Bay 12 Games Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  
Pages: 1 ... 120 121 [122] 123 124 ... 748

Author Topic: Future of the Fortress  (Read 3238452 times)

NW_Kohaku

  • Bay Watcher
  • [ETHIC:SCIENCE_FOR_FUN: REQUIRED]
    • View Profile
Re: Future of the Fortress
« Reply #1815 on: May 03, 2012, 02:03:07 pm »

Well, it's actually sort of the problem that constructing above-ground houses is harder and more laborious than mining out housing.  This should be reversed if we are talking realism.  Waves of suggestions of "just let me have a button to keep using the same stone when I'm designating large constructions so I don't have to keep fining the slate in the list of stones" come to mind here.

It wouldn't be quite the problem if it wasn't assumed that all expansion in a fort would automatically be "subtractive", or that aboveground forts or castles were "for the challenge" or "for a change of pace" just because the interface for one is simple while the interface of the other is painful.

If you had more construction-focused expansion, then you really would often only be mining stone for quarrying purposes.

Part of why I hoped stacking would be a part of the next release was that it would let this sort of rubble and mullock item stuff just be generic "rubble" or "mullock" or "amalgam" material that could be stackable, and as such, not be as much a problem with causing FPS lag in the already-bloated item vectors. 
Logged
Personally, I like [DF] because after climbing the damned learning cliff, I'm too elitist to consider not liking it.
"And no Frankenstein-esque body part stitching?"
"Not yet"

Improved Farming
Class Warfare

Jothki

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Future of the Fortress
« Reply #1816 on: May 03, 2012, 05:45:30 pm »

Well, it's actually sort of the problem that constructing above-ground houses is harder and more laborious than mining out housing.  This should be reversed if we are talking realism.  Waves of suggestions of "just let me have a button to keep using the same stone when I'm designating large constructions so I don't have to keep fining the slate in the list of stones" come to mind here.

It wouldn't be quite the problem if it wasn't assumed that all expansion in a fort would automatically be "subtractive", or that aboveground forts or castles were "for the challenge" or "for a change of pace" just because the interface for one is simple while the interface of the other is painful.

If you had more construction-focused expansion, then you really would often only be mining stone for quarrying purposes.

Part of why I hoped stacking would be a part of the next release was that it would let this sort of rubble and mullock item stuff just be generic "rubble" or "mullock" or "amalgam" material that could be stackable, and as such, not be as much a problem with causing FPS lag in the already-bloated item vectors.

That and a "construct ceiling" designation.

It would make sense for most forts to start out as aboveground and made of wood and whatever stone you get as mining refuse. A mountainhome would then be a point of pride for dwarves, not an automatic default.
Logged

drvoke

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Future of the Fortress
« Reply #1817 on: May 03, 2012, 06:26:48 pm »

Quote from: Dev Log
I've dropped skill-based mining drop rates for the time being.

Can we get some clarification about this statement?  There seems to be some confusion about what this means, exactly.
Logged
Ambassador magma patiently awaits his meeting with your nobles.

Andeerz

  • Bay Watcher
  • ...likes cows for their haunting moos.
    • View Profile
Re: Future of the Fortress
« Reply #1818 on: May 03, 2012, 06:32:49 pm »

Jothki and Kohaku: yesplzkthx.  I second that these ought to be considered seriously.
Logged

Brewster

  • Bay Watcher
  • Dabbling Engraver
    • View Profile
Re: Future of the Fortress
« Reply #1819 on: May 03, 2012, 06:43:49 pm »

Quote
Stockpiles can now be set to give items to multiple stockpiles.

Wheeee!

Quote
You can also set stockpiles to give to a workshop, in which case the workshop will only use items from its piles.

Wheeee!

Wheeee!

I'm ready for this release SIMPLY cause of stockpile fixes... finally my doors will all look the same!

greenskye

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Future of the Fortress
« Reply #1820 on: May 03, 2012, 06:49:28 pm »

Well, it's actually sort of the problem that constructing above-ground houses is harder and more laborious than mining out housing.  This should be reversed if we are talking realism.  Waves of suggestions of "just let me have a button to keep using the same stone when I'm designating large constructions so I don't have to keep fining the slate in the list of stones" come to mind here.

It wouldn't be quite the problem if it wasn't assumed that all expansion in a fort would automatically be "subtractive", or that aboveground forts or castles were "for the challenge" or "for a change of pace" just because the interface for one is simple while the interface of the other is painful.

If you had more construction-focused expansion, then you really would often only be mining stone for quarrying purposes.

Part of why I hoped stacking would be a part of the next release was that it would let this sort of rubble and mullock item stuff just be generic "rubble" or "mullock" or "amalgam" material that could be stackable, and as such, not be as much a problem with causing FPS lag in the already-bloated item vectors.

While I agree that in general building above ground forts should be easier, I wonder about how "realism" should be applied to dwarves. Mining purely for stone seems like a reasonable assumption for humans or other surface dwellers, but dwarves spend their entire lives underground and working with stone. It does not seem out of place that mining should be very easy and efficient for a dwarf. There are certain limits to realism when dealing with non-human creatures.

Though I too would like to see stacking handled sooner rather than later. It appears on the surface to represent a large amount of the FPS issues.
Logged

Putnam

  • Bay Watcher
  • DAT WIZARD
    • View Profile
Re: Future of the Fortress
« Reply #1821 on: May 03, 2012, 09:15:12 pm »

Quote from: Dev Log
I've dropped skill-based mining drop rates for the time being.

Can we get some clarification about this statement?  There seems to be some confusion about what this means, exactly.

I've already posted it in the topic. Here, have 8 more.

Quote
I'm just going to stick with the larger intermittent boulders for now to keep things moving.
Quote
I'm just going to stick with the larger intermittent boulders for now to keep things moving.
Quote
I'm just going to stick with the larger intermittent boulders for now to keep things moving.
Quote
I'm just going to stick with the larger intermittent boulders for now to keep things moving.
Quote
I'm just going to stick with the larger intermittent boulders for now to keep things moving.
Quote
I'm just going to stick with the larger intermittent boulders for now to keep things moving.
Quote
I'm just going to stick with the larger intermittent boulders for now to keep things moving.
Quote
I'm just going to stick with the larger intermittent boulders for now to keep things moving.

Lord Shonus

  • Bay Watcher
  • Angle of Death
    • View Profile
Re: Future of the Fortress
« Reply #1822 on: May 03, 2012, 09:33:39 pm »

Thad does not explain whether the change is lower drop rates, or skill having zero effect. The ONLY things that means are that he hasn't set the drop rate to 100% or added non-boulder mining residue.
Logged
On Giant In the Playground and Something Awful I am Gnoman.
Man, ninja'd by a potentially inebriated Lord Shonus. I was gonna say to burn it.

Manveru Taurënér

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Future of the Fortress
« Reply #1823 on: May 03, 2012, 09:42:57 pm »

The way I interpret it is that he's dropped the idea of skill-based drop rates, which is what he is planning on implementing with the different boulder sizes and rubble etc, leaving things as they are for now. So there hasn't been any changes, the change was what was dropped.
Logged

Lord Shonus

  • Bay Watcher
  • Angle of Death
    • View Profile
Re: Future of the Fortress
« Reply #1824 on: May 03, 2012, 09:48:28 pm »

That is how I read it as well. The statement is, however, grammatically ambiguous that the other interpretation is just as valid, and thus it is erroneous to arrogantly proclaim that there is no possibility of that possible interpretation being the correct one. Nothing is proven until Toady clarifies his meaning, either in a reply post or when more complete information is given in the development log.
Logged
On Giant In the Playground and Something Awful I am Gnoman.
Man, ninja'd by a potentially inebriated Lord Shonus. I was gonna say to burn it.

Toady One

  • The Great
    • View Profile
    • http://www.bay12games.com
Re: Future of the Fortress
« Reply #1825 on: May 03, 2012, 11:15:37 pm »

Quote from: NW_Kohaku
If we are moving towards dumping of liquids, will other cart contents be the same?  Can this occur mechanically/automatically (something built on the track is designed to tip cart bins over and dump the contents out when the cart rolls by) or are you leaning towards manual dumping only?

I'd like to allow automatic dumping of any object.  Quantum stockpiling is exacerbated by this, but I'm not really bothered by that at this stage of the game.

Quote from: Quatch
As part of the flying minecart physics, did you decide on a tile size?

Assuming gravity works like real world gravity and you can invent a time unit (obviously not linked to the dwarf mode calendar, which moves too fast for this), then a choice has been made.  It wouldn't make any fewer dragons fit in the tile though.  I think for the purposes of the minecarts it turned out to be 2m x 2m x 3m with 10 clicks / second, but it isn't that important or far-ranging in effect.

Quote
Quote from: monk12
How does the lack of skill-based mining effect ore mining? I don't care much if there are fewer boulders around, but I normally mine around the ore/gems until I can get a 100% drop rate- it'd suck if I'm limited to random chance.
Quote from: Greiger
Probably close to Monk's question, but what about gems?  Especially the ones that only show up in really small clusters like the colored diamonds?  Will those always drop a chunk?  Or are they subject to the same whims of the RNG as the normal stone, with a high chance of completely ruining that one tile of clear diamond even with a legendary miner?  Something in between?
Quote from: Caldfir
Toady, could you clarify the above quote's meaning?  Also, what is the motivation for this change?
Quote from: thvaz
I'm disappointed with the mining changes. I was expecting at least:

1)Heavy boulders too heavy for a dwarf to carry
2)Clutter in the floor slowing down movement
Quote from: blue sam3
Will legendary miners still have a 100% drop rate, or will this be reduced too? Could we have some rough numbers?
Quote from: monk12
When you say "dropped skill-based mining drop rates," does that mean you've lowered the rate at which stone drops when mined, or that you've eliminated the effect skill has on mining drop rates?
Quote from: NW_Kohaku
When you say "net positive", what do you consider the positives and the negatives of various rubble and stone sizes?

Is it, as DG hinted, that you would like to make mining slower and more complex by making players have to clear rubble so that mining huge patches isn't easy, and see such complexity as a positive, but that you are both worried about player backlash over a change in the system and that the game lags when more items are added into the game?

Or is it, alternately, that you see slowing down player mining in general as a negative to be avoided, and merely that giving mine carts a use was the positive?
Quote from: drvoke
Can we get some clarification about this statement?

I didn't like the weird clunky metagame surrounding mining skill, so I made the drop rates uniform.  Gems drop at 100%.  Ore drops like rock, but you get more bars per ore now.  Stone drop is 25% now, I think, but the ore change makes it closer to legendary bar numbers for those.  There seems to be plenty of rock around, and I'm not sure which megaprojects would actually be affected, but we'll see how that goes.

I'm leaning against impossible-to-move rocks as a short term goal because I'd need to change how all of the stone-based jobs work, which would require another smaller rock object for things like crafts (or a wheelbarrow for every crafts job, which is odd).  Theoretically you could have a boulder breaking job that creates smaller rocks when you need them without creating too much spam.  That leaves furniture and construction jobs -- having to use a wheelbarrow for every one of those is sort of a killer too.  The wheelbarrow-to-every-else quotient starts to get high and cluttered looking, similar to not having forks or other little tools for every little thing in fortress mode.  Having wheelbarrows used for just stockpile hauling seems safer.

Regarding rubble, I'm sure people that voted for hauling are all over the place, but it seems like it would create the exact problem I'm supposed to be fixing.  I don't think it would be fun to have to devote a lot of dwarves/infrastructure/anything to building a gigantic useless mound the same size as your fortress every time you play.  The current stone doesn't drop everywhere and it has uses.  I'm not sure what the rubble is supposed to be adding to the game.

Quote from: MrWiggles
Toady, your recent Dev Updates seem to including language and at times, ideas, from the FotF. How much, if any is the FotF being an influence on Improved Hauling? Or are just using our language to help convey what you two are currently working on?

I've been reading it and the other active minecart/hauling threads.  Most of the stuff I've been doing has been kicking around a while, or was already up on the dev page, but I've also put in good ideas as they've come up.  I can answer further if you have more specifics.
Logged
The Toad, a Natural Resource:  Preserve yours today!

Rose

  • Bay Watcher
  • Resident Elf
    • View Profile
Re: Future of the Fortress
« Reply #1826 on: May 03, 2012, 11:26:56 pm »

This means that I will need to dig more for my fort.

I'm okay with this.
Logged

DG

  • Bay Watcher
  • Pull the Lever
    • View Profile
Re: Future of the Fortress
« Reply #1827 on: May 04, 2012, 01:19:26 am »

I'd agree that building a small hut should be easier than digging out an equivalent. I'm not so sure about multistory edifices, though.
Logged

dhoovr

  • Bay Watcher
  • Fear of blood tends to create fear for the flesh.
    • View Profile
Re: Future of the Fortress
« Reply #1828 on: May 04, 2012, 03:18:13 am »

I'd agree that building a small hut should be easier than digging out an equivalent. I'm not so sure about multistory edifices, though.
I see it as tasking a mole with constructing a nest (as in a bird's nest, but not necessarily in a tree). Dwarves are better at digging. Humans are better at constructing. Elves are good for nothing.

Rubble is also good for nothing but for those who need realism and conservation of mass, maybe a mined out floor tile can have an addition description of being "rubble covered" or "dusty" or something of that sort that generally works as a contaminant. Then you can use cleaners (maybe a broom is required) to remove the contaminant before it can be smoothed. Though this might require a new (and useful!) designation to "clean" as opposed to setting the area as a meeting hall and all that nonsense.
Logged

blake77

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Future of the Fortress
« Reply #1829 on: May 04, 2012, 04:10:42 am »


I didn't like the weird clunky metagame surrounding mining skill, so I made the drop rates uniform.  Gems drop at 100%.  Ore drops like rock, but you get more bars per ore now.  Stone drop is 25% now, I think, but the ore change makes it closer to legendary bar numbers for those.  There seems to be plenty of rock around, and I'm not sure which megaprojects would actually be affected, but we'll see how that goes.


How about economic stones, such as flux, obsidian, kaolinite and etc. ? Would there be an option to "Quarry"  so that stone drop rate is increased. Some megaprojects require plenty of stone, and sometimes stones of a certain colour are rare.
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 120 121 [122] 123 124 ... 748