Bay 12 Games Forum

Glass terrariums on chain would help with the going underwater thing - tho there'd be no work getting done, just a nice get away.

Hey all,

Here's the culprit situation:

http://mkv25.net/dfma/viewmap.php?view_mapid=312

Click on the Fatal demolition point of interest.

Essentially:
- two aquaducts were slated to be removed.
- One was 3x3, the other 1x3 (vertical), both east-west openings.
- The 3x3 was parallel with the bridge, the 1x3 was one tile further south.
- By the time I noticed the flood, both aquaducts had been partially removed, and the 1x3 had two large 0s showing, while the 3x3 had four small os showing (the 1x3 was last to be removed).
- Somehow this allowed water onto land, but none of the aquaduct waterways were terminating on land.

Any clues, or is this a bug?

 

Though you've probably solved this by now, if all else fails, just remove the smelter. I had my best miner stuck on a 1 sq tile on the wrong side of a magma floodgate. As I hadn't made the channel on the other side, when my mechanics got their butt into gear my plan was to lower the floodgate and try building a 1sq bridge over it. Amazingly the miner must have taken advantage of the split second between the gate going down and it filling with lava because he got his ass back on my good side and ran off to the (furtherest!) well.

You'd think for earning legendary status you'd learn not to dig yrself into a corner!   :roll:

[ June 20, 2007: Message edited by: Faces of Mu ]

Heyas,

Has anyone noticed how old mayors keep their job title, even though they're not on the nobles screen? I think I've got three running around my fort (correction, two because of wolf attack).

quote:

---

Originally posted by Keiseth:
<STRONG>Oh, oh! A thought! A good thought!

Can you throw your furniture? I imagine a door or table would do some great throwing damage and you'll be able to throw them to no end!

Crapmountain, the Dark Fortress was destroyed today by an angry adventurer with a payload of wooden doors and one hell of an arm... He was last heard heading to a nearby town screaming "Knock knock!" as if under extreme rage.</STRONG>

---

HA!  

Hi Toady and all,

I had a fort, abandoned it, and when I reclaimed I kept getting "Ambushed!" type messages and the screen would flick to the ambushee. Given I had reclaimed and I expected there to be a few of these, so I ignored it for the sake of trying to focus on mining. However I got the same thing happen every second, so I only got work done while paused, and could hardly monitor anything. After a while I noticed that the unit being ambushed was the planter from my previous fortress. So I couldn't control him, turn off his hunting or bring him somewhere where he wouldn't keep running around triggering ambushes by deer.

The problem was:

a) A dwarf not in my team kept triggering ambushes
b) the ambush messages were persistent, every second
c) it kept translocating my view to the ambush (every second!)
d) I couldn't control or stop this dwarf (player ignorance?)
e) I wasn't sure how to set the gate entrance so I could use F1 key to change my view back to exactly where I was working (player ignorance).

Ta!

Welcome aboard! Great to see yr into the game!

I don't have a clue what yr talking about re: steampunk, but welcome aboard!  

I put this in the FotF thread but decided to move it here.

This is prolly an oldie, but here goes:
If the option of simply resigning from a fortress was implemented along side the abandonment option, then choosing your initial fortress site could depend on proximity from either dwarven civilisations you want to start out from, or those dwarven fortresses you resigned from and were allowed to flourish on their own. Hence how far away you could place your fortress would be dependent on:

a) the resources available in that civ/fort (e.g., to take the traditional two iron picks, your embarking civ/fort would need a forge and smelter. You could only take the starting resources that that civ/fort could produce)
b) the amount of food you take
c) the amount of points left, whether this be the remaining equipment points or a separate travel tally that is accumulated based on the two variables above (most likely the latter, as distance able to be travelled should be multiplied by food taken, not reduced by it).
d) the skill sets of your dwarves. E.g. Hunters would increase the distance you could travel.

Ultimately this would mean that your dwarven colonisation of the world would have to branch out from settlements in a very organic way, rather than just picking an oasis and sending dwarves merrily on their way. Hence a new, World End Game scenario is created based on the percentage of the world colonised by dwarves, or degree of diplomatic influence, etc etc etc. As there might be more than one starting dwarven civ, you could even grow and develop each civ in turn so that the world is dominated by warring clans, with you always playing one side at a time, sending armies against the defences you just tried to make impregnable. This means a world is only as easily or challeningly won depending not only the game engine, but also on the skill of the player as they are really playing with or against themselves.

So in summary, the ideas are:
1) Have the option to abandon OR resign, and let the fortress survive on it's own.
2)Make starting resources dependent on the facilities of the embarking civ/fort.
3) Make starting sites dependent on and limited by distance from natural/your civs and the resources you take.
4) Create forts that are factioned to different civilisations so you can fight against yourself.
5) Make world colonisation or diplomacy as world end-game conditions.

Please do let me know if this has been posted before!

[ August 08, 2007: Message edited by: Faces of Mu ]