Bay 12 Games Forum

You mad son of a gun, you really did it! My lord.

It's entirely probable that one of the "missions" would be simply "build a fort in this area to expand our influence." I don't see the problem.

Going off topic for a sec:

Can you please stop spamming

ignore future trolling

now stop spamming the thread.

Please refrain from using words whose meaning escapes you.

Discussion against an idea is still discussing an idea. It wouldn't be a discussion at all if everyone only said "Yes, what a wonderful idea, I agree". Subskills/Interface discussion are related topics that could go in a new thread, but work just as well here, because the splitting of preexisting skills brings up the problems of overspecialization and skill-clutter, and excessive micromanagement and overburdening data respectively.

Furthermore:

The suggestions forum is FOR discussing ideas that may or may not make it into the game, and there are MANY threads here that delve into things that are never likely to get implemented.

The idea of suggestion threads is to bring forth ideas that players might like to see implemented in the game, or for the development of said ideas into something workable that CAN be implemented. This subforum would be barren if people limited threads to subjects whose implementation was a foregone conclusion.

Back on topic:

One thing I think we should not forget in this discussion is that a single dwarf can be given multiple labors, even if the skill system isn't changed.  So if smithing is split out into two or more skills, it would still be easy to have a single smith doing all of the work, just by enabling all the different smithing labors in his preferences. The only gameplay difference would be that such a generalist smith would gain skill less rapidly than a specialized one.

While true, the experience gain on each would have to be scaled up to compensate, simply because it'd be near impossible to have a decent metal-goods trading industry otherwise. Even now it's a pain in the butt to get a metalcrafter above competent without a Mood.

I'd actually like to see Brightsmiths integrated into the Jeweler's shop, and have it be something that is done entirely without heat (as specified by Impaler). This is CLEARLY not a skill in any direct way related to blacksmiths, and who seek an entirely different goal. Again, there is basically no need for this skill in the operation of a fortress and little overlap of skill. If anything, it could be done by a metalcrafter (rather than a forge using blacksmith), but I'd really rather see jewelery and fine metals handled at the jewelers shop rather than a craft workshop.

Well, the jeweler's shops DO need some more excitement, and giving them gold/silver would help with that.

I get what you're going for here, but not all processes make sense for all outputs or inputs, so a lot of the complexity there is just wasted; most combinations wind up being totally meaningless. There are also labors that don't have inputs, or don't have outputs, like, say, hunting. So basically, there's a lot of redundancy in that system, and the system still doesn't work for everything.

Could work if, instead of "input/process/output", you had "labor/material/object", where the content of the second and third columns dependent on the previous column's selection, if needed. So you could go for "Crafting/Wood/Mugs", or if Toady eventually allowed for it, "Stonecrafting/Obsidian/Toys" for instance. Some labors like Hunting wouldn't need a second or third column, and simply choosing "Hunting" in the first column would be sufficient.

It's only not a Fallacy if you've established a chain of logical cause and effect which you manifestly did not do.  If you don't want more primary skills that's your opinion but saying that my proposal makes a large incresse in primary skills inevitable isn't substantiated.

Okay:

If we split up metalsmithing into x-smithing * 4, much like if the Coopers thing is implemented (don't try to argue they're unrelated, they're the same damn topic with different subject matter and prooobably could do with a thread-merge), it will likely follow that more skills get needlessly split up, either for 'Historical Accuracy' or to keep things nice and uniform.

Masonry could be split into Furniture, Sculpting, and Brick-making/laying. Stone Detailing becomes Smoothing and Engraving. Wood- and Stone-crafting get split up to differentiate between whittling/chiseling and putting small pieces of wood/stone together to form crafts that way. I'm sure we could think of more.

Do you see what I mean and intend to argue the point as I intended, or are you going to keep crying "FALLACY" and jam your fingers in your ears?

I stated more then once that the benefit is that you get closer to the common high-fantasy troupe of specific dwarven settlements having craftsmen with a particular excellence and expertise in a particular metal.  Often its stated their work is a desirable commodity through the world.  This adds character to a Fortress and encourages trade both imports and exports.

So, "realism/historical accuracy for realism/historical accuracy's sake" is the sum of your argument? I guess we're just going to have to agree to disagree on this then, because I certainly don't see the merit in that.

My whole point is that 'metal' should not be consider "a single material type", the game has a large number of 'elemental' metals and a huge array of alloys.  Lumping them all together is akin to having a profession called "Non metal Crafter" who makes everything out of glass, wood, bone and stone as if they were all interchangeable.

That's not remotely similar and you know it.

Ridicules, more knowledge and sophistication ALWAYS results in more division of labor.  That's why their are hundred of types of medical specialists today compared to medieval society having only Surgeons, Dentists and Blood-letters.  Again if you don't want more skills that's one thing but don't made ridicules assertions in the guise of realism.

You are the only one arguing for realism. You.

Also, division of labor is the practice of splitting up multiple tasks in the creation of a single object, such as having a multitude of laborers each creating different parts of a gun. The goal of division of labor is to have multiple workers that are easier to train and can be paid less than a single worker who does all of these things by himself, as well as speeding up the process by having all of the laborers ready to work their particular task as soon as the task needs doing.

Division of labor is not associated with the "knowledge" or "sophistication" of a craft, it is related to the total labor available, or the complexity of performing it. As you know, once you hit anywhere between 50-80 dwarves, depending on your playstyle, you quickly run out of non-hauling jobs for your dwarves, either because nothing more particularly needs to be produced, or because you do not have enough of an influx of materials to support additional jobs.

"Division of labor" as far as the process of (dwarven) metallurgy is concerned involves procuring metal ores from the earth, smelting it into usable metal bars, and then smithing it into objects. You may have already figured that I was talking of the already-existing Mining, Furnace Operating, and x-smithing, respectively.

Telling your dwarves that "You're going to smith copper objects, you're going to smith iron objects, and you're going to smith gold" is pointless because, due to the nonfunctionality of the dwarven economy, division of labor is only helpful in terms of how long it takes to produce an object. Having one dwarf mine, smelt, and smith is inefficient as he'll be divided between all three tasks. Having one dwarf do each task results in goods being produced faster. Overshooting it by having a dwarf each for red-, black-, white-, and bright-smithing results in similar production times, but with two or three dwarves, at a time, spending most of their time doing nothing in particular.

Perhaps this model could change when the economy is fixed, but it's impossible to say how at this time.

Slippery Slop is the name of a logical fallacy, it's like saying "But that can't be right because Ad Hominem attack!",

A dangerous course, one that leads easily to catastrophe, as in He's on a slippery slope, compromising his values to please both the bosses and the union. This metaphoric expression alludes to traversing a slick hillside, in constant danger of falling. [Mid-1900s]

Yeah, no.

if my idea is a good thing compared to the present system then it should be evaluated on that merit, if too much of that good thing would be a bad thing then that's a reason not to over do something, not a reason to avoid it entirely as if their is no stopping something once started.

On the merit of what, precisely? All I see is unnecessary overspecialization.

This is ridiculous, the 'High Fantasy' genre is based in human history and Toady has explicit cut off date for what Technology is and isn't appropriate.  Dwarves are the most metallurgicaly gifted race so having more nuanced divisions of skill in metal working is one way to express that, non dwarves might lack certain skills making them unable to work the metal which is different from being unable to mine/smelt the metal.

The dwarves' penchant for metalworking is already expressed by having five skills dedicated to the working of a single material type, as well as being the only race capable of working steel (and, implicitly, HFSinite). "More nuanced divisions" are perfectly unnecessary.

Besides, I would argue that being so naturally gifted with metalworking would involve less specialization required. Every dwarf in this game clearly has an intrinsic knowledge of different metals, judging by their likes and that they know how to make various alloys. Additionally, they presumably have some knowledge of the differing properties of each, i.e. malleability and brittleness. Therefore it's not at all a far stretch to assume that once a dwarf knows how to work metal, he wouldn't have a great deal of difficulty adapting those techniques to harder or softer metals.

If the incresse in primary skills is kept to around 50% (1 additional skill for ever 2 current ones) it would hardly be noticeable as it would be moving from 50 to 75 (assuming changes only to the industrial profession skills and not combat skills or social skills) and their is no real difference between the cognitive juggling of 50 or 75 objects.  A Skill synergy system on the other hand would probably require around 100 skills or skill modifiers (one for every 'form' and one for every 'material') and require multiple objects to be combined to produce every desired result which is a lot of mental juggling.

50-ish primary skills are barely acceptable as is, and a not-insignificant percentage of them have no remarkable use to speak of. 75 primaries would be absolutely unacceptable and I don't know how you could possibly justify otherwise.

Dwarves looking for a hauling/dump job seem to favor the furthest eligible item possible. I'm not sure why.

Ideally, you could build a catapult range for defense, and have retractable bridges/floodgates to control whether the rocks fly outside.

The main trouble maker is my mayor, who keeps mandating Adamantine.  I got excited at the begining, wondering if this meant I had some on the map, but I know for sure now, it aint there.  I still havent found any, and look forward to the next release, which should have some on every map, no?

I think it was just magma where there would be "a little on every map, even if just on the bottom".