Bay 12 Games Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  
Pages: 1 ... 565 566 [567] 568 569 ... 748

Author Topic: Future of the Fortress  (Read 3710168 times)

Zavvnao

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Future of the Fortress
« Reply #8490 on: December 29, 2013, 04:22:33 am »

Manveru Taurënér and Trif, thank you both. I had not thought of those that much until now.
Logged

Toady One

  • The Great
    • View Profile
    • http://www.bay12games.com
Re: Future of the Fortress
« Reply #8491 on: December 29, 2013, 07:03:09 am »

Thanks to Valtam, Knight Otu, smjjames, Trif, monk12, hermes, Putnam, Footkerchief, Willfor, King Mir, Demonic Gophers, Manveru Taurënér, Mopsy, Rockphed, MrWiggles, LordBaal and everybody else that helped out this time.  There were many questions which were addressed by people, so if you don't see yours below, you should check back around where you asked and see if it is handled within 10 posts or so.

This is also the first time I've had the forum yell at me about a FoTF reply taking more than 40000 characters, though perhaps I've broken them up before.  There will be two posts.

Quote
Quote from: Novel Scoops
When giving Megabeasts intelligence and schemes comes into play, do you have any plans for Forgotten Beasts?
Quote from: Helgoland
Similarly, will it be possible to play as a megabeast or another historical creature? Minotaurs, demons and Cacame come to mind...

There aren't any particular plans for forgotten beasts sitting around.  I remember some dev item or another about playing monsters, but this is all distant stuff.

Quote from: smjjames
I saw in a devlog several weeks back that you had fixed cavern populations going extinct in adventure mode (YAY!), I'm wondering if it would now be possible to encounter FBs while roaming the caverns in the next version?

In the testing mode, there are these question marks where the forgotten beasts have been placed as armies underground.  I haven't investigated them yet, but it seems like it might be possible.  They'd be almost impossible to find though, since they don't roam around leaving a trail.

Quote from: Novel Scoops
The troll shearing pits have captured my curiosity, so Are all the named sapients such as Trolls, Gnomes, Troglodytes and Merfolk higher up on the development lists then random animal people? Will fleshing out independent civs or tribes be on the table, especially if they correspond with other arcs such as the sea?

I'm not really sure when they'll fit in, and there isn't an order to any of those things.  They can certainly come up during any related arc.

Quote from: Footkerchief
I'm curious whether there's any disobedience mechanism yet for the companion orders, and whether they can disobey without full-on leaving your group.  This release is creating so much fertile ground for personality-based storytelling -- in this case, a stew of intersecting values (trust, patience, loyalty) and circumstances (the promised reward, opportunities for betrayal).

The basic companion orders are just follow/wait right now, and they won't wait forever, but it'll have to be made slightly more interesting before we can really dig into it.  I have one note left about yielding and having companions follow you in yielding and behaviors for them -- that runs right into some of their values potentially, and I'm probably going to do something with it.  There's definitely a lot just sitting right in front of me.  It's all a matter of pretending it's not the case so I can get a release together now.

Quote from: Eric Blank
Toady, will we have general commands to tell all of our followers at once to stay put etc., or does each companion need to be given orders separately?

Will companions that have been ordered to stay put immediately run off to chase down the first hostile they spot, or will they hold position defensively?

Right now orders are issued individually, but I don't imagine that'll stand for very long, since it's annoying even during testing.

The main idea behind the wait order is that they won't engage hostiles so that your sneaking isn't screwed up, aside from having them actually wait while you go off someplace entirely different.  It'll probably need to be further specified as we go along.

Quote from: Novel Scoops
Given all the development of leaders of small groups, are you considering making it possible for them to be independent civ's? Tribes, petty kings and all that jazz.

All of the humans are independent if they don't have a tribute relationship.  There is no civilization leader, unless there's a god impersonator (or successor -- I don't remember if vamps can create their own position or need to act through a god successor).  Gobs are similar, though they are generally saddled with a demon.  The other civs are subject to their entity definitions, so that dwarves and elves in their main civs find such arrangements more unthinkable, though dwarves or elves that have moved to human civs can become local leaders of human-style sites.  It shouldn't be so clear-cut with the dwarves and elves, but it'll be a bit before we sort that out.  If a dwarf group breaks off from the main dwarves, they'll probably establish analogous entity positions in their new entity, since that's how they live, but there's also room to define some wiggle room into the raw file.

Quote from: smjjames
So, does that mean they'll brag and say something like 'I killed Montoya, whose father I slew!' within the combat logs? Unless I'm misunderstanding what you mean.

Yeah, that's right.  All of the conversations are more like the people screaming in the market now, or a capybara sounding a warning or something.

Quote
Quote from: Japa
palms, cacti, that sort of thing.

we were promised pictures
Quote from: Knight Otu
Given the context, I think pictures doesn't refer to screenshots here. It kind of sounds like Toady was talking about the default tiles? Anyway, I'm pretty sure that it's done - Toady mentioned that the tree parameters can create "(somewhat half-assed) saguaros."

Yeah, those pictures were the tile images of the trees, though I probably have various screenshots I should put together.

Quote from: Mr S
Toady, has development come to a satisfactory state, for now at least, in regards to succession of offices currently held in player Fortresses?  Previous FotF replies had made mention of conflicts for the successor.  In this context I took that to mean not so much fighting among candidates, but conflict with another position the succession candidate already holds, i.e. Baron dies, nephew would inherit Barony, nephew is already Trade Liaison to another Fortress.  Does the nephew quit one and take the other?  Does he hold both?  Will we see Nobles holding positions in absentia?

Related to this, what effect will off-site Nobles, holding an office associated to the player Fortress, have on the player Fortress?  If the late Countess' second cousin twice removed does indeed succeed the title, she's then listed in the Nobles menu?  Will you be able to see her in the Units screen?  Is the unit fully realized from the moment of assignment, i.e. relationships, description, labors etc. or upon arrival?  Will she have room requirements even before she arrives (if at all)?  Can she make mandates from afar?

There can be people that originally hold a position off-site, and I think they can still get stuck with multiple positions.  Their unit definition won't be loaded, they don't have requirements and they don't have demands as long as they have not arrived.  It might put their name in the noble list, but that's about it.  Game-wise there are complications until this gets sorted out, however it might work, with the diplomats and so on, if they want to meet with the missing person.

Quote from: lue
Just out of curiosity, have there been any changes to the layout of existing structures in adventure mode, either to accommodate new features or fix old bugs? I'm thinking of if, for example, human keeps are now octagonal, or temples are no longer open-air, that sort of thing.

I don't recall anything immediately with the existing human structures.

Quote from: metime00
When you mention village relationships, does that apply only to human villages or is it all civilized and populated sites? And if so, do all the villages act independently, or is there now a concept of nations/civs in their interactions with each other? Do the village warlords have any relationship with their lieges?

I've only done the human villages so far, and it's the civ-level stuff that complicates the other ones (humans don't have any civ level stuff, though you can end up with an sort-of analog where the larger market towns dominate their surroundings).  I'm not sure what we'll end up with this time.  The humans can end up with civ level positions through exotic means, but they don't know how to push their weight around yet (and won't until the dwarves/elves do the same thing).

Quote from: thvaz
You mentioned wilderness creatures and bogeymen - and I'm extending the question to other night creatures too - there will be a change in the next release where the villages and town react to them independently of the player involvement? There will be a  chance of the guards catching them or organizing raids to their lairs?

We aren't to that point with the night creatures yet -- they now exist as a critter wandering the map or sitting in their lair depending on the time of day and so on, and are trackable, but they don't perform their world gen activities, like kidnapping people, and the world gen adventurers don't confront creatures...  they just hang out in pseudo-taverns.  The people that work for village leaders can be a bit more enterprising, but they are just interested in village-to-village fighting.

Quote from: CypherLH
Will villages "bicker" for actual reasons such as competing land/resource claims in this release or will feuds of some sort simply be generated with no real reason behind them? I would ask the same thing about the reasons behind Orc occupations of villages/towns.  I suppose delving into this might get into some of the old Army Arc stuff where entities were supposed to start to actually caring about stuff.

There are disputes over various real-world things, but since we don't have an active economy or people going about actual jobs with actual resources, it can't be anything but faked right now.  I suppose the matter of holding territory and having power over people now is real in a sense, since they draw soldiers from actual pools of people and controlling more sites makes one more effective at that, so you can take that as a reason for their actions.

Quote from: Urist Da Vinci
Can leaders have and enforce beliefs that are generally not supported by the population, but not in such a way that their population suffers or hates them? (as a consequence of the way things will be implemented, not as a special feature) I am thinking of something like a sheriff who doesn't want "vagrants" in his town.

There aren't really enough AI actions for something meaningful to happen there yet.  The leaders have their own personality, and their decisions are filtered through them, but their decisions are all about fighting at this point.  When we get to the thief role, one of the main features will be laws and their enforcement, which'll really flesh all of this out.

Quote from: Thundercraft
When it comes time for magical artifacts, if their creation actually was inspired by a god, then will the item description mention this fact or even the name of the deity?

It's difficult to say what's going to happen there.  That said, the new demon sites have a slight touch of that in the next release, on a whim.

Quote from: smjjames
Would it be possible for a full blown civil war to erupt within a civilization? The new devlog hints at the potential for larger scale internal conflicts to arise.

The struggles are all still local, and they aren't as mindful of larger succession issues as they could be, but the network of tribute relationships could lead to something that feels partially like a civil war -- if a few cities have their villages in hand, there could be many smaller skirmishes between the main actors with villages switching hands, within the same civilization, but no large army battles.

Quote from: Novel Scoops
Will goblin civ's ruled by demons be the only ones who get to recruit night creatures? Will the night creature hierarchy and goblin anarchy show up when they attack in Fortress Mode?

It's hard to say how it'll play out until we get there.  There are already vampires and necromancers that don't have anything to do with demons and goblins, so I imagine it'll continue to be diverse.

Quote from: Anatoli
For the next release, can entities change faiths and what regulates those changes? What regulates the strength of those faiths?

Taking the example in the devlog, what exactly is the end goal for those villages? Do they actually conquer the other village, or does the other village just gives up it's claim (or faith, in this case,) after they've been beat up a certain amount?

All of the historical critters have their own faiths, and those generally align with the populace but they don't have to.  The abstract populations have some factional information that governs how the on-the-fly people are generated, but that's all very random.

The goals of the fights are either to get a tribute relationship or to install a new ruler that will give you a tribute relationship.  A single historical figure can't change their religious views at this point, though they can be deposed.  The religious differences just give rise to the hatred at this point -- they don't govern how the war unfolds or what the goals are.

Quote from: misko27
Will we be able to worship a god, and if so will people react to us differently because of it?

People know the religious affiliations of everyone at this point (they tend to know things that don't yet have a rumor format), so if you worship a god, and claim a site, other site leaders can hate you for it and attack your site based on your faith alone, though that isn't that common since most gods aren't in opposition through their spheres (when we have juicier myths and philosophies, there'll be all sorts of reasons).  You can pick a god to worship in character generation at this point.  Footkerchief mentioned how you used to be able to join up at a temple and how that was bugged -- I don't recall updating that conversation option to the new system, but it isn't as high a priority now that you can start with an affiliation.

Quote
Quote from: Sizik
Does [claiming sites] allow for adventurers (or even NPCs) to become like Emperor Norton?
Quote from: smirk
Hmm. Head of an entity whom no-one else officially recognizes, but is nevertheless well-liked enough to subsist on the goodwill of the locals. Possible to an extent, but I'm doubtful this release will include charity. It MIGHT be possible that sufficient fame leads to more favorable prices (both buying and selling), but no one will be exploiting your name for their own monetary gain either. It's all in how you write the fluff after the fact, I suppose.

Yeah, the only nice thing people do for you now is let you sleep in their homes, but getting your own currency would be an additional step.  You can certainly be an irrelevant claimant.

Quote from: smirk
If we retire an adventurer who is head of an entity, Will they still be able to migrate to one of our later fortresses? If so, does that give our fortress a stake in said entity?

I don't think the adventurer will migrate in, since they'd have a position responsibility that binds them to their residence.  They don't give that up positions when they retire, though you can pass them along before you retire if you want.

Quote from: Eric Blank
Toady: you say that we'll be able to set up a new site government and take over sites and declare new site governments under our control, but will we be able to strong-arm the civilization's top leaders as well and become a sort of revolutionary dictator or monarch, or does the system only support controlling site governments at the moment?

In the process of taking over sites will other leaders in the civ recognize us as a threat and attack us, or will that be handled at a later date?

If civ governments can be taken control of and site governments can be remade entirely, then can we also declare ourselves leader of an entirely new, sovereign civilization and take over, say, one of our retired forts?

If so, would the entity template be taken from the local culture of the first site we take over or the civilization we hail form?

Human civilizations don't have civ leaders (aside from the occasional god-demon and their successors), so it's not usually an issue.  I haven't handled that case, or any of the civ cases (dwarf, elf, etc.), so I don't have answers for any of those.

You'll be recognized as a threat at some point in the process, since it is the same as regular village-to-village fighting.  This means guards stopping you, fist fights and escalations.  Making a claim is also a way to spoil a friendly visit, I imagine, though where you say it and when a rumor spreads to a person and so on determines how that can work.

Quote from: tfaal
I've got a few questions, so I'll try to keep this concise. If I have this right, there are now three sorts of site conflicts:

*The goblin invasions and resultant insurrections, which are lethal combat.

*The harassment based village raids we heard about earlier, which are non-lethal/brawling.

*These new village raids, where the winner captures the site in question. (I'm not sure if these are lethal or not?)

Is that right? If so,

*Where do the old worldgen battles fit into all this? Do they take place during worldgen alongside these other types of conflict, or have these conflicts replaces them?

*What happens when a player starts stabbing enemies during a non-lethal raid?

*How do beaten enemies decide whether to flee into banditry or yield into servitude? Is it based on attributes?

I think that's right, if you don't count things you could do yourself (like rescuing kids etc.).  Worldgen battles are the same as usual -- I just haven't finished the army arc, and have only sort of started it, so there's a lot missing.

If you start stabbing enemies during a non-lethal raid it becomes a lethal fight.  Everybody involved will pull weapons if they have them and a lot of people will potentially die if one side doesn't give up first or run off -- the tendency to run off will increase if the people involved aren't battle-hardened or otherwise cut out for that sort of thing, so it won't necessarily end with everybody dead.  The diplomacy state stores the overall level of each war, but that isn't fully integrated yet -- so I'm not quite sure at this point whether or not a lethal raid that you escalate will lead to a more permanent increase in lethal hostilities across the board between the two groups, but the idea is in play.  You certainly have the potential to be a catalyst for negative changes.

The last bit with banditry isn't decided yet, since I haven't completed the bandit conversion.  It'll probably check the personality of the leader.
« Last Edit: December 29, 2013, 07:04:49 am by Toady One »
Logged
The Toad, a Natural Resource:  Preserve yours today!

Toady One

  • The Great
    • View Profile
    • http://www.bay12games.com
Re: Future of the Fortress
« Reply #8492 on: December 29, 2013, 07:03:49 am »

(*continued from above*)

Quote
Quote from: Novel Scoops
Will adventurers be able to reclaim abandoned fortresses for their Civ through capturing the main building, such as a keep or mead hall? When goblins capture a dwarf fortress, is the site map converted to a goblin fortress template and vice versa? How long does this take? Will players be able to embark on recently conquered sites?
Quote from: Ribs
What happens if you attack the leader of one of your retired fortresses? Can you claim it with your adventurer? Can you claim dwarven fortresses at all?
If so,

Will there be some variation there, or will the dwarves from retired fortresses always be the more loyal types who will try very hard to kill your adventurer before surrendering?

What complications would occour from doing something like dethroning a dwarven king? Is that going to be possible? I imagine you would be able to take the dwarven capital by killing a whole bunch of people and making the king yield to you. But what happens then? Is it possible for your adventurer to aquire the title of king if he conquers enough dwarven settlements?

I think the way it "works" now, you could claim one of your retired fortresses, but it wouldn't actually know how to have it change hands, since there is no power location (at least not in a way that is currently understood by the adventure part of the game).  Abandoned fortresses don't have people in them, so you'd have to bring a companion along, state a claim to them, and then not have it recognized because there is no power location.  You can kill whomever, but you can't obtain the civ-level positions.  If you kill a monarch, you'll end up with a replacement, if there's a claimant around, or a lack of decision making -- which doesn't matter so much for dwarves, since they don't attack anybody yet.  I haven't allowed adventurers to place a claim on an existing entity position (they can only form a new entity with a new site claim), but you'll definitely be able to do that when we get into the meat of succession wars later.

Quote from: Nasikabatrachus
Will the new site claim system allow player characters (/and their gangs?) to retire and live out of places like caves and lairs (that is, without "giving in to starvation")? When can we reasonably expect to be able to coax people to start living at sites we capture? "Find a new life in my goblin fortress! Don't mind the goblin bones. And the trolls. Oh, and bring food."

There isn't anything like that yet -- this isn't really the "be a bandit gang"/"have your own entity" release, but elements of that came about as a side effect of the village-to-village fighting.  We don't have anything like a recruitment system for your own sites for regular citizens of other sites, though refugees can be dragged around and people can be inducted into your site squad (which is linked to your position as entity leader in the usual way, and thereby usable by any successor to your position).

Quote
Quote from: Trif
Is it possible to claim a site for an allied civilization, e.g. expanding the dwarven motherland by defeating a goblin tower? Or do you have to be completely independent for now?
Quote from: DarkDXZ
Can we, for example, claim a site of an enemy civ for our own civ to affect the political world map? The idea of running around as a group of soldiers conquering the region for our own civ's good and profit sounds at least interesting, and I wonder if something like this is possible right now.
Or are the site claims purely an abstract thing in that respect as well?

Adventurer affiliations are loose now -- you can't establish a new barony, for example, or conquer a site for a goblin or elf civ.  You can subordinate your site entity through a tribute relationship, but I haven't done anything with the official dwarven hierarchies.  Once the dwarves are causing some trouble of their own, that'll establish a framework, though I'm not sure in which order things will play out.  The adventurer's site claims are real though, in the sense that they have the weight of an entity behind them and all associated mechanics (including succession, squads, diplomacy, reputation tracking and so on).

Quote
Quote from: monk12
What happens if you start mistreating the citizens of your new entity? Will they kick you out of the entity, or will they leave it, or will they just be like "well the King can do what he wants, I guess." Are they more tolerant of stealing in the name of the new site leader (considering it tribute or something?)
Quote from: Footkerchief
The only rebellions we've heard about are insurrections against occupiers, so I think this would depend on whether the adventurer is considered an occupier.  That might be based on whether you're from the same civilization?

If you start running around beating people up, say, you'll develop a crappy personal reputation with the affected local culture, and technically people can start thinking insurrectionist thoughts, though they don't have enough independence to rise up without an outside catalyst (like another group attacking your village, at which point they can help).  The occupation flag is applied in goblin-type circumstances rather than village-to-village skirmishes, but it isn't the sole determiner of behavior -- it's more to separate out populations between occupier and occupied, since the game has some (mainly conversation) assumptions about people and the site entity otherwise.  It's an early distinction that may eventually be dropped, especially when we get to law-type stuff in the thief role that can make a change in human leadership a major change (or when we get to the implementation of the vampire laws from world gen, which might have some minor influence even in this release).

Quote from: lue
With tributes running the town while you're away, will messengers ever find you to alert you to problems in that town, e.g. the guy you left it charge was killed and someone new controls the town? Or will you intrinsically know when your rule is affected?

There aren't any personal messengers right now, so you'd have to go back to figure out precisely what's going on, or if you are slow a rumor'll spread.  Depending on how I update the information screen though, you might learn certain things instantly.  I haven't yet obscured your own position data, for instance, so you'd know when something is lost, but not to whom.  There's probably a line to walk between reality, user friendliness, cruelty and humor in any updates there...  you could end up with a string of conquests in your information screen that are all undone without your knowledge, and whether or not people believe them would depend on which group of refugees came through or how fast the general rumor clocks are ticking (ideally recent rumors would never spread by clock, but we won't know how far we can take that until the caravans are moving).

Quote from: Novel Scoops
You've previously mentioned that the current inability of the game to simulate the duties, relationship and general "role" of historical figures, or notice/handle people "breaking character" is the reason we can't assume control of them, but how important is acting like a historical figure as opposed to playing like a historical figure? Obvious examples include combat, but even simple things like a player controlling a unobservant character looking at everything, or a new player controlling a experienced tomb raider triggering every single trap, would be relevant. Would players in this position be able to use abstraction, or be able to use (limited) hints?

Presumably some of these things would be governed by skills, unless you are talking about deliberately screwing up.  I'm not sure I understood.

Quote from: wdiksolan
I was reading through some old devlogs about tracking and combined with giving companions orders this question popped up:

When being tracked, can you tell a companion to wait and then ambush the hunters while you escape?
Or better yet, will you be able to give your companion your shoes and then tell him to head in another direction to confuse them and if so, will they follow him?

You can't tell them to ambush anybody -- right now we just have wait/follow available.  That'll definitely change, but perhaps not for this time.  But yeah, if you had your companion do this or that later on, as things currently stand they would leave tracks, and these tracks would have the same standing as your tracks in terms of your pursuers.

Quote from: Broken
So, Now that the duplicating populations are being fixed, does this mean that bringing the age of death is posible, like in the old days?

Just having the higher population numbers makes it more work to accomplish if you don't abort world gen really early, depending on how old days your old days are, and I'm not sure what other obstacles there are, but the hist fig and entity counts seem zero-able now.

Quote from: Witty
Coming next release, will hill, mountain or deep dwarves differ from one another on any level? Will hill dwarves tend to be more tan, or deep dwarves pale? Will hill or deep sites fight amongst themselves in a similar manner to human villages?

I haven't linked skin colors to actual sun effects or anything, so it doesn't understand any of that.  The game understands cave adaptation, but that doesn't have any physical ramifications aside from the barfy stuff.  Putnam posted some of our speculation, and we'll work toward something over time.

Quote from: misko27
How is fort mode loyalty now? Is it still possible to be friendly to a civ and an enemy of the fort and vice versa? And will dwarves still attack someone who is friendly to one of their entities but an enemy to others?

It is harder to start fights now, since the game requires more context.  It's likely still possible to get any sort of configuration of entity reps, though the gaining of enemy status doesn't work the same way any more.  Civil war bugs have probably changed.  It's unclear if it'll be for the better, especially at first.

Quote from: Xanmyral
How will enemies deal with people who are out of melee reach but attacking them? As in, say they're in a tree, on a roof, or on a particularly large rock and they're chucking bolts, arrows, or other rocks at them. Would enemies be able to climb up there and deal with them, chuck rocks back, take cover, or just stand there staring at the man who discovered third directional movement?

A typical game exploit people employ, rather cheap too. I hope enemies have the sense to scour for rocks and chuck them, or climb on their own.

Enemy climbing AI is still an open question for this release.  It depends on how easy it is to adapt a few of the existing functions -- I can hope for a two line change and end up with a train-wreck.  It's hard to say until I try with this one.  Jumping seems harder, or at least more prone to slow things down since it has to look outward farther than they've had to in the past.  It'd be especially bad with running/long jumps.  I haven't taught them any new tricks with ranged combat.  The reason the AI is still an open question rather than something I've put off is these kind of concerns, and I'm mindful of having cheap exploits lying around even if it doesn't seem that way many times, but it might be difficult to prioritize depending on how tough it is.

Quote from: Novel Scoops
As part of the tavern arc, can we expect to see better detailed and possibly less dedicated motivations of adventurers and monster hunters?

I'm not sure what'll happen with the arc when it comes to tangential issues.  There are many tangents for that one.  Presumably when we have the dwarf mode taverns in play, you'll need visitors with the initial release, and they'd need a variety of reasons for being there to make the taverns properly bustly.

Quote from: Anatoli
Toady, as there has to be more and more dialogue options, would it be reasonable to have Threetoe write the dialogue? Since he's the writer and all. And you're already working together, so it's not exactly like expanding your team.

This wasn't the issue with the speed of the conversation additions.  The moving parts that bog down the process are all technical.

Quote from: Eric Blank
Toady: Will refugee populations camping outside towns slowly disperse into that town's or other towns' populations, or will they remain there indefinitely/until the rumored force of darkness is rumored to have left?

They don't spread out at this point, though since we have populations mixing together in world gen, I'm pretty sure it'll happen at some point, and it would be ideal to mix diffusion and tension there.

Quote from: MDFification
Toady: Currently underground tunnels are capped at the map's edge in fortress mode to prevent invaders from using them. In future will this be different? Drums, drums in the deep!

I suspect when we get to the deep dwarves under-outside of your fortress map (which'll very likely happen at the same time that the hill dwarves matter, and that's not too far away), the game will come to understand how to use the tunnels.  Once it knows that, anything's possible, and I'll probably feel compelled to take advantage of the situation.

Quote from: Helgoland
Are we at some point going to see non-omniscient dwarves?

I saw a few people ask for clarification, and I'm also not sure what this was referring to.  There are a few things like witnessing deaths now that they don't know immediately, and (most) other things that they do know.  For something like pathing, I suspect it would cause more trouble than it's worth, if they didn't know that a passage had become blocked for instance, though there are probably cool cases and annoying time-wasting cases.

Quote from: Cobbler89
Will refugee camps share any common framework(s) with hill dwarf sites as far as relating to and communicating with your fortress?

Keeping in mind that none of that happens yet, yeah, I think all of them (deep dwarves and others as well) will probably work in the same way, though the hill and deep dwarves might have a more official relationship that affects the options (especially if they are considered a part of your barony/county/etc.).  The refugees are also a bit more uncomfortable in that they have both an army status and a pseudo-site status -- armies can't leave sites everywhere as they move, for memory reasons, but once refugees have settled for a while, you want to be able to tie diverse site information to them.  It isn't fully resolved yet because refugees won't have a full set of mechanics for quite a while.

Quote from: GreatWyrmGold
1. How were goblins running away from themselves?
2. Do you have any plans to do something with the refugees on the fringes of dwarven settlements and the like before the next update?

1. Once they took a town, a form of the old invasion rumor persisted in the new site entity, and a portion of the occupying population fled at the rumored invasion (as if the demon were somehow displeased with them even though they were the ones that carried it out in their old affiliation).

2. It'll be best to wait for hill dwarves to become fort-mode integrated so it can all be under the same umbrella.

Quote from: Eric Blank
will refugees in camps give players quests to go investigate/free their hometown, or do they expect us to take the initiative? Will they also know something about the happenings in the area they are now in and give quests to kill local night creatures and bandits?

The refugees and people in general have their list of problems, which is also the list of things they react positively to if you do something about them.  For refugees, the main one is what happened back home.  It's not quite questy but it's functionally similar.  Their new local night creatures and bandits don't yet bother them (due to the lack of battles and complete site data), so no associated rumors are generated and they don't know about them.  Once we get the world gen night creature antics moved over, it should happen naturally once the refugees encounter trouble.  The bandits don't know how to target refugee camps, but if they did, that rumor would be generated as things stand.  I'd need to handle the site data there (a tricky question of timing) or abstract bandit actions a bit (which is similar to adding army battles).

Quote from: Novel Scoops
Is the role of the starting 7 going to be given especial thought when fortress founding scenarios come up? Logically, they could be forward scouts, prospectors, merchants starting a inn by the road, hardened mercenaries looking to claim long-rumored gold, and so on.

The old jokes have tended to be removed over time as things become generalized.  At the same time, if it is convenient to keep a sort of "party" of initial dwarves for familiarity purposes, that might happen.  I'm not sure the same population growth speed will be maintained in different scenarios though.  They could be very different from each other, and some might not involve immigration at all, which could affect starting numbers (though having to define skills for more than seven starting dwarves might be a bit much as well -- it might be that a core group works well there too).

Quote from: MrWillsauce
What did you think of Atrocious Beards Part Two (assuming you saw it)?

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Quote from: Putnam
With all these changes to how rumors and such get spread, is there any change to, say, demons impersonating gods?

There probably should have been, but that's still something that exists from world gen and then isn't continued on as anything but an odd fact.  It'll technically matter when civ-level actions can be taken by non-gob entities, but there's something inherently rumory about it that isn't touched by the new rumor stuff.

Quote from: Novel Scoops
Can the AI loot sites?

There aren't any objects to loot yet.  Just as the tribute is "abstract", anything like looting has to wait for all the economy stuff to come to fruition.  The part from the 2/8 devlog that Footkerchief quoted with demons pillaging dwarven capitals was the world gen backstory -- once you get into play, everything involving items doesn't matter.  Items move around in world gen with trade, though I'm not sure if even the pillaging at that time is abstract or not.  The tribute is.

Quote from: monk12
Will there be any indication NPCs are having a conversation?
Will eavesdropping be possible?
What happens if the conversation is interrupted by player antics? I'm thinking especially of important conversations; can you create Groundhog Day style loops by constantly interrupting conversations through violence or other shenanigans, etc

All conversations currently happening around you pop up in the regular announcement list, and if you can see a speaker, they get a number printed over them with a corresponding number on the announcement line.  Conversations aren't so frequent that this has caused problems, but as more banter goes in we'll see if adjustments are required.  Conversations fizzle over time if they aren't used, so if you start a fight, anything going on would need to be reestablished.  I'm sure people will find many ways to mess with the poor critters.  It just takes a simple two statement exchange to establish sweeping entity changes and so on, though, or even less (like a declaration of a site claim), so you'll have to be on the ball if you want to disrupt the march of history at a given location.

Quote from: smjjames
Question/thought partially related to the underwater trees bug (which might not even exist in the next version), how do multi-tile trees and cavern fungi deal with tight spaces like one tile wide corridors that would otherwise be too small for a tower cap with a 2x2 trunk to grow in? Do they just sort of force themselves into the space or simply not grow at all?

Trees start at one tile and they grow from there, so issues with blockage and all that haven't really changed.

Quote from: smjjames
Will we be able to make the dirt and sand into walls in the arena? (actually, thats the same as my origional question, I just didn't know we could place them in the new version).

And will we be able to plant trees and shrubs on the soil in the arena?

I don't think you can set the wall type, and it doesn't let you plant and age specific tree types to test them out yet.

Quote from: Zavvnao
Will fantasy in the game ever grow beyond Euro-centric fantasy?

The randomization was mentioned while I was typing this up -- there's definitely going to be a randomization and a smearing out of things, and the sources of inspiration there are varied.  I have no idea about adding specific stock elements from real-world cultures farther afield, since we were never really strongly pro-stock-stuff to begin with, and we'd just be looking stuff up and putting crappy versions of it in (not that what we have is much different from that already).  There are no doubt several more general thematic biases of which I'm not even consciously aware, and each of those would have to be raised and tackled separately.  The genre/atmosphere/plot stuff from Armok 1 was supposed to address this, or at least allow you to play very atypical worlds, but we are a long way from that.
Logged
The Toad, a Natural Resource:  Preserve yours today!

Trif

  • Bay Watcher
  • the Not-Quite-So-Great-as-Toady One
    • View Profile
Re: Future of the Fortress
« Reply #8493 on: December 29, 2013, 08:40:57 am »

Thanks, Toady!
Logged
Quote from: Toady One
I wonder if the game has become odd.

Knight Otu

  • Bay Watcher
  • ☺4[
    • View Profile
Re: Future of the Fortress
« Reply #8494 on: December 29, 2013, 08:46:05 am »

Thanks for the answers!
Logged
Direforged Original
Random Raw Scripts - Randomly generated Beasts , Vermin, Hags, Vampires, and Civilizations
Castle Otu

Adrian

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Future of the Fortress
« Reply #8495 on: December 29, 2013, 09:06:22 am »

I had to read Tarn's spoiler to find out what "Atrocious Beards Part Two" meant.
We use the Candy Cane and Circus euphemisms because the real names are spoileriffic. The title of a movie is not a spoiler and it shouldn't be given a euphemism.

That's my two cents.
Logged

Trif

  • Bay Watcher
  • the Not-Quite-So-Great-as-Toady One
    • View Profile
Re: Future of the Fortress
« Reply #8496 on: December 29, 2013, 10:45:11 am »

I had to read Tarn's spoiler to find out what "Atrocious Beards Part Two" meant.
We use the Candy Cane and Circus euphemisms because the real names are spoileriffic. The title of a movie is not a spoiler and it shouldn't be given a euphemism.

That's my two cents.
Atrocious Beards isn't supposed to be a euphemism, it's a reference to DF Talk #20 where Toady and Co made fun of the facial hair in The Hobbit Part 1.
Logged
Quote from: Toady One
I wonder if the game has become odd.

Footkerchief

  • Bay Watcher
  • The Juffo-Wup is strong in this place.
    • View Profile
Re: Future of the Fortress
« Reply #8497 on: December 29, 2013, 02:10:36 pm »

The basic companion orders are just follow/wait right now, and they won't wait forever, but it'll have to be made slightly more interesting before we can really dig into it.  I have one note left about yielding and having companions follow you in yielding and behaviors for them -- that runs right into some of their values potentially, and I'm probably going to do something with it.  There's definitely a lot just sitting right in front of me.  It's all a matter of pretending it's not the case so I can get a release together now.

Agonizing.

If you start stabbing enemies during a non-lethal raid it becomes a lethal fight.  Everybody involved will pull weapons if they have them and a lot of people will potentially die if one side doesn't give up first or run off -- the tendency to run off will increase if the people involved aren't battle-hardened or otherwise cut out for that sort of thing, so it won't necessarily end with everybody dead.  The diplomacy state stores the overall level of each war, but that isn't fully integrated yet -- so I'm not quite sure at this point whether or not a lethal raid that you escalate will lead to a more permanent increase in lethal hostilities across the board between the two groups, but the idea is in play.  You certainly have the potential to be a catalyst for negative changes.

Having that level of nuance in the fights sounds really cool, not just for gameplay variation but also for making the fights more tense and suspenseful.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

I think I'd be happier with the silly action scenes if they had Braindead-style splatter.

It just takes a simple two statement exchange to establish sweeping entity changes and so on, though, or even less (like a declaration of a site claim), so you'll have to be on the ball if you want to disrupt the march of history at a given location.

I'm reminded of The Princess Bride when Westley fails to interrupt the wedding, to Buttercup's chagrin.  It's so cool to have big moments realized in gameplay, whether they're interrupted or not.
Logged

smirk

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Future of the Fortress
« Reply #8498 on: December 29, 2013, 02:58:00 pm »

Thanks for the answers Toady!

It just takes a simple two statement exchange to establish sweeping entity changes and so on, though, or even less (like a declaration of a site claim), so you'll have to be on the ball if you want to disrupt the march of history at a given location.

Hmm... Do NPCs in adventure mode take everything you say at face value right now? Or can they disbelieve your ridiculous claims yet? Say if a green adventurer wanders into a capital city and lays claim to the throne. Would there always be a "so-and-so has laid claim to the rightful throne of Milord Arglebargle!" rumor, or a "Hey, look! There's a new crazy guy in town" rumor, or even no rumor at all because the citizen you told was too busy laughing his ass off? Is it possible, in fact, for such a claim to have no effect upon the entity at all (i.e. not even listing you as a claimant)?
Logged
When i think of toady i think of a toad hopping arround on a keyboard
also
he should stay out of the light it will dry out his skin
his moist amphibian skin
.

Footkerchief

  • Bay Watcher
  • The Juffo-Wup is strong in this place.
    • View Profile
Re: Future of the Fortress
« Reply #8499 on: December 29, 2013, 03:06:35 pm »

It just takes a simple two statement exchange to establish sweeping entity changes and so on, though, or even less (like a declaration of a site claim), so you'll have to be on the ball if you want to disrupt the march of history at a given location.

Hmm... Do NPCs in adventure mode take everything you say at face value right now? Or can they disbelieve your ridiculous claims yet? Say if a green adventurer wanders into a capital city and lays claim to the throne. Would there always be a "so-and-so has laid claim to the rightful throne of Milord Arglebargle!" rumor, or a "Hey, look! There's a new crazy guy in town" rumor, or even no rumor at all because the citizen you told was too busy laughing his ass off? Is it possible, in fact, for such a claim to have no effect upon the entity at all (i.e. not even listing you as a claimant)?

Quote
Quote from: Sizik
Does [claiming sites] allow for adventurers (or even NPCs) to become like Emperor Norton?
Quote from: smirk
Hmm. Head of an entity whom no-one else officially recognizes, but is nevertheless well-liked enough to subsist on the goodwill of the locals. Possible to an extent, but I'm doubtful this release will include charity. It MIGHT be possible that sufficient fame leads to more favorable prices (both buying and selling), but no one will be exploiting your name for their own monetary gain either. It's all in how you write the fluff after the fact, I suppose.

Yeah, the only nice thing people do for you now is let you sleep in their homes, but getting your own currency would be an additional step.  You can certainly be an irrelevant claimant.

Which site claims from which entities take precedence in a given site should be pretty complicated later on, but it's not time for more complications, so the recognized claim (for purposes of diplomacy and site disputes and displacement after invasions and all that) is just based at this point on who is physically holding the main building (whether that's a keep or a mead hall).
Logged

mastahcheese

  • Bay Watcher
  • Now with 20% less sanity and trans fat!
    • View Profile
Re: Future of the Fortress
« Reply #8500 on: December 29, 2013, 06:03:42 pm »

Thanks, Toady!

While individuals won't change religious/political beliefs in the next release, when they do get added in, will we be able to forcibly change another persons beliefs? I'm imagining some sort of Liberal Dwarf Squad where you go around kidnapping and converting people to your ideologies, presumably to achieve some sort of goal.
Logged
Oh look, I have a steam account.
Might as well chalk it up to Pathos.
As this point we might as well invoke interpretive dance and call it a day.
The Derail Thread

Nasikabatrachus

  • Bay Watcher
  • Who watchdwarfs the watchdwarves?
    • View Profile
Re: Future of the Fortress
« Reply #8501 on: December 29, 2013, 07:26:54 pm »

Thanks for the answers, Fearless Toady Leader, and may you have a merry New Year.

Ah, but ze questions, zey nevair end.

I haven't seen this mentioned specifically, but does the new contract system allow for dismissing companions? e.g. If a companion is too badly wounded to fight or too cowardly, can I tell them to take a hike, or do I have to order them to wait on the edge of a volcano until they get the message?
Logged
"I want to have goblins about me, for I am courageous. The courage which scareth away ghosts, createth for itself goblins--it wanteth to laugh." Thus Spake Zarathustra, chapter 7, Friedrich Nietzsche

Eric Blank

  • Bay Watcher
  • *Remain calm*
    • View Profile
Re: Future of the Fortress
« Reply #8502 on: December 29, 2013, 08:21:08 pm »

A FotF reply! Happy birthday to me! :P

Thanks for the answers Toady. It's all starting to make more sense now.
Logged
I make Spellcrafts!
I have no idea where anything is. I have no idea what anything does. This is not merely a madhouse designed by a madman, but a madhouse designed by many madmen, each with an intense hatred for the previous madman's unique flavour of madness.

Silicoid

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Future of the Fortress
« Reply #8503 on: December 29, 2013, 08:53:31 pm »

Quote
Quote from: Thundercraft
When it comes time for magical artifacts, if their creation actually was inspired by a god, then will the item description mention this fact or even the name of the deity?

It's difficult to say what's going to happen there.  That said, the new demon sites have a slight touch of that in the next release, on a whim.
Now I have to find out this secret....  With one small statement you caused the death of a thousand adventurers in search of this mystery.
Logged

Valtam

  • Bay Watcher
  • [VALUE:LEISURE_TIME:50]
    • View Profile
Re: Future of the Fortress
« Reply #8504 on: December 29, 2013, 09:26:52 pm »

Keep up the pace, Toady, and thanks for the enlightening answers. Have a nice new year, by the way.

Thanks, Toady!

While individuals won't change religious/political beliefs in the next release, when they do get added in, will we be able to forcibly change another persons beliefs? I'm imagining some sort of Liberal Dwarf Squad where you go around kidnapping and converting people to your ideologies, presumably to achieve some sort of goal.

You know how it goes for releases that are further away from the next one, but I think this Powergoal should give a glancing answer.
Quote from: dev_single
PowerGoal139, A BATTERY OF AA MECHANICS, (Future): You receive the holy relic of Aa from a manifestation of the deity. You bring it to the Temple of Aa and set it on the altar. People dance as you chant the prayer of Aa. Word spreads quickly that a prophet of Aa has arisen, and the religion of Aa sweeps throughout the land.

It should make sense to be able to change people's convictions and beliefs, as soon as these make sense and serve a physical purpose in the world.
Logged
my first quest was to seige a nemacrcors tower i killed 3 nemacrcors the got killed by a zombie fly.
How on earth did you manage to do that twice?
Pages: 1 ... 565 566 [567] 568 569 ... 748