Bay 12 Games Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - Stragus

Pages: 1 [2]
16
DF Dwarf Mode Discussion / Re: Winning. Is. BORING.
« on: January 01, 2016, 01:35:57 am »
"After the totally uneventful first game, I sure was ready for some action! And so I generated about 60 world maps (in parallel, running 16 instances of DF to use all CPU cores), with Beasts and Savagery set at "Very high", and finally found what seemed like an impossible challenge: a crippled Dwarven civilization, a nice starting location right next to a cluster of 20 dark pits and 2 dark fortresses, without a single dwarven fortress nearby."

As you can guess, nothing happened in 4 years, at which point my fortified military outpost became the capital, the monarch arrived, and I gave up. I was right next door to the goblins! Where were they? They should have been ambushing my wood cutters, harassing my workers, launching skirmishes, constantly probing my defenses, if not plainly dying at the fortress walls (goblins usually live short and violent lives). I thought I had picked a pretty good location for a survival challenge.
How much wealth did you generate, and how much population did you have? You're never going to get goblins if you don't have enough population and wealth. Also, which version was this? Version 40 was notorious for not having sieges.

That was version 0.42.3. I had 200 population at the end, a wealth of 15 millions (partially due to bugged prepared meals which are worth way too much), 4 years game time. I was right next to the goblins with the only crippled dwarven civilization at the other end of the map, and nothing ever happened.

Seriously, I'm not sure how better I could have told the game "I want a survival challenge"!

Edit: And I haven't touched any configuration file, that was pure vanilla 0.42.3.

17
DF Dwarf Mode Discussion / Re: Winning. Is. BORING.
« on: December 31, 2015, 06:24:35 pm »
That's the situation we have right now. People complain about it because they want to get challenges delivered to their doorstop, complete with goblinite, instead of deciding what they want to do and embarking/setting options accordingly.

People are saying 'embark somewhere without enemies if you want to turtle'.  But it's also just as valid to say 'embark somewhere near necro towers and goblins if you want constant sieges'.  Players who pick bad embark locations for what they want aren't a reason to change the base game.

That sounds great, except it doesn't work! I'll quote myself from another thread:

"After the totally uneventful first game, I sure was ready for some action! And so I generated about 60 world maps (in parallel, running 16 instances of DF to use all CPU cores), with Beasts and Savagery set at "Very high", and finally found what seemed like an impossible challenge: a crippled Dwarven civilization, a nice starting location right next to a cluster of 20 dark pits and 2 dark fortresses, without a single dwarven fortress nearby."

As you can guess, nothing happened in 4 years, at which point my fortified military outpost became the capital, the monarch arrived, and I gave up. I was right next door to the goblins! Where were they? They should have been ambushing my wood cutters, harassing my workers, launching skirmishes, constantly probing my defenses, if not plainly dying at the fortress walls (goblins usually live short and violent lives). I thought I had picked a pretty good location for a survival challenge.

Without external threats, DF becomes The Sims with dwarves, which I'm sure is fine for some people.

18
Based on the code in that project I think it's refreshing to see a guy who codes by introducing all the special cases right upfront, inline, with little or no abstraction where it's not absolutely necessary.
[...]
Unfortunately, AFAICT, Dwarf Fortress is one of those rare one-man projects where you can work yourself into a hole by assuming you don't need any extra abstraction and never deviating from that assumption

That doesn't sound good... I have once been an amateur self-taught programmer (more than a decade ago), coding everything right where it was easiest at the moment. It turned out to be a disaster of apocalyptic proportions, and I have learned that lesson. Sure, I'm also totally against the whole C++ school of thought that everything should be encapsulated in layers of layers, but there's a point where abstractions simplify the code, and they have no runtime cost when done intelligently (static inline).

Speaking of code design, I "accidentally" played with water in DF, and the frame rate collapsed to a point that isn't even funny. This is also not how water behaves! (why does it have the viscosity of ketchup?)

Years ago, in spare time, I wrote a terrain engine with a complete water cycle, true hydrography (undergroud and surface flow), erosion, etc. The computational fluid dynamics had been simplified, linearized and were solved as cyclic tridiagonal: http://www.rayforce.net/newproject024.png
It easily ran in realtime, you could alter the terrain or observe how evaporation/rainfall patterns altered the surface flow and water levels.

So that kind of stuff can be done, and far more. I don't mean to critize too much, but I think Toady could use some help for the physics and optimization...

19
DF Dwarf Mode Discussion / Re: Winning. Is. BORING.
« on: December 27, 2015, 08:09:25 pm »
You haven't lost in SimCity (or the current gold standard, Cities: Skylines) if you stop at an idyllic, rural hamlet and just let that sit. You also haven't lost if you attach a handful of pieces from a whole bucket of Lego, say "I made a chair!" and walk away.

I have reached 614k pop in the original Sim City. :) And this isn't a chair, but here's a Lego table of about 8000 parts:
http://www.bricksync.net/legotable004.jpg

I don't mind self-defined goals, they can be fun. My main issue is that all DF documentation promises a hard game, and it clearly isn't.

And I would enjoy the game far more if there could be military-oriented challenges, instead of just being a minor distraction.

20
DF Dwarf Mode Discussion / Re: Winning. Is. BORING.
« on: December 27, 2015, 02:58:01 pm »
Or, dig out a huge circular room, about 30 urists across, with a raised dais in the middle for the depot. Channel down the remainder of the room, with drawbridges inside and outside that can be raised at need. Channel the entire room down several urists deep, dig intake and outtake tunnels, install floodgates and levers, and flood the room several urists deep. It's far less efficient, but visually pleasing and kind of neat to imagine.

Sounds nice. Now, instead of building this "just for fun", as visually pleasing as it can be... Imagine if such an impressive structure would actively help you defend against the forces threatening your fortress. It does sound pretty hard to attack if you ask me!

Imagine if people would build these ambitious projects because it would help ensure the long-term survival of their fortress. Imagine if a large and wealthy fortress would need dozens of such mega projects to even survive.

I don't know about you, but that would sound amazing to me! That would be a fantastic game.

21
DF Dwarf Mode Discussion / Re: Winning. Is. BORING.
« on: December 27, 2015, 01:31:31 pm »
"Winning is boring!", I think that slogan reflects the mindset of current DF players quite well. :)

I don't think the comparison with Sim City is fair. In that game, one can strive to reach the highest possible balance of the various indicators: health, education, traffic, pollution... and it's a difficult problem. In Dwarf Fortress, what do we get for designing the most efficient fortress? Well, we get more idle dwarves. That could mean a bigger military (maybe 80% of the population), and that does sound like a pretty good motivation to build an efficient fortress... except that a bigger military isn't really required anyway.

Others have mentioned the problem of finding a balance between "being wiped out instantly" and "the fort settles in stability with ease".

I think the solution is simple: a challenge/survival mode for those who like such a challenge. In such a mode, the ferocity of the attacks would then increase proportionally to both the wealth of your fortress and time. If it appears your fortress has settled comfortably and nothing can touch it, you should keep playing and building, because you'll discover how that mighty fortress is finally going to fall. The challenge now becomes: how far can you go? How long can you last?

The story behind such a mode could simply be that the world is falling into darkness, and your fortress eventually ends up being the only one still standing.

Now, that's a real challenge. I would love it.

22
This game is more than a video game, at least as our society chooses to define video games. To be a willing player of Dwarf Fortress is to become involved in the story of your dwarfs! There is nothing more satisfying than becoming engrossed in the tale of one of your haulers, only to have a siege break against your walls and to see that hauler meet his end at the iron blade of a goblin swordsman.
I fully understand the appeal of creating and playing a story, but an interesting story requires adversity. There have to be difficulties to overcome. There's nothing heroic or epic about a stroll in the park! Let's say the life story of Frodo Baggins wouldn't have been that interesting without Sauron and the ring.

Real role-playing games (like D&D), with a human mind as DM, are absolutely amazing for cooperative storytelling. Computer games are great at different things: deep simulation, big data crunching, fast-paced action, and graphics.

Dwarf Fortress is all about the first two points, with a touch of storytelling as an emergent property, and that's great! Now, if only the game could provide some adversity, some challenge... for those who would like some anyway.

I'm confused by your post. You claim to have spent hours looking up things and figuring out how they worked, designing overly elaborate and unnecessarily complex death traps, and deciphering the mechanics behind an incredibly deep system. You spent HOURS doing this, and....you're wondering where the fun is? Weren't you having it?
No, that wasn't fun! This is like preparing yourself for hours for a chess game: reviewing openings, studying tactics and strategies. And when you finally sit down, your opponent never makes his first move. You wait, and wait, and finally you win by default when his clock time runs out... No, that's not fun!

If you want to have "fun" at this game, after you've learned the mechanics and how the game works, you have to pretty much shoot yourself in the foot, and while you're at it, play blindfolded with your hands tied behind your back ecc ecc...
Imo, having to play like this to have some sort of challenge means that the game is badly designed; if only people were more critical with Toady, instead of worshipping him like a god, maybe he would focus on important things rather than add layers and layers of fluff.
Sorry for the rant but I'm quite disheartened by how the game is being developed.
I am mostly in agreement. Yet... if Toady is fully aware of the lack of challenge, if the current sieges are just a placeholder for something far better, and if he's working on taverns/temples/libraries just because it seemed more fun at the time... then that's great! I have no problem with that. There's no need to add features strictly in the order of what would make most sense for playability. Also, you sometimes need to brainstorm further on the very important stuff, and that causes less important features to get done first.

But the documentation seriously needs to reflect this. The myth of an extremely hard game and this "losing is fun" slogan have to go. Currently, this is a very easy game: you can't lose unless you want to lose. That being clearly established, now let's hope future updates can provide a challenge for those who seek one. The players who only want to build peacefully already have what they seek.

Toady is no god. I've heard that he isn't even all that amazing as a programmer, compared to some of the designers out there in the corporate world.
I'm a software programmer myself (I write high-performance physics running on CUDA clusters), and I must say I agree. I see some bugs/flaws as symptoms of poor design. Performance is *way* too bad for the current complexity, it's a symptom of poor code. And the fact that 64 bits binaries have problems (as I read somewhere) is a symptom of poor programming practices.

But Toady appears to have a vision, good ideas and plenty of motivation. I'm just hoping he can get an optimization expert to help, there's no reason why dwarves couldn't be smarter, why job assignment shouldn't be near-optimal with distances sorted by true path finding (among many other things).

Eh, if the project were open-source, I would offer my services. :)

23
There are always conducts, or at least that's what they were called in NetHack...
True, but Nethack is already hard enough without trying to follow any conduct! I have ascended once at Nethack on alt.org, I'll forever consider that a lifetime achievement... ;)

Are archery towers really too effective? I have read somewhere that walls can be climbed... Of course, if walls/floors can't be destroyed, then it's possible to build a bunker without any entrance whatsoever, which would be an issue.

I still haven't seen much battle, but in a well-balanced game, I would expect that each kind of defense has its weaknesses:
- Trap corridors should only be good against small targets (a dragon wouldn't care if you drop a little rock on it)
- Walls should be vulnerable to siege engines and ethereal creatures passing right through them (very appropriate for some undeads!)
- Soft soils should be vulnerable to digging goblins and whatever else
- Archery towers should be vulnerable to siege engines and ineffective against opponents wielding tower shields
- Drawbridges could be vulnerable to infiltrators (ethereal, flying, whatever) pulling the lever at the most unfortunate time
And so on...

In my humble opinion, *that* stuff should be the focus for development instead of libraries, taverns and temples.

On a slightly unrelated topic, let's assume one would like to build an outdoor fortress for an extra challenge. I found the information lacking regarding outdoor crops... It seems that if you grow asparagus for example, cooking it produces no seeds. Is forcing dwarves to eat raw asparagus the only way to produce new seeds? Is there any way to obtain seeds from the raw vegetables, while still providing cooked meals to one's dwarves?

24
Thank you for all the replies!

What was your population?
After the monarch arrived, the population was at 200. This minimum population of 80 to be attacked appears way too easy... (I probably had my gate tower built and 40 dwarves in training at that point).

Generating world maps with savagry set to "high" can backfire, because possible opponents may get killed during worldgen in the more dangerous world. It's more reliable to use a standard worldgen, but then choose a dangerous location within that world.
Thank you, I'll keep that in mind. Still, I had specifically picked a world where the goblin civilization seemed to be thriving, while the dwarves were crippled and barely survived in a corner of the world, and I established myself right next to the goblins... so that may not have been the issue.

Tell me, did you encounter any Forgotten Beasts, any Titans? Did you find the Magma Sea? And speaking of Forgotten beasts, if you want Goblin sieges (which happen fairly frequently, in the current version) to be insanely difficult (assuming they bring mounts, which they will, usually), try the following:
Was a Wereloris a forgotten beast? :) Eh, probably not, but it's all I encountered, besides giant hamsters and the like. I may try the edit you suggest, although some mod others have suggested also seems very promising!

The first mistake you made was reading the wiki. You could have the most FUN if you tried to learn the game by trial and error.
I would like to agree, but it's practically impossible to play without the Wiki. The game itself doesn't provide any information, it took me forever to realize that magnetite was actually iron. Not to mention having to guess what "Process Plants", "Process Plants (vial)", "Process Plants (Barrel)" and "Process plant to bag" actually do (Farmer's Workshop)...

Download the Fortress Defence mod, sounds perfect for your tastes. Lotsa sieges.
That mod does look very interesting! Thank you very much. :) They even have a "Challenge" mode, and a "Bonus" on top if that wasn't hard enough. Oh, I very much like the sound of that!

Yeah.. I'm desperately hoping that a (soon!) dev cycle will be dedicated to !!FUN!!.. Poetry, dancing, scholarly deeds.. All amazing gameplay elements, but not very dwarfy, and not very good harbingers of flaming, toxin-soaked, jaw-gnashing FUN..
I couldn't agree more. These elements are fine for people who just want to build peacefully, but the game is currently lacking for those looking for a challenge. I want to experience the !!FUN!!, the game should crush my puny beginner's tactics so that I can strive to do better next time. ;)

If there was a gameplay mode where the difficult just constantly increases with time and wealth, I certainly would be addicted to it! Just imagine the last stand of the dwarves in a world falling into darkness... and after a few years, your fortress is the only one (perhaps) still standing in the world.

First, I strongly suspect that goblin and kobold visitors are still broken. Prior to 40.X, ambushes and sieges were randomly generated events that generated attackers from pre-set populations, or from thin air, if necessary. Now there is a complicated mechanic of your site being selected as a target, then the attackers actually reaching your site.
Yes, I had read about that system before starting my second fortress. And that's also why I had established myself right next to the goblins (20 dark pits and 2 dark fortresses!), with any surviving dwarven civilization very far away. Frankly, the goblins shouldn't have had anything else to attack.

I'm okay with the concept of the player choosing the desired "difficulty level" with his starting location. It could then range from perpetual peace to an impossible challenge, and I *thought* I had picked an impossible challenge; that was certainly the intent. Sure, I could have picked a metal-less tundra/glacier in an evil biome on top... but I think something is broken with that world simulation. What were these goblins doing?

I second the idea of moving to an evil biome.
All right. I'll first try the Fortress Defense mod (on challenge + bonus), and see how that goes.

Personally, I like really, *really* hard games. I am several different types of masochist.  ;)
Ah, you aren't the only one. I want to be utterly crushed, I want the game to slap me in the face and laugh at my grossly inadequate tactics! :) I want the intellectual stimulation of having to figure out what can be improved, what weaknesses can be corrected, what new crazy ideas have any hope of working (including the mentioned squirt gun, cave-in engine, obsidian trap).

The problem with a game like Dwarf Fortress is that it can be hard to distinguish bugs from features. Why should the Goblins care about your little, out-of-the-way outpost, when there are far more opulent, closer fortresses to sack?
I placed myself right next to the goblins (2 world map tiles away), and other remaining dwarven fortresses were half-the-world away. I think the game should accept such a player isn't expecting to survive the first year, and deliver what was expected.

219 - 4th goblin siege finally a worthy one of +/- 270 troops, though they didn't really had a chance by the time
Nice! That does sound quite fun, so goblins can mount a serious challenge after all. Considering that you only had 3 losses, I'm hoping it's due to your most impressive tactics rather than goblins just being ridiculously weak. :)

Thank you all, I'm now hopeful this Fortress Defense Mod will deliver a real challenge!

25
DF Dwarf Mode Discussion / New player expectations: where are the enemies?
« on: December 24, 2015, 03:37:03 pm »
First fortress (0.42.02)

I followed the quickstart guide. I absolutely loved the "Losing is fun" slogan, how DF was described as never knowing how you are going to lose. That sounded just great. And so the game was on Pause at least 95% of the time, as I binged on the wiki, planned everything, micro-managed to lose as little time as possible. It might have been my first fortress, but I wouldn't go down without a fight! I played with the constant tension of expecting some blow that would wipe out all my efforts.

I played for 3 in-game years, and it was... strangely peaceful, way too quiet. I think the most epic battle I witnessed was a hunter clubbing a moose with his wooden crossbow for 18 pages. I then remembered the guide had made me pick a "Serene" environment... As I also learned to read the world map, I realized I had surrounded myself with other friendly dwarven fortresses!

Silly me, so it was my fault all along, I had picked the most peaceful starting location possible. All right, time for a new fortress!


Second fortress (0.42.03)

After the totally uneventful first game, I sure was ready for some action! And so I generated about 60 world maps (in parallel, running 16 instances of DF to use all CPU cores), with Beasts and Savagery set at "Very high", and finally found what seemed like an impossible challenge: a crippled Dwarven civilization, a nice starting location right next to a cluster of 20 dark pits and 2 dark fortresses, without a single dwarven fortress nearby. Excellent!

Expecting a bloody struggle for survival, I approached this like a master Starcraft player would: seeking an optimal build, turtling in with traps (though I still have never seen a trap in action), rushing towards iron and steel, maintaining half of my population in military training. If the main entrance was too well defended, I thought perhaps they would dig through the soft soil of the top levels, emerging through the walls? I expected the first top level(s) might quickly fall to the enemy, and therefore designed various choke points further down. (I later learned they can't dig or even destroy walls, and that you can't order your military to disengage/retreat anyway)

As you may have guessed, nothing happened. Once, after two years, some werebeast appeared and managed to bruise a wood hauler before the 50-strong militia arrived (the beast's head was cut off on the first blow). But I'm right next door to the goblins! Where are they? They should be ambushing my wood cutters, harassing my workers, launching skirmishes, constantly probing my defenses, if not plainly dying at the fortress walls (goblins usually live short and violent lives).

I kept going, thinking that at least a higher wealth would attract even more powerful enemies. Greedy dragons? Envious extra-planar entities? Deities insulted by my earthly arrogance?

Two years later (total of 4 years), the wealth reached 15 millions, my fortress was named the capital and the monarch arrived. That's right, my little military outpost that has never seen battle, right in front of 20 dark pits and 2 dark fortresses, retired from all dwarven civilization, became the capital.


Conclusion

Honestly, I feel cheated. The wiki is describing a game where the Fun is brutal, where it's only a matter of time before any fortress fell, no matter how well you think you were prepared. That sounded fantastic, amazing! A game where constantly losing is at the core of the game! Where we would struggle to improve our tactics just to get a little further each time! Where only the greatest DF Grand Masters could expect to sustain large and wealthy fortresses!

If there are no enemies or dangers, then it's impossible to lose, and Dwarf Fortress ends up being similar to The Sims. Where did that "Losing is fun" slogan come from? How do people lose?

Did I miss something? With all the mods out there, did I miss a setting to change the difficulty from "Very easy" to "Insane"? How should I generate a world giving me a real challenge for survival? (please don't tell me to just dig deeper, I would like to lose while struggling for survival, not for acting stupidly...)

I am seriously baffled with this. Please tell me it's not just The Sims with dwarves...


Some other observations:
- When my wood hauler was bruised and resting, all my dwarves spammed "No Water Source" for weeks. Sure, it was winter and the river was frozen... But if the dwarves have the technology to manufacture steel, surely they have figured out how to melt ice and snow? Or was there a way to micro-manage a "put snow in bucket" job that I couldn't find?
- My military dwarves kept dropping food in their private rooms, which would rot and generate miasma.
- When I switched barracks for my 30 marksmen, they temporarily all came to the new library to drop their food on the floor. I immediately marked all of it for dumping, disabled general wood & mineral hauling, and yet my dwarves kept doing other things. Half of it rotted and generated a huge cloud of miasma.
- My outside watch tower/gate has been covered in vomit for two years. No one seems interested to clean it up, and it never goes away. Here's the second floor: http://www.rayforce.net/df000.png
- Apparently, bundles of fine prepared meals (roasts) outside a barrel are worth the square of the quantity? So a bundle of 50 fancy roasts is worth 2500 times a single fancy roast, but only 50 times when finally stored in a barrel.

Pages: 1 [2]