Bay 12 Games Forum

What's the best way to switch over, and are the "problems" that 2010 has (that were not present in 28.xxx) as easy to ignore or work around as you guys make it look?

Fear is the mind killer.  You are able to play Dwarf Fortress.  That means you're better/smarter/sexier than 99.99% of people.

Don't do it because you have to.  Do it because you'll lose.  Do it because it's a challenge.  Do it because you can.

{b}uild --> {A}rchery target.

Note the capital "A".

They can be built of wood or stone.  See the wiki page for more important information.

Quote from: Graebeard on December 01, 2010, 10:17:25 pm

It's actually not too complicated.

Click the link, then hit "save" and save it as "memory.xml" in your Overseer folder.  That should do the trick.

Disclaimer: I haven't actually done this with .18, but I did it back with the memory.xml for .16 and it worked just fine.

Save? I don't know what your talking about. There is no save button!

File -->  Save As.  Or just Crtl+S in many browsers.

Grae is my first name.
And don’t all dwarfs have beards?
That is my story.

I thought what's funny?
And also has beards in it?
Google provided.

Quote from: Herbiie on December 01, 2010, 01:04:26 pm

Quote from: Kogan Loloklam on December 01, 2010, 11:16:51 am

If the right support were provided for these, then we'd quickly develop multiplayer and 3Dness. The 3d just requires passing the commands from the 3d client to Dwarf fortress. This doesn't seem to be too far off, and it might even already exist, I don't know since I don't use visualizers.

Tbh if we kept the 2d Interface & added another slot for 3d & the game being full screen it'd make a big difference, think stone sense but in the same window as DF & with animations, you still have the entire game just with a 3d representation alongside it, with the ability to turn the 3d bit off. I don't think DF would lose any of it's charm, the main way of finding out exactly what happened in a fight would be the Combat Reports, but there's a 3d bit making it easier to visualise.

Dwarf Fortress is (for the most part) operated by key commands.

As such, I don't see how a 3d Visualizer program isn't quite enough. Sure you then got two programs running, but as long as the visualizer can send the keyboard commands to Dwarf Fortress, then you have a 3D interface for the game, or at least the potential for one.

Herbiie has a really interesting point.

One of the biggest criticisms of the game is its interface.  I'm not sure that I completely agree.

An interface essentially has two functions.  The first is to allow the game to give you information.  The second is to allow you to pass information (instructions) back to the game.

In many ways the current interface is poor regarding the first function.  But regarding the second, I actually really like it, and I think it's very effective.  Sure, it takes a while to master, but I am able to work much faster with keyboard control than I am with a mouse.

So how about having one interface for each function?

Keep the current 2d interface to allow user input.  Maybe jazz it up with sprites à la mayday.  This would allow for continued strong and precise control over the game.  Have another window with a 3d representation, either isometric like Stonesense or 3d like Fortress Overseer or Visual Fortress, that would allow users to see information from several z-levels at once.

I mean, we're pretty close to that right now with Stonesense anyway, right?  Just link the "new" visualizer to DF to allow for continuous updates (link Stonesense already does, I think) and add an option for slaving the 3d interface to the 2d interface.

This wouldn't necessarily require Toady to completely recreate the interface and figure out how to offer the same degree of control in a 3d environment that we have now in a 2d slice of that environment.  It might also lend itself well to parallel development if Toady ever wanted to bring more people in or offer more direct/explicit support for mods and utilities.

I'm so glad this thing is still growing.

You know what?  I've never had the patience to play a fort at 5 fps before, but I think I'd like another crack at this one.  The 200 dorf workforce may make up for it in sheer potential.

Can you sign me up for another turn with the proviso that I won't be able to actually play until after the 18th?

^

Also, the individual pumps in a pump stack transmit power vertically between one another.  That's why the floor is channeled out from underneath the "head" of each pump, so that they'll be touching one another.  All you need is one connection to a power source somewhere on the stack and all the pumps will be powered.

How would someone go about filling a water reservoir?

First, you need a source of water.  Renewable is better (river, brook, underground lake touching the edge of the map) because you don't have to worry about evaporation as much.

Second, you need to get the water to the reservoir.  This might be as easy as channeling a ditch between your river and the reservoir, but that only works if the reservoir is on the same level (or lower) as the water source.  It's almost always better to pump it full rather than rely on natural flow to get the job done.  It's faster and more reliable.

To pump water, build a pump on the level above the water source you wish to tap.  Here's an example with a cross section of a river.

     ->
##777#####

# = walls (or natural ground rock)
7 = water
-> = pump facing right
This setup will allow you to pump water out of the river.  The pump will "teleport" a tile of water from one level down on the left to the same level on the right.  All you need to do now is construct walls around the head of the pump so that the water flows into your reservoir.  Here's a top-down example:

..~~~...........
..~~~...........
..~~~.....#####.
..~~~.....#777#.
..~~~.#####777#.
..~~~->7777777#.
..~~~.#####777#.
..~~~.....#777#.
..~~~.....#777#.
..~~~.....#####.
..~~~...........

. = ground
~ = river water, 1 level below
# = walls
-> = pump facing right
7 = water on "ground" level
Hope that helps.

Edit: if you need to get the water up multiple z-levels you can just do this with multiple pumps.  There's no strict need to "stack" the pumps.  You can have the water "step up z levels as you go along if you prefer.  The only thing is that the pump stack design automatically connects all the pumps together for power transmission.  That's not too important, though, if you have plenty of power.  Or if you have a couple spare dwarfs that can rotate through pump operating duty when needed.