economy, Dungeon Master and nobles all worked properly in 40d (though I'm not sure the economy can be said to have 'worked').

On the other hand, the current version has healthcare, caverns, FBs, guaranteed candy and HFS, and far more z-levels to play with. I'd say go with the new version.
Title: Re: Why 40d?
Post by: GTM on February 04, 2011, 08:33:30 pm
Quote
One reason that hasn't been mentioned yet is that 40d works on the basic Windows XP. So does 31.03, but that one's pretty buggy. I haven't played Dwarf Fortress in a while because the newest version just won't work.

This may be a problem specific to your computer - I haven't tried 0.31.18 in xp yet, but I got 0.31.16 to work on a little netbook that hasn't had XP updated since at least 2008.  My fort had an FPS death after the first wave of migrants, but that was just because the processor was like less than 1 ghz.
Title: Re: Why 40d?
Post by: Egon on February 04, 2011, 08:50:15 pm
The 40d military gave you far more bang for far less buck, whereas for the current military you'll spend half an hour organizing them only to see them slaughtered by the first ambush that comes your way. Meanwhile economy, Dungeon Master and nobles all worked properly in 40d (though I'm not sure the economy can be said to have 'worked').

On the other hand, the current version has healthcare, caverns, FBs, guaranteed candy and HFS, and far more z-levels to play with. I'd say go with the new version.

On bolded

That's my problem with the new version. If the traps don't kill incoming goblins, I'm shamboned- I had an entire 30 dwarf military completely obliterated by 1 (one) Goblin spearmaster.

For me, fun is watching my military kill anything that dares attack my fortress, not watch one goblin kill 90+ dwarves, 30+ wardogs, a grizzly bear, and anything else on the map.

40d is a lot more simplistic, but the military is a lot easier to work with where it counts and (despite them seeing 'training' as mortal kombat) not as prone to dying in droves.

plus there's a nice lack of bugs. other than the cats.
Title: Re: Why 40d?
Post by: Jacob/Lee on February 04, 2011, 09:40:28 pm
You could use danger rooms, y'know.
Title: Re: Why 40d?
Post by: Rollory on February 04, 2011, 11:35:28 pm
I am still playing my 40d fortress.  It is over 200 dwarves, full size map (16x16) and FPS is pretty steady at 12.  When there's ambushes on the map it drops to 9.  It's positively fast compared to what 31 puts me through for much smaller maps.  I have a nicely varied terrain in all that space - the fort is just an area at the center of the map, the rest of it is what I think of as my own little kingdom - the hinterland, the countryside nearby.  Means I get to actually set things up like expeditions into the woods or nearby mountains to do things like hunt or clear-cut for some wood or strip mine some mineral veins before then having the expedition return to the city.  Can't do that in 31 because you just can't take such a large area.  As for underground stuff, my map has an underground river that is filled to the brim with cave crocodiles (breeding on their own for ages) and a chasm that was completely covered over by the mountain (not open to the sky) which is full of giant bats and giant cave swallows (I was lucky and had a breeding pair of the swallows get genned in there - normally I only see one at a time).  That gives me plenty of stuff to do underground.

My military _is_ overpowered but all things considered I prefer that to the utter idiocy of the 31 military.  What particularly made me snap about 31 was when I moved a dwarf who had all the ideal equipment for his skills from one squad to another, whereupon he dropped everything and went around picking up half-assed crap, because the way equipment works, it gets assigned to and owned by squads, not individual dwarves.  It's also why woodcutters and miners can't get activated into the military and then deactivated and keep using their axe or pick for the various tasks the whole way through.

I admire Toady's creation as much as anyone on these boards, but that is just a totally fucking moronic way to implement it, and I'm not putting any more time into the 31 military until that gets fixed. 

Also, for all the health care changes - I just DON'T CARE.  A hit point system, and having them lie in bed for a couple years and maybe recover, is good enough.  Surgery and bone-setting and crutches and splints and all the rest of it is just irrelevant to me.

Actually the one 31 game that I am playing is one where I found a "real" island - surrounded on all sides by water, all within the same tile (it's 6x6 embark I think) - so no immigrants.  I'm playing it as shipwrecked dwarves, they've built a wooden stockade in the center of the (jungled, gorilla-inhabited) island (there's an aquifer, so digging down very far isn't easy) and I'm just letting things go and see the years pass.  But if I want to play a real game, with sieges and cities and so on, 40d is the way to go.

(Actually, once I finally reach a stopping point with my earlier mentioned fortress, I have another 40d embark site I really want to try - a lonely ridge in the middle of a perfectly flat Haunted desert, and a dwarf civ that has lost all its cities but the king is still alive and reasonably young, and the goblin civ that did them in still has its demon leader.  I have visions of turning that mountain into a ballista-bristling fortress of doom where the dwarves make their final stand, the king returns, and a final cataclysmic battle against the demon lord occurs.  I generated a lot of 31 worlds to try to find a similar setup but no dice.)
Title: Re: Why 40d?
Post by: strongrudder on February 05, 2011, 01:37:16 am
I'm finally getting myself into 31.xx, but boy is the military a pain. In 40d you could get your first squad up, armed, and training in a few seconds. I eventually figured out how to do the same for my 31.18 dwarves, but it's unnecessarily complex and thus is more micromanagement to me than fun.

I like having kill orders and stuff (and I well may learn to love this setup someday?) but it has to be my biggest beef with the new version so far.
Title: Re: Why 40d?
Post by: EddyP on February 05, 2011, 08:38:12 am
I actually quite like the healthcare system - it's always really satisfying to see it up and working properly. I just wish Toady would do something about nerves, because once a dwarf's nerves are cut his skull might as well have been jammed through his brain.
Title: Re: Why 40d?
Post by: Chocolatemilkgod on February 05, 2011, 08:53:16 am
Can't you change the raws so that nerves can heal?
Title: Re: Why 40d?
Post by: shlorf on February 05, 2011, 10:54:52 am
That would only make nerves that are bruised or anything heal, but since nerves taking cut damage either are severed (=won't heal even with healing rate added to nerve tissue) or fine, it doesn't do much. You can remove the has_nerves tag from dwarfs tho, that will stop nerve damage problems, supposedly without side effects.
Title: Re: Why 40d?
Post by: Darvi on February 05, 2011, 11:17:06 am
There's another thing: 40d farms needed no irrigation. Huge advantage if you're still a newbie.
Title: Re: Why 40d?
Post by: nbonaparte on February 05, 2011, 12:23:38 pm
The one nice thing about new irrigation is that I can use the embark anywhere utility and still be able to farm in the mountains.
Title: Re: Why 40d?
Post by: twwolfe on February 05, 2011, 01:18:09 pm
Also has Visual fortress, so you can get a good look at how you're fortress really looks
Title: Re: Why 40d?
Post by: Marshall Burns on February 05, 2011, 01:25:11 pm
I actually quite like the healthcare system - it's always really satisfying to see it up and working properly. I just wish Toady would do something about nerves, because once a dwarf's nerves are cut his skull might as well have been jammed through his brain.

I like the nerve damage. I just wish crutches worked.
Title: Re: Why 40d?
Post by: EmperorNuthulu on February 05, 2011, 01:37:30 pm
 I think the only thing two things that were better for me in 40d was the military system (Since marksdwarves actually trained!) and the site finder having things like chasms and what not. The healthcare system has annoying bugs but keep in mind dwarf fortress is set in medieval times, medical science is not going to be very advanced, heck I'm actually suprised some things like surgery and what not made it in. Then again you could say that dwarfs don't have anything to say that you're injured because gods punishing you, so for all we know every one in a hundred dwarves is House.
Title: Re: Why 40d?
Post by: Burnt Pies on February 05, 2011, 01:42:30 pm
I stuck with 40d because I prefer the Military, pure and simple. Every new version that's come out has had that clusterfuck of a military screen, and I just can't be bothered to figure it out. Also Miners are frequently my main defence against marauding animals, and I need some easy way to get them to stand their ground and kill the damn fox.

Things I wish 40d had from the new versions are the caverns, the healthcare and the vaguely useful migrants.
Title: Re: Why 40d?
Post by: KojaK on February 05, 2011, 02:07:48 pm
The military screen is insane on first glance, but once you take the time to read what it all does, it becomes very, very simple to use.

I love the vast amount of options it affords me, and yes, I do get a bit annoyed at the lack of actual control over the dwarfs (miners using picks, woodcutters using their axes, etc).

I also love the healthcare system, and the toned down military... I like having to seal myself off from those first few ambushes and sieges, it's quite realistic (to me anyway).

I've also had no game-crashing or game-ending bugs to deal with. Implementing the 'no blood tracking' in the newest version was just in time for me.
Title: Re: Why 40d?
Post by: Sutremaine on February 05, 2011, 02:20:39 pm
I've also had no game-crashing or game-ending bugs to deal with. Implementing the 'no blood tracking' in the newest version was just in time for me.
I played 31.01 and couldn't hack it (and its incredible slowness), and I was kind of burned out on DF so I stopped playing altogether. I came back when 31.18 was out and there was more information available on the wiki, and having that clean break made it easier to relearn the game in the same way I'd learned it the first time round.
Title: Re: Why 40d?
Post by: Marshall Burns on February 05, 2011, 03:40:54 pm
I've also had no game-crashing or game-ending bugs to deal with.

Me either. Plenty of annoying bugs, and the game routinely crashes while cleaning items after a save, but nothing that prevents me from playing. I had crashes all the time back in 40d. I still use seasonal autosave, but so far I haven't had an occasion to need it (knock on wood elves).
Title: Re: Why 40d?
Post by: Shootandrun on February 05, 2011, 09:27:01 pm
40d is more simple. That's all. The military is more simple, the underground is more simple, the healthcare is more simple, farming is more simple. Nobles and economy aren't, but it was'nt too important (you can deal with nobles and just don't mint coints).

You like it or you don't.
Title: Re: Why 40d?
Post by: Flare on February 06, 2011, 06:20:53 am
I like having kill orders and stuff (and I well may learn to love this setup someday?) but it has to be my biggest beef with the new version so far.

You can't live without it when you get used to the options it avails you. I found this out trying 40d after getting used to the current system. In short, the micromanaging in the current system is only at the beginning when everything is being set up, the automation built into the system allows for a very hands free military taking care of itself.


In any case, it seems more often than not that people are complaining that the game got harder rather than any significant change in how the game plays out.
Title: Re: Why 40d?
Post by: Egon on February 06, 2011, 11:27:49 am
I stuck with 40d because I prefer the Military, pure and simple. Every new version that's come out has had that clusterfuck of a military screen, and I just can't be bothered to figure it out. Also Miners are frequently my main defence against marauding animals, and I need some easy way to get them to stand their ground and kill the damn fox.

Things I wish 40d had from the new versions are the caverns, the healthcare and the vaguely useful migrants.

ya know, i'd take a mix of 40d's military and 31.xx's. 31.xx for equipment and organization, 40d for everything else.

and that's honestly the *only* thing i'd like to see. otherwise 31.xx is great.
Title: Re: Why 40d?
Post by: strongrudder on February 06, 2011, 11:33:23 pm
^ I agree. I like the depth to which you can go into specifics (assigning an exact weapons or piece of armor, setting out specific training schedules, allowing soldiers to revert to civilian duties while on break from training). But! There's a difference between a genuine difficulty increase* vs. just making something more tedious and convoluted to set up**.

What would be ideal for me: have a default setup that functions immediately as soon as you meet a few easy requirements (assign squads, designate a barracks/archery range, assign squad to barracks) the way 40d did. But to get the most out of it, you could then customize the training schedule (give them their needed patrol/training breaks), customize their weapons (no, go for the *sword*, not the -sword-! Or maybe a +mace+ instead!), restrict them to a specific burrow, put out kill/station orders, whatever. You're probably going to do about the same amount of managing in the end! But the difference could be important to someone new. They get a chance to see a functioning military, then they can tweak the details they don't like. Better than doing it by process of elimination or just giving up on military altogether.

Aagh, change is hard. I'll quit whining and work on military in my next fort, heh. 2010 is still great stuff, especially since adventure mode got its overhaul. :D

Spoiler: * (click to show/hide)

Spoiler: ** (click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Why 40d?
Post by: Hiiri on February 07, 2011, 03:16:31 am
It never ceases to amaze me how people, who learned to play dwarf fortress in the first place, get scared away by the new military screen. Or the hate that the patches/updates/upgrades always generate in the old members of whatever game.

Now that most of the major bugs have been fixed (or have workarounds), I can't think of any reason not to play .31. And DF just keeps getting better :)

Edit: The military screen is NOT too hard, complex or unnecessary. Or the healthcare system. These are the details that really separate DF from any other fantasy game.
Title: Re: Why 40d?
Post by: Dorf3000 on February 07, 2011, 05:00:42 am
** such as: the interface. What can and can't I change? The training minimum of 10 dwarves per squad, for instance. Changeable! But buried in a submenu where you don't expect it. And assigning armor? Even if I'm telling the dwarf to choose on his own, I still have to tell him it's his choice for each individual type of armor. Might as well micromanage for real then - it'll only take another two button presses.

The defaults are bad and the UI is anti-intuitive, but that's what you should expect from DF.  For instance, you construct walls, ramps, etc from the constructions submenu in the build screen <b-c>, yet all the other terrain-changing actions are in the <d> designate menu, including removing the constructions you just placed.  The key to select which type of stairs you want changes depending on whether you want to dig it or build it.  Farms are built with the same awkward method as floors and bridges, even though they use no materials - I can't count the number of times I've built a 1-tile farm because I was expecting to be able to size it by marking two corners.  The default is to ignore 'refuse' outside, which is hidden in the <o> orders menu, which totally screws you every time you embark and you wonder why the dwarves aren't collecting bones from outside to put next to your craft shop.  Or they're not dumping the stone you just made from digging out that hill.

When you consider all the other problems DF throws at you, the military screen is not so bad.  If you restart and embark a lot it does become a pain to fix all the dumb defaults each time, but it's not unbearable.  The default uniforms aren't bad and it's better than nothing, and stops you having to assign every squad member their gloves and greaves and everything each time.  They do upgrade by themselves so if you start out with -copper mail shirts- they'll not stay in them when you have masterwork steel.  Compared to the 40d shenanigans required just to get dwarves to swap weapons (because they'd "train" with the sharpest swords they had, and chop each other to pieces), the equipment assignment screen is like manna from heaven.  It's not all good, I agree - the patrol point defining procedure is pretty poor and it's the only thing from 40d I really miss, now it involves fiddling with the notes screen which I could write an entire thesis on how unintuitive it is.  But overall, once you get used to it, it's an improvement.

tl;dr: Complaining about the interface in DF is like complaining about how wet the sea is.
Title: Re: Why 40d?
Post by: strongrudder on February 07, 2011, 05:13:11 am
DF is certainly complex, but most of it makes sense without too much thought. I play with ASCII and think that nearly every symbol is fantastically chosen for what it represents. Sure you have to keep track of a bunch of hotkeys, but the letter choices again make sense - (w)orkshops, stock(p)iles, (o)rders, got it! There are only a few - (l)artifacts? -  that you just have to memorize.

The new military interface is the first thing in the game to give me any *real* trouble getting my head around it. I don't think what it does is bad, I just think it could be arranged to be more sensical. Just like it's frustrating digging through broken code for a misplaced parenthesis, it's not fun with I have to make sure the stars flags are aligned in order to allow my soldiers to train. And I still can't get marksdwarves to do it. Deploying them is easy at least, though if they haven't been training properly it's rather futile. :d

I don't think my opinion is unreasonable here. I'll learn it, don't y'all worry. I may even look back at these posts I'm making and laugh once I'm used to it! But I don't have to think it's optimal, just as I agree that it is indeed dumb for construction-removal orders to be filed with the designations. ;)
Title: Re: Why 40d?
Post by: assimilateur on February 07, 2011, 09:06:21 am
2) Much easier (and basically ridiculously overpowered) military.

I don't see how the military was more op in 40d than it is now. In 40d, there was at least the threat sparring injuries and lucky arrows or bolts, whereas in .31 my legendary, steel-clad warriors are basically invincible versus anything short of an fb with deadly dust (and perhaps some clowns, though I have yet to tackle them).

3) PERFORMANCE.

This seems to differ between one person and another, because for me the performance post-update has been similar (as in, similarly bad) to what I had pre-update.

-The military was very, very basic to the point where assigning the proper equipment was was not a serious pain.

Was this a typo?

-Economy (...) worked correctly.

I'm going to repeat what someone already said: the economy was fucking ridiculous, and by what standards you could seriously say that it worked correctly I can't, for the life of me, understand.
Title: Re: Why 40d?
Post by: Ivan Issaccs on February 07, 2011, 04:59:02 pm
The thing I miss most about 40d is hammers.
It was just so entertaining to watch a goblin go flying 15 spaces and gib himself against a tree.
Title: Re: Why 40d?
Post by: Sutremaine on February 07, 2011, 08:09:00 pm
What I'd like from .31's military:

:   A 'copy to whole year' option for the schedules, or some sort of 'override schedule' option that has priority over schedules the way active orders do. I tend to have the military do stuff as necessary, and 'guard this temporary burrow while the mechanic reloads the cage traps' is something I'd like to be active until I switch it off manually. Otherwise I'd have to set an alert for 'guard temporary burrow....' and leave it taking up room on the alerts screen. Not too bad for one or two of these things, but since you can't reorder alerts (I think) they'll get really annoying at some point.

:   A way to instantly militarise a dwarf, as you could in 40d. Useless for serious combat, but good for killing groundhogs or forcing a dwarf to go somewhere. Upon activation, the dwarf would have a squad created and be highly visible to the player (flashing dark grey and white, Conscripted status on the Unit screen, something like that). Upon deactivation, the squad would be disbanded and the dwarf returned to full civilian status. This would not be an option for dwarves already in a squad.

:   A 'best available' option for uniform, which would be the default for manually created squads and cause the military to go and grab whatever they could find. Might not actually be the best due to dwarves picking the most expensive stuff and not the actually best stuff, but ehh, close enough.
Title: Re: Why 40d?
Post by: krenshala on February 07, 2011, 11:04:12 pm
What I'd like from .31's military:

:   A 'copy to whole year' option for the schedules, or some sort of 'override schedule' option that has priority over schedules the way active orders do. I tend to have the military do stuff as necessary, and 'guard this temporary burrow while the mechanic reloads the cage traps' is something I'd like to be active until I switch it off manually. Otherwise I'd have to set an alert for 'guard temporary burrow....' and leave it taking up room on the alerts screen. Not too bad for one or two of these things, but since you can't reorder alerts (I think) they'll get really annoying at some point.
I'm far from the expert some other DF players are ( :) ), and hadn't even thought of using an alert for that (thank you, i'm gonna steal the idea :D), but you appear to have overlooked the fact that you can unassign portions of the burrow.  So, create your burrow, make the alert for guarding it.  Then when you know you want to use it designate the correct area to guard, activate it, and when the work (or whatever) is complete, deactivate the alert and remove the burrow designation from the map.  KEEP the burrow, just 'erase' what you had designated. :D

:   A way to instantly militarise a dwarf, as you could in 40d. Useless for serious combat, but good for killing groundhogs or forcing a dwarf to go somewhere. Upon activation, the dwarf would have a squad created and be highly visible to the player (flashing dark grey and white, Conscripted status on the Unit screen, something like that). Upon deactivation, the squad would be disbanded and the dwarf returned to full civilian status. This would not be an option for dwarves already in a squad.

:   A 'best available' option for uniform, which would be the default for manually created squads and cause the military to go and grab whatever they could find. Might not actually be the best due to dwarves picking the most expensive stuff and not the actually best stuff, but ehh, close enough.
From my experience the dwarves in 31.18 already go for (what they consider) the best stuff, and will usually upgrade if something better is available in a stockpile (and not owned, if I'm understanding the posts correctly ... i usually have only just enough, if that, for my militia so far).
Title: Re: Why 40d?
Post by: GL12 on February 08, 2011, 04:10:03 am
Eh, I'm getting frustrated with how useless training seems to be in 2010. In 40d I could have 2 squads of dorfs train for a year or two and they would be able to handle basically anything short of clowns. In 2010 they get slaughtered at the drop of a hat. I realize I should probably make one of those new fangled danger rooms but placing traps takes AGES. The new kill button is the shiniest thing ever though.

Honestly, other the that the main thing I miss is crossbows being essentially railguns. Same for ballistae. I understand why it was changed though.
Title: Re: Why 40d?
Post by: Nyxalinth on February 08, 2011, 08:04:40 pm
I think the only thing two things that were better for me in 40d was the military system (Since marksdwarves actually trained!) and the site finder having things like chasms and what not. The healthcare system has annoying bugs but keep in mind dwarf fortress is set in medieval times, medical science is not going to be very advanced, heck I'm actually suprised some things like surgery and what not made it in. Then again you could say that dwarfs don't have anything to say that you're injured because gods punishing you, so for all we know every one in a hundred dwarves is House.

In medieval times, there were knowledgeable doctors, but they weren't in Europe. You had to go to the Moors in Arabia or in India to find proper healers.  Mind, things still weren't up to modern standards, but they were far, far ahead of anyone else.  I might be wrong; I read that a long time ago.
Title: Re: Why 40d?
Post by: Marshall Burns on February 08, 2011, 10:15:46 pm
Funny thing is, in Medieval folklore, dwarves had excellent medicine. They were sought out by other mythical beings for treatment. After all, when you're a Germanic giant and your liver is in your right foot, a human doctor just isn't going to cut it.
Title: Re: Why 40d?
Post by: Malibu Stacey on February 09, 2011, 10:45:04 am
I think the only thing two things that were better for me in 40d was the military system (Since marksdwarves actually trained!) and the site finder having things like chasms and what not. The healthcare system has annoying bugs but keep in mind dwarf fortress is set in medieval times, medical science is not going to be very advanced, heck I'm actually suprised some things like surgery and what not made it in. Then again you could say that dwarfs don't have anything to say that you're injured because gods punishing you, so for all we know every one in a hundred dwarves is House.

In medieval times, there were knowledgeable doctors, but they weren't in Europe. You had to go to the Moors in Arabia or in India to find proper healers.  Mind, things still weren't up to modern standards, but they were far, far ahead of anyone else.  I might be wrong; I read that a long time ago.

Even before "medieval times" there were plenty of very good medical practitioners in Europe. Hell the Hippocratic Oath was created by a Greek who lived around 400 BC & created the basis of most modern western medicine along with his peers. The Romans then built upon that to the extent that they even did what would be considered "cosmetic surgery" by modern standards. That's a fair few centuries before "medieval times". Unfortunately most of Europe generally regressed with regards to scientific learning during the "medieval" period until the Renaissance kickstarted the modern age (can't fault major religion when it comes to supressing & controlling people).
Title: Re: Why 40d?
Post by: Anathema on February 09, 2011, 11:25:54 am
More importantly, there's a difference between "primitive" and "buggy" when it comes to medicine. If DF 31.xx's medicine was primitive, i.e. doctors using leeches and experimenting with mercury (which really happened!) and other crazy stuff without really understanding how any of it works, and hurting dwarves as often as they help, I could understand that. Doesn't sound like it would make for a fun game, but it would be believable - that's not the problem, though.

DF 31.xx's medicine is not primitive, it's buggy. I've got Doctors refusing to even diagnose patients until you deliberately give them a new injury to trigger treatment, dwarves completely ignoring any finger/toe injury until it gets infected and causes death (I don't care how primitive your medicine is, it should be common sense to bandage a wound or clean it or try something), nerve damage which happens too easily and never heals leading to frequent permanent paralysis, dwarves with moderate injuries (broken limbs, "torn open" tissue, etc) sleeping for years even after the injuries have been treated and healed, etc etc.

I mean, I love 31.xx (for the vast underground/caverns especially) and I don't think I could go back to 40d, but how I hate the medical system. No matter how well I set up my hospital, I have to write off a dwarf that gets any injury - many of them will refuse to go to the hospital for potentially infection+death-causing injuries, or won't get treated despite living permanently in the hospital, or won't ever recover despite getting treated and healing, or.. I see recovery as a miracle, great when it happens but never to be expected.
Title: Re: Why 40d?
Post by: lowbart on February 09, 2011, 12:35:56 pm
Yeah, I hate the stupidly complicated military system in 31, but I can't go back to 40d because of truetype.
Title: Re: Why 40d?
Post by: penco on February 09, 2011, 03:14:47 pm
I am pretty indifferent. I just play the newest one because it's the newest one.

The best feature of the .31 series is the new underground stuff. The difficulty is ramped up a good bit, often due to bugs but mostly due to the implementation of more realistic and less overpowered game mechanics. I like a harder game, so that sits well with me.

---

The military screen is not hard to figure out. It took me maybe 20 minutes to master. The problem is that your idiot dwarves will half of the time not follow your orders. Good luck trying to train anything, especially archers. Your best bet is just to catch a bunch of wild animals and beat them with sticks for training.

I refuse to use danger rooms. That's about the stupidest, cheesiest thing ever to me.

---

The healthcare system is neat in theory but irrelevant in practice. The only time it matters at all is when you have a minor injury from a cave-in or a scuffle with a kobold. Otherwise, they just lay in bed forever, even if they are theoretically healing slowly.

---