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 - Andeerz

Pages: 1 ... 13 14 [15] 16 17 ... 44
211
DF Suggestions / Re: Adding slings ( think David vs Goliath)
« on: November 09, 2010, 04:10:40 pm »
Then I'd suggest the ammo system needs to change...
But you need to define an ammo type for the sling which points to the [ITEM_AMMO] or similar tag group. Since stones aren't defined as an ammo type, you'll need to make a workshop task that makes them. Which is to say, dwarves cannot get their ammo right of the ground.

@Vattic: I agree.

@iceball3: I see what you mean! 

But wait up: how does a catapult recognize stones as ammo, then?  Is it sort of like a reaction more than a combat action sort of thing?

Ayway, I think perhaps all stones could simply have the ammo tag.  But I think there must be more elegant solutions.  Vattic, what would you suggest as an ammo system change?





212
Hmmm... I think an "influence" sort of representation like in Civ 3 might be a good idea provided that this "influence" is generated from very real and observable interactions between individual entities in the game.  Ultimately, I think a nation is defined by peoples' attitudes, and not some sort of magical line in the dirt.

I would model it based sorta like how it's done now.  Dwarves, elves, humans, etc. right now have their allegiance to a nation already represented, which could serve as a framework for this.  I'll need to use a made-up example to show how I think this idea ideally would work.  But I'm going to have to think this one through pretty hard before I post it.  Basically, here are some of the things I need to figure out:

1. How someone can establish their relative dominance and influence over people
2. How to model to what degree other entities (either subject or dominant over someone) respect this dominance
3. How (from #'s 1 and 2) a hierarchy of power can be established and recognized as a government as a sort of individual entity itself
4. How this network of power and respect and government can influence people to identify themselves as belonging to the same group, which would in essence be a nation
5. How to have people recognize the idea of a nation as an entity separate from government (for example: Japanese still identified themselves as Japanese even after the collapse of their monarchy's power after WWII)

So, sorta what I'm thinkin' (and I'm no sociologist/poli-sci person or anything, so I'm not the best authority on this)... What initially makes a people united (as a nation, province, tribe, whatever) are, I think, two things (and I could be wrong!!!) a. having something in common (culture, lineage, etc.) and b. essentially a recognition of authority/government/social order of some sort; they have to recognize each other as being "family" sort of, and agree in general to work together somehow for the survival and common good of a people.

I think that these two things are what basically should operate at the base level of how entities in the game recognize things like different civilizations, nations, fiefs, provinces, etc, and belonging to such things.  Hmmm... any sociologists, political scientists, or historians got any useful models?
 

213
Reviving this thread a bit, Maybe a bit of thoughts on oxygen? I mean you can build a base completely underwater and still be okay.

Maybe really, really high peaks would have low oxygen content, which would slow dwarves down a bit when their at the top of a 500 Z-level mountain. (not sure on this one, how high is a Z-level exactly in dwarf fortress?)

I like to think dwarves as having ridiculously high red blood cell counts to deal with mining in deep mines with sub-optimal ventilation, and having good constitution to boot to deal with dangerous gasses ans stuff... In that case, maybe they wouldn't suffer much at high altitudes.  :D  Though I like the idea in general!

214
So in otherwords...

A "Nation" doesn't exist in feudalism so to speak.


Yeah!

Not so much Rome. In fact that was one of the contributors to their eventual downfall.

Yeah, the eventual fall of the Republic after over 400 years... and the eventual fall of the empire after another 500 or so... :P

Agh... never mind.  I don't wanna derail this.

215
Hmmm... patriotism's meaning can vary on context.  I will assume that what you mean by patriotism is patriotism in the sense of loyalty and pride for one's own country.  I will have to look into this some more another time, but I'd be willing to bet that patriotism is something that existed well before the modern era.  In order to have patriotism as defined here, you have to have a country, as opposed to a loose confederation of city states, feifdoms and the like which were prevalent throughout the medieval era.  A nation in the modern sense in Europe didn't come around until the Renaissance with the rise of nationalism and stuff. However, I wouldn't be surprised (and this is purely speculation) that there existed patriotism in solid, unified empires like the Roman Empire, and the Persian Empire which I would argue fit, at least in many respects, the modern definition of a nation. 

Patriotism is dependent on a sense of unification across a large geographic area, something that I think couldn't happen without a strong, unifying government able to effectively make its presence felt across a large area; you couldn't really have a nation in the modern sense nor patriotism in the way defined here.  Persia and Rome did have such governments, and I'd be willing to bet that this was due to a thriving economy, solid infrastructure, and a strong professional volunteer military to keep destabilizing agents out of the areas. 

I bring this up, because I think this could give an idea of how to deal with the idea of "nations" in DF.

216
DF Suggestions / Re: Dual/Multi core support...
« on: November 08, 2010, 03:19:08 pm »
Ah.  I see.  Thanks guys.  Well, would it be correct to say that perhaps path-finding, as it is assumed to be already asynchronous, would be the easiest (least-hard would probably be a better word) thing to multi-thread? 

I can see what you guys say about the difficulties of multi-threading path finding, but I think we are all just speculating here since we have no specific knowledge of the code of the game.  I would love to know exactly how changes in the walkable space make this difficult, if indeed this is the most important factor (which I don't doubt).  Basically, I would like to know how the path-finding normally updates the path taken when path changes happen.

217
DF Suggestions / Re: Dual/Multi core support...
« on: November 08, 2010, 05:14:25 am »
Ok!  Thanks.

But what makes path finding something that is hard to do in parallel with other processes?  Is it only because there are often other processes that are dependent on the position of the thing moving?  If so, what are these processes?  I can think of some processes where this might be the case, like the pathfinding needed to follow other moving things.  Am I thinking about this right?   

218
DF Suggestions / Re: Dual/Multi core support...
« on: November 08, 2010, 04:24:20 am »
I really wish I knew more about how this game is programmed and how exactly processors work... But from what I do know from my meager experience in C++, what you are saying, Quietust, seems like thinking in the right direction... but I'm not sure I follow entirely.

I don't exactly see how this would help.  Then again, I am not at all familiar with how pathing and processors work other than a very superficial, possibly erroneous, understanding.

Am I correct in assuming that the processor can only calculate a single thing at a time?  And that two cores means that two things can be calculated at the same time?

Assuming that's correct, then am I correct to assume that pathing works as follows?  When a path is requested, the game takes into account the positional state of everything at a given instant.  It then calculates the path, and there you go.  As the dwarf travels along the path it periodically requests the path again to make sure that it is still viable.

If all of that is true, then why is it hard to relegate every pathing request as it happens to another core?  What dependencies are there that prevent it from being done asynchronously without it screwing up something down the line of calculations that might depend on it?

219
DF Suggestions / Re: Adding slings ( think David vs Goliath)
« on: November 08, 2010, 03:58:02 am »
Yeah!  Fortunately, it seems according to the most recent DF talk that Toady is going to do a lot of research concerning military strategy, history, and whatnot for this arc.  And Toady is most certainly already aware of the need to change projectile motion in the game for weapons at least.  I think it's pretty safe to assume the combat system and weapons properties as Toady works on the army arc is going to get a lot of fundamental changes. 

220
DF Suggestions / Re: Adding slings ( think David vs Goliath)
« on: November 08, 2010, 12:44:30 am »
Wow.  That is a great link, Vattic!  Well researched, and the cited sources could be potentially useful as well!  :D  Especially for discussing potential modeling of tactics and stuff for the army arc, which Toady says he needs to do more research about.  This kind of info about weapons is exactly the kind of info Toady and people suggesting stuff for army-related things need.

I would love to see the potential for kind of changes of warfare throughout the medieval period be able to be recapitulated in DF for the same reasons it happened IRL.  Notice I say potential as in it could come about from a non-scripted, procedurally generated system...

ANYWAY...

The sling makes sense more than ever to me now, as well as the utility of other ranged weapons.  Awesome!  And I would LOVE to see the sling in game to be sure, and just as importantly (if not more so) the relative TRAINING and SPACE requirements.  That goes for the sling as much as any other weapons, which will be absolutely necessary if the army arc is going to be able to truly simulate the merits of different kinds of weapons!
   
EDIT: For what it's worth, the article Vattic linked to cites a variety of very credible and well researched sources.  The author himself may not be a historian, but he's hella-intelligent and knows how to do good research as evidence by his other work.  Basically, I'd pretty much trust this article as very reliable.

221
DF Suggestions / Re: Additional Mechanics/Traps Wishlist
« on: November 06, 2010, 10:41:55 pm »
Speaking tubes?  Neat!!!  I'm all for it.  Though it might be out of the time frame, it's a tech plausible with the given manufacturing capabilities of the dwarves.

It got me thinking about other primitive telecommunications technologies (which many probably wouldn't be that related to this thread, but they are cool!):

Optical telegraphy (heliographs and other signal lamps, fryctoria, and smoke signals), audio telegraphy (drums, whistled language, whistles, horns, and other instruments), carrier pigeons, etc.  Links to useful wikipedia articles about them can be found here 

ALSO!  Sensory technology (some of which I think has definitely been suggested at least elsewhere):
non-magnetic compass/direction sensor, odometers, siege mining sensors...

I'm going to have to go through this and see if I can find any more measuring devices and sensors and stuff that were available in medieval and older times.  :3

222
DF Suggestions / Re: Adding slings ( think David vs Goliath)
« on: November 06, 2010, 05:30:49 pm »
Regardless, they were useful!  :D  And would be an awesome weapon to unleash before engaging in close quarters... 

223
DF Suggestions / Re: tourism industry
« on: November 06, 2010, 04:19:45 pm »
LOL!  True dat, zwei!

224
DF Suggestions / Re: practical scientific advancement.
« on: November 06, 2010, 03:50:38 pm »
Human history is only so useful when talking about a fantasy world sim. 

Only so useful, but still useful, and particularly useful for the matter at hand (though, admittedly, the matter at hand is off topic).  What else would you have to go off of regarding the characteristics, purpose, and significance of various medieval technologies portrayed in a fantasy world sim like DF?   

Well, my core objection to firearms is that if they are much more effective than the "normal" projectile weapons, they'll decrease the importance of heroes and increase the importance of cannon fodder. (The same thing is possible with magic: A wizard here and there that goes out and about casting lightning bolts won't have similar effects because that kind of magic is typically restricted by talent, access to spells and long training. However, if every peasant can learn it, expect the same effects as if they all had rifles.)

And this is where discussing human history is important and useful.  What I've basically been trying to say is that IF we use reality to base the characteristics of DF weapons off of, looking at history would show (which some might disagree with) that the scenario feared by Silverionmox would be able to come about regardless of guns (and I think probably not much more easily with guns).  It would be dependent upon the economic and political environment more so than the technologies available (NOT to say guns wouldn't be a factor if they were in the game; I think we all know that technology is very important). 

Now, about scientific advancement:

I actually like the idea that was stated earlier, that a strange mood could procedurally generate a new alloy, weapon, craft, etc.  Furnace operating -> alloy mood. Cooking -> meal mood. Brewing -> drink mood. Once the mood finishes, you can now make the new item at the appropriate workshop.

...stuff...

Of course, procedural recipes would require recoding workshops and stuff, since at the moment you need to create a new world to add a reaction.

I in essence like the idea.  I can't think of a way to model discovery and invention in DF other than an occasional strange mood of sorts where new uses for things are discovered.  I mean, new uses for things pretty much always were discovered or invented by an individual with a stroke of genius of sorts, no? 

Check out my post on this thread: http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=62629.msg1492239#msg1492239

It contains your idea in a manner of speaking and suggests some ideas for how these sorts of technology related strange mood sort of things would come about, technological progression, exchange of technology (and knowledge in general), and how it would affect things in the game.

225
DF Suggestions / Re: Rectification of timescale across modes
« on: November 05, 2010, 09:06:27 pm »
From Dwarf Fortress Talk #4:
Quote
...Now right now the world is not so big that you can't walk across it in ... what does it take in adventure mode, I think you can step twelve tiles in day? I really don't remember. So if you're in adventure and you can go twelve tiles in a day then even in a large world you can go twenty or twenty two days to cross the entire world. So if you take the caravans time and up it up - up it up, up it up, that's great - if you shoot it up by like five times then it would still take a hundred days to cross the entire world, and if that's the case then there shouldn't be problems with not getting a dwarven caravan every year, even if they stop at various cities, even if they stop a city for like five days and move on...

The time taken to travel from one side of a large world to another isn't too bad.  22 days sounds right.  Given traveling a local tile in adventure mode takes 11 seconds, that would mean it would take about 25 days to travel from one side of the map to another on a large map.  Assuming you can move at an average of ~3.3 mph (avg. human walking speed) the entire time (no stopping for anything), that would make the map about 1990 miles by 1990 miles, which is a reasonable size. 

So, perhaps changing adventure mode time (or at least adventure mode walking speeds) should be a no-go.

So I have a suggestion that builds off of what others have suggested.

Speeding up movement speeds of entities in fortress mode might do the trick given the following are addressed:

1. Combat speed
2. Time taken to eat/sleep/drink/take breaks
3. Possible CPU issues (which might be impossible to take care of...)

I could be missing some very important issues... so my suggestion might be full of shit from the get go.  And if issue #3 cannot be taken care of, then this suggestion is totally pointless.

But, let's assume speeding up movement speeds doesn't require ungodly CPU abilities.

For issue #1, simply increase the speed of things in combat so that they match adventure mode time...

For issue #2, things get tricky.  A lot of these things have already been mentioned... Breaks could be left alone, but eating and sleep would have to be modified...    I don't like the idea of making combat units a special-case thing where they magically have different eating and sleeping requirements by virtue of their military designation.  This would be open to exploit...

We could keep eating/sleeping/breaks time requirements the same, but the major thing that this would eff up would be prolonged sieges.  If your dorfs take a month to sleep or something, and in the middle of a siege your military dwarf goes to sleep and then a 2-day-long prolonged assault happens in adventure mode time, then your dwarf is asleep for the entire damned time.  I could sort of live with it, but I know a lot of people wouldn't be able to, and I wouldn't be entirely satisfied.  I mean, I could totally see this not being as big an issue as people think, and I could explain at length what I mean at a later time... But I'll suggest something else for now...

What would be most satisfying to me would be to shrink the time difference gap as much as possible and live with the fact that maybe dwarfs might be eating several hour long meals and sleeping longer than 8 hour (in adventure time) increments.  To do so, first make fortress time a bit slower, as in have what would now be one year of game time be like one season of game time.  Job time requirements could be increased to compensate.
 
Focusing on eating, perhaps things could be done as suggested before: Effectively increase the yearly eating requirements by a factor of 4 or something (so, instead of eating as they do X many times a year, they eat 4X or more times a year).  Increase food yields per year to compensate.  Decrease the time it takes to eat by whatever factor.  Keep in mind also, the increase in travel speeds would make eating a bit less time consuming...

A similar thing could be done for sleeping. 

Ultimately what my suggestion would make fortress mode end up looking like, I think, would be largely the same, except instead of dwarfs being easily seen traveling from one point to another, the dwarfs would be jumping around.  They would still be going through places, it just wouldn't be visible.  I wouldn't mind that, myself.  Things would appear as normal if time was slowed to adventure mode time.  Basically, everything would be operating at the same time more or less between modes, with the exception of eating/sleeping/taking breaks. 

Perhaps I'm missing some very important issues.  But I think this combination of ideas could work!  Whatcha think?         

Pages: 1 ... 13 14 [15] 16 17 ... 44