Bay 12 Games Forum

Do they actually get upset over not having mittens or hats? I don't think so?

According to this chart, it looks like Chausses (modded to let dwarves make them) + robe would be a good minimalist outfit to keep them happy with very little micromanaging.

Sorry to triple post, but no other threads were bumped between anyway...

Also, a convenience feature for embark map hunting would be to just list the metals etc. that are available, and possibly the layer types (e.g. igneous extrusive, sedimentary, etc) at embark. There's not even a roleplaying reason not to do this -- how are the dwarves supposed to somehow know that there are "deep metals" but yet not even know what the metals are, or the basic geology of the rock strata is that is clearly visible right near the surface?

Either they're prospecting or they're not. The weird "Well we know some info but inexplicably don't know other info that would be obtained in the exact same way" business doesn't add anything to the game other than frustration and lots of unnecessary map loading and abandoning.

I'm sure this detail has been suggested many times, but it goes along with the rest of the thread.

I understand that, but I don't think this has to at all be inconsistent with that framework.

First of all, 3/4 of the idea CLEARLY isn't inconsistent, as simply having a finer grained terrain customizer has nothing to do with whether the world has a greater context or not. You might say that the manicured embark site is "unrealistic to occur in a world," but be that as it may, it can still just exist anyway and function just like any other embark site in world context. The dwarves just happened to stumble upon a garden of Eden (or a garden of Pain, depending how you designed it...), simple as that. The only complaints you could have here are role-playing ones, not code inconsistency or feature-limiting ones. And roleplay is in the eye of the individual player.

The other 1/4 of the idea (control over invasions and wars), either:
a) Can be ignored. It's much less important IMO than the terrain customizing fine grain control.
b) May become moot with sufficient numbers of future features that allow control anyway (being able to easily provoke wars like by sending invasions, etc.)
c) Unlike the terrain issue, is more easily addressed by modding scripts and things anyway.

What needs to be "completely revamped" about mining?

Quote from: itg on January 18, 2014, 11:48:05 pm

Solon InchedDike The Dank Year. The brain injury never healed, by the way, but it doesn't seem to affect him.

Well, that beats my story of a legless militia commander who still managed to get ten or eleven kills over the course of eight years...

You should totally be able to wheel around other squadmates in wheelbarrows! Why is Toady not devoting 100% of his time to this feature?!

+1 to the idea of having to have the wall designated for engraving first. If there are none, he just sits there, like a leatherdwarf without a leather workshop and a mood, etc.

That way it will never accidentally happen in the middle of your smoothed magma tube or something like that. And similarly to other moods, if you WANT to super micromanage it once announced, you could by canceling all designations etc. etc.

Standard use for necromancers is military practice. Especially marksdwarves. You just forever have a live target (place to stand > fortification > area with critters > bridge > fortification > necromancer) then use the bridge to turn on/off his line of sight.

Or build a trap where you get gobbos in a room and then can dump a bunch of hooves and hair and stuff from your refuse on top of them, which a captive necromancer then sees in line of sight and animates repeatedly until the goblins are all strangled to death by yak hair.

Perhaps pathfinding doesn't seem significant to you mainly because you already intuitively design forts in a way that is good for the pathfinder? For me this is the case: doing traffic designations etc. only increases pathfinding by 50% or so usually, because it's already built in a reasonable way.

But if you go build a crazy swirly rabbit warren of a fort, the difference becomes much more acute when you designate it, etc. versus not.  You might just never do that.



There does seem to be some sort of unknown factor that just makes it slower almost no matter what you do over time.  Maybe the slow accumulation of traded goods, or dead things whose deaths are kept track of, or worst case: some sort of memory leak that finds its way into the saves, not just the RAM? I don't know.  But with good design, proper management of pathing and atomsmashing thousands of leftover socks, you can usually get GOOD ENOUGH to last so long that you'd just get bored anyway much longer.