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 - NW_Kohaku

Pages: 1 ... 14 15 [16] 17 18 ... 555
226
DF Suggestions / Re: Biomes being an option in search menu
« on: May 06, 2016, 04:41:55 pm »
You might want to look at the table here on the wiki

Biomes are generated through a combination of drainage, rainfall, and temperature.  While you can't search for the specifically named biome, the combination of those three things are easily searched for using the tools already available.  I.E. If you want to find a desert, you search for a low-drainage, low-rainfall location, while a forest is a high-drainage, high-rainfall location.

227
DF Suggestions / Re: Be the person you want to be!
« on: May 06, 2016, 04:03:49 pm »
If the parents are historical all their children will be historical a creature cannot lose its "hist fig" status . An sicne it tracks over many many years, all the noble families tend to be tracked since the worlds beginning and thereby all of their family members will be hist figs aswell.

(unless the Nobel families die off, in which case it then will grab from the entity population and create new ones)

(Insert joke about Alfred Nobel's lineage having an impact upon DF here.)

Anyway, I'm not sure that's necessarily the case.  I don't know, but there may be a category of "historical by association" that means historical figures that are notable only for being related to someone else who is notable cannot extend that notability past a few degrees of separation.  I don't have evidence of this, but it would make sense from a programming standpoint to prevent an explosion of historical figures from fecund races that live in peaceful times. 

At the very least, many such figures tend to get culled at the end of worldgen, and as such all records of their existence are lost because the game doesn't consider it worth keeping up on them.

A great-grandson of a queen might just be a farmer, with no entries in legends mode at all, which would be enough from which a player adventurer could claim descendence, even from a royal family that lost power.  Doing so doesn't require changing anything in Legends Mode, because they don't exist in Legends Mode. 

228
DF Suggestions / Re: Food, its consumption and pricing
« on: May 04, 2016, 11:22:19 am »
While I agree that feeding your dwarves should be more involved, there isn't any way to do that so long as food is grown in bulk quantities simply by throwing seeds at dirt.  There is a planned update to farming to that end, and you can read the Improved Farming thread in my signature for more than you are likely to want to read on the subject of how it could be balanced.

Meal value, meanwhile, is also a known problem and will likely be fixed at some later date, as well, when trade as a whole is given an overhaul.

Dwarves eat once a month because the walk from the food stockpile to the dining room takes three hours, and they sleep for two days.  The timescale in dwarf fortress is massively warped, with walking distance taking an inordinately larger amount of time compared to everything else dwarves do.  Just a few versions ago, it was common for dwarves in well-provisioned forts to starve just because they wouldn't break off from their hauling tasks soon enough to make it to the booze stockpiles to take a drink or get something to eat.

229
DF Suggestions / Re: !!Fun!! Caves
« on: May 04, 2016, 08:57:53 am »
Actually, this is pretty much what still exists.

I honestly am more inclined to believe this is a sockpuppet performing some trolling. If someone knows about the HFS, then they almost certainly already know it includes "digging too greedy and too deep" and that it already IS a Moria reference.

In the off-chance that I'm wrong, however, AdeptusEldritchus, you're talking about unmarked spoilers. Please at least spoiler your comments or mention in the thread title that you are discussing spoilers.

230
DF General Discussion / Re: Dwarf Fortress and CPU Processors
« on: May 03, 2016, 08:25:28 pm »
For Dwarf Fortress, multicores don't matter because it's single-threaded. This means most mid- or top-line CPUs from the past 5 or so years are all going to be fairly similar, although I think i7s are the fastest single-threaded from memory.

What really slows DF down, however, is cache missing. 

You want a very large cache if you can get it.  Sadly, you'd need somewhere around to 1gb in cache to really run the game entirely on cache.  A quick Googling says that the best is somewhere around 128 mb in a L4 cache, which isn't really there yet, but might get there in a few years.

Failing that, you want the fastest memory possible.  What you really want is the lowest possible CAS latency. (See here for a little guide on it.)

The reason for this is that most of DF is not really complex math that will tie up a CPU, it's actually a bunch of "checks".  The big drains on FPS are things like pathfinding (which involves querying the map almost at random - which foils caching unless you have some crazy huge cache large enough for the whole map, and also foils prediction in slicing), checks on item status as you get more and more random garbage in your fort (again, involving checking such a large table of data it can't be cached), or fluids, which are problematic mainly because they force redraws of the connectivity map... which again means a huge table of data too big for the cache.  Ultimately, this means that your RAM is going to need to respond quickly to queries of small bits of data that the CPU cannot predict like it normally can, so having the lowest CAS latency possible is the best way to improve speed.  (It's also not strictly the most expensive thing you need to buy, since you don't need to buy tremendous amounts of RAM for DF... at least, not yet.)

231
DF Suggestions / Re: Food need preferences now too strong
« on: May 03, 2016, 08:02:57 pm »
A need for some kind of prepared meals is far too easy to meet Bumber.  I think that should work is that dwarves should get a happy thought from good quality prepared meals and a bad thought from eating raw food, with the exception of fruits and nuts (aka seeds and leaves category).  No needs in the wider sense should be met save from eating foods with a liked intermediate, (like at present).
For now, but agriculture will be reworked and recipes are coming eventually. Needs aren't supposed to be that difficult to meet. Pray to deity is as simple as building a temple. Drinking is as simple as having booze. There are ones just for talking to people or viewing art. IMO, we don't need an entire economy based upon a single need.

Bumber is correct, there's no reason why needs should be absurdly difficult and micromanagement-heavy to fulfill.  They are needs, not wants.

Remember that I am proposing that the available array of food demands that a dwarf can want be greatly reduced to within the range of foods that it's civilization and the immediate trade partners of that civilization, this means that the majority of individual demands of most dwarves should be meetable more easily since needs are restricted to the foodstuffs that are culturally available for a given civilization.

Yay, you've reduced it from the completely unmanageable 1000 food types down to a "mere" functionally unmanageable 200 food types. 

Even if needs called for difficulty, and they don't, micromanagement isn't difficulty, it's just not fun. 

Why do you hate fun?

We do not have to invent an arbitrary luxury goods category in order to motivate commerce,

We already have arbitrary luxury goods.  I was talking about a system to actually give them a purpose.  A system that isn't based upon perverting the needs system for something it was never designed to handle, for reasons nobody but you seems to see.

I would rather you actually read what I was proposing carefully and did not read absurd contradictions into it; by available to the civilization I of course available through trade, in addition to the things the civilization imports.   >:(

Actually, I have read it, and understand it and its implications, apparently better than you do. (As does, seemingly everyone else in this thread.) That's why I'm stuck here having to repeatedly explain to you that you're trying to propose a solution to something that isn't a problem.

I would rather you actually read what you are proposing carefully and read the absurd contradictions in it.

The random needs are there but they are secret.

Once again, this is a terrible idea.

NEEDS SHOULD NOT BE SECRET.  They are needs.  They are things players have to provideYou should not make something the player has to do secret, and hide it from the player

If you want to have a want that is secret, that applies a bonus above and beyond what is needed, that would be one thing, but this is a need.  This is something you have to provide.

Need I remind you that trading isn't always possible?  Some forts go through long periods of sieges, even permanent ones, although this is due to bugs.  You're saying that players shouldn't have a choice, they have to import every single food that is tradable, all the time.  Doing that, even by your own standard, isn't "difficult", it's just "tedious" when it isn't "impossible".  In fact, "just take one of everything" takes even less thought and planning on the part of the player than trying to fill one of every "flavor category", which was what you were trying to oppose.

What you are proposing is like saying that, to use D&D for an example, there will be a room in every dungeon that can only be opened by a single completely blindly randomly chosen item off the chart of stuff in the "equipment" section of the Player's Handbook.  There are no hints, no clever puzzle, just carry 7 tons of equipment with you at all times no matter where you go, and spend far less time actually adventuring or having fun since you're going to be forced to order minions and teamsters carrying all your bec de corbins and hide armors around. Because you think that's where the "challenge" of the game should come from.

232
DF Suggestions / Re: Be the person you want to be!
« on: May 03, 2016, 07:38:31 pm »
The basic problem with this kind of idea has always been that player's would simply take over characters they do not like and then have them commit suicide for no apparent reason or sabotage something in a certain way in order to facilitate the success of a characters that *should* be the enemy of that character.  Having the game replace an existing character by having them die for gamey reasons is basically the npc commits suicide for player ends problem actually written explicitly into the mechanics. 

Your grammar made that rather difficult to read, but presuming I understand it correctly...

What you're complaining about in the first paragraph is pretty much exactly what already exists in games like Crusader Kings II if you don't play Ironman Mode - you can play as a king of one nation, save, go back to the menu, then start playing as another landed noble. Hypothetically, you can sabotage a nation, then play as a smaller rival to take advantage... But honestly, I've never seen anyone really do that, just because it makes the game dissatisfying. 

It is, after all, basically cheating, and if you wanted to cheat, there are more direct ways of doing so.  Worrying that players will take advantage of extraneous methods of game manipulation like this is on par with worrying that mods will allow players to make dwarves that do not eat or have emotions.

Aside from that, pretty much everything is already in; we already choose our skills, we also in a very rudimentary way decide our social standing; so I cannot really see how this suggestion is not really already implemented.  The only really notable idea on this thread is the potential to define who your (non-historical) parents and other family members are out of the available professions of the site, that would add something to the game but since important people do not have non-historical children being the child of a noble is ruled out. 

Most of this thread is basically the player is an omnipotent god that should be able to rewrite history and bend the universe to his will effortlessly.  However there is one way that the child of noble wish of the player could be met I can think of.  That would be to select an existing historical couple, have them conceive a child that would not otherwise have existed and run the simulation on autopilot for as many years as it takes for them to grow up (or reach a user-defined age).  Of course there is the risk that the player's character will come to a sticky end in that time, or end up in a goblin fortress more likely; but that is I guess in the spirit of the game.  So in essence the whole concept is kind of "if this couple made a baby now what would happen to it?".

The children of a historical, yes, but not necessarily the grandchildren to the best of my knowledge. 

Regardless, there are more important aspects to characters than just their skills. I'd rather see player character personalities modeled.  (In fact, I'd like to see player playstyle actually affect player character personality.)

You may trivialize adding in a backstory to a player character to the point where you apparently don't even acknowledge that was the main request, but many players would obviously greatly appreciate it.

233
DF General Discussion / Re: The truth about Dwarven milk
« on: May 03, 2016, 04:15:38 pm »
They have to name it after the dwarves, rather than the place the dwarves occupy because then it would be "Oaken Pullies Milk" in one game, and "Drowned Hammer Milk" in another.

234
DF General Discussion / Re: Future of the Fortress
« on: May 03, 2016, 04:10:55 pm »
So, with some of the myths stating that there's like, a tower or a road to the heavens, does this mean that we will eventually be able to travel to them as physical places and kill the gods? Because some of the gods tend to be jerks, and they need to be taken down a notch.

If we can kill gods, what will that do to the world? Will creatures cursed by the gods that are killed suddenly be cured by their deaths?


The HFS is already a gateway to another dimension.  A gateway to the heavens would presumably be similar, except with all those Fun vault dwellers hanging around instead of clowns. (What, did you expect them to be singing choruses in togas?  This is the game where "good" means "unicorns will impale you for getting too close to their bubble grass".)

235
DF General Discussion / Re: Future of the Fortress
« on: May 03, 2016, 04:05:12 pm »
I would have to disagree that there isn't a way to do this. All the design here is a bit up in the air I admit, but I think it could look something like this and work pretty well:

Yes, there are ways to do it well, those are ways that involve pushing magic into the physical space simulation, as I stated in that response.

The problem is that I apparently cannot repeat enough for people that there are some very obvious traps that people keep walking straight into, not the least of which being turning magic in fortress mode into a randomly-activated "game over button" that makes magic so massively unattractive nobody would ever want to use it.  For example, what you just produced falls under that definition of terrible ideas nobody would want to play:
Library is created and researching "terrible secrets" or something is enabled as it would be off by default. So Urist McMagescholar decides he's going to try and learn some new magic. He get the job "PONDER THAT WHICH SHOULD NOT BE." The job can have a variety of outcomes, likely distributed along a curve just like item quality.

Great: Breakthrough, leading to increase in understanding and maybe a new ability or something.
Good: Skill gain, points added to pool that might lead to breakthrough
Neutral: Nothing happens.
Bad: Urist glimpses something bad get a strong negative thought.
Very Bad: Urist glimpses something really really bad, get a strong negative thought, and becomes incredibly incurious.
Even Worse: Urist goes instantly insane
Epic Failure: Urist goes instantly berserk
Getting interesting: Urist and everyone else in the library goes instantly berserk
Hilariously Bad: Everyone nearby gets a random syndrome
Catastrophic: Urist sees that which should not be. That which should not be sees Urist, likes what it sees, and comes to visit.
!!FUN!!: Urist becomes filled with joy and gets instant legendary skill in a new dance called "The Crimson Welcoming." He immediately goes to the tavern to lead the first and only performance of this unique and beautiful work of art...

There is, everyone say it with me, now, no reason to ever use a system like this. There is no way for the benefits to outweigh the risks.  This is a sucker's bet.

And yes, sorry to everyone else if I have to keep saying this over and over, but apparently I need to sledgehammer the notion that turning fortress mode into a slot machine is a bad idea into everybody one by one.

236
They're technically correct (the best kind of correct!)

In technical usage, a "steep" learning curve originally referred to one in which you gain knowledge quickly (hence, forming a steep graph.)  However, popular usage tends to use it the opposite way, likely due to the mental association of "steep" with eg. a steep, hard-to-climb cliff.

I think the main takeaway is the fact that that thread went to fifteen pages, which shows the really weird relationship a lot of Dwarf Fortress players have with the game's difficulty, like there's this pride in it being SUPAH HARD.  Honestly, though, when you get down to it...  it's not difficult once you know how to play.  I mean, if you know all the rules and the interface, you can easily make a fortress that is practically invulnerable, without requiring any particular skills beyond knowing those basic rules and controls.  There's a lot of rules and controls to memorize, which makes the game seem intimidating (and when you don't know all the rules, it tends to seem like things can fall apart for no clear reason), but I don't really think of it as a difficult game to play, just a hard one to get into.

I think the other issue is the "losing is fun" catchphrase.  What it really means is that Dwarf Fortress is designed to make it fun to lose; that is to say, when everything falls apart, it tends to do it in a memorable way.  But it's not hard game in the sense that eg. Dark Souls or Flappy Bird is hard.
The axes are labelled wrong. The axes should be "Ability to get stuff done" horizontally, against "Knowledge/understanding of game required" vertically.

That thread was locked for a reason.  Please don't reopen a pointless argument.

237
DF Dwarf Mode Discussion / Re: Strangest Reclaim?
« on: May 02, 2016, 03:27:36 pm »
You're saying building giant spacious fortresses out of one material is crazy?

The problem isn't so much spaciousness or even the one material part, as it is the fact that it becomes basically impossible to navigate, as anyone who started in a fortress as a dwarf adventurer can tell you.  (You'll starve before you find the path to the surface...)

As much as I prefer decentralized stairwells to central stairwells, central stairwells at least do make a logical sense that makes it easy to path through, especially without seeing the whole map.  Toady's new maps basically involve making a giant wormy, twisty hallway that randomly has up or down stairs that only go up one or two floors before winding around, and demanding the player explore more of them.  Add to this the difficulty of different sections of the same floor not connecting to one another, and multiple up/down stairs on the same floors, and you have a 3d labyrinth where an upstair is just a dead-end, and you have to go back down, then over, then back up a different stair to find a valid path to where you are going, and you start to see the problem in a maze where the only features are the repeating doors to empty 2x2 rooms.

238
DF Dwarf Mode Discussion / Re: Minecart SCIENCE
« on: May 02, 2016, 03:17:54 pm »
FYI, tinypic.com doesn't require signing up for anything. I post things onto that since imgur doesn't show up on this forum.

239
DF Adventure Mode Discussion / Re: A Brawl Gone Horribly Wrong
« on: May 02, 2016, 02:10:57 pm »
I didn't test this, but there are ways you can train to make gelding much more likely.  Like I said earlier in the thread, I saw one guy specifically train to throw people so they land balls-first.

240
DF General Discussion / Re: Future of the Fortress
« on: May 02, 2016, 01:58:25 pm »
There is no way in hell he will be able to think of every single edge case in a game this complex no matter how hard he tries to do it.  The game is unfinished, and the community has stuck around through the craziness and the craziness is part of the experience. Toady does try to think of edge cases and he has talked about this in the past, but people will always find one he hasn't thought about. It will never be perfect right off the bat, these kinds of things never are, sure you can try to get him to push for that, but it is unreasonable to expect him to somehow think of every single edge case.

Sure the community can try to help, but there will most definitely be at least one completely crazy bug no one thought about.

I never said that a release must be perfect, I merely cautioned against expecting it would be a release with hundreds of spells that don't cause absolute mayhem with game balance.

If you're trying to say that one shouldn't let the perfect be the enemy of the good, then that's by all means an endorsement of everyone coming around to list the many possible edge case failures for Toady, even if not every one can be found, rather than dismissing such things as pessimism.

How am I trivializing the AI cheating?  Didn't you already say the best way to keep the game balanced is to allow them to have full access to all the spells, isnt that cheating? And isn't that exactly what I said aswell?

[...]

I understand that toady needs to limit cheating but I also understand that the only way for a game to be actually challenging is to either create a genius AI or allow cheating for the AI and df will likely do the latter and does do the latter and I AM fine with that as long as the player still has a chance.

My point is that there is a limit to which cheating can be stretched without making the game impossible to play as anything other than an exploit-memorization game. An army of 50-ton steel blobs with full-body necrosis syndromes is essentially impossible for any military to defeat, and functionally requires obsidianization traps.

The cheating also needs to be balanced for both players that can randomly have access to virtually any type of magic, all types of magic, or no magic... which is an absurdly difficult ask.

And I agree that you have to be really careful when making AI like this (as I stated earlier) , I understand that there are problems, But I want to see toady accomplish things that seem impossible (This game wouldn't exist if toady hadn't tried achieving the impossible)  so encouraging it in my opinion isn't really that bad.

Toady doesn't accomplish the (actually) impossible.  At best, he accomplishes the unprecedented, but he has mainly just done things that nobody would put the time or effort into doing, or which people believed would not be popular enough to warrant doing. 

What I'm opposed to is simply saying "Toady can do this thing that I can't even clearly define or have thought about all the way through, even if it's impossible because Toady does impossible stuff all the time!"

It's like saying, "Hey, people said making a plane that could go through the sound barrier was 'impossible', and now they say time machines are 'impossible', so clearly, time machines are going to exist any minute, now!"  No matter what the memes say, DF isn't going to become self-aware any time soon, and DF has a nasty tendency to make memes that fans angrily stick to as though it were true.  (Like, say, female dwarves with beards...)  Magic, in particular, is a hotbed for asking for the impossible or the badly-thought-out, which is why it demands strong pushback to ask people to think through what they really want, and consider the impact it will have on people with different play styles than one's own.

Pages: 1 ... 14 15 [16] 17 18 ... 555