Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[wierd]

Indeed! Both replies!

However, in circumstances where the destruction of dwarven children is proscribed, (Such as my diabolical little research project), setting the child pop cap to 0 would be counter intuitive.

Things like this are clearly useful to the mad scientists amongst us.

(Sorry about the wall-o-text, it's just an issue I have repeatedly encountered, and am deeply concerned about, as it affects everyone, everywhere.)

[Tirion]

This just happens to be the most efficient and effective way to dispose of dwarfen babies whom I don't want for the various reasons stated in the original post.

The second-most efficient. The most efficient would be to set the child cap to zero.

Still useful for selective culling, used in eugenics projects. Doing it while the good thought from giving birth still lasts and the little bundle of (thankfully not implemented) poop hasn't become friend of half the fortress might even justify doing it instead of waiting for them to become children and burrowing them under a bridge.

Re: overpopulation IRL: Obviously, we are going to have a starvation-induced mega tantrum spiral sooner or later. Those who train their attributes, limit the number of friends (individuals with high chance of survival are preferred), stockpile food, booze and equipment will likely survive the resulting massive population drop and will be able to start over.

[Ravendarksky]

This just happens to be the most efficient and effective way to dispose of dwarfen babies whom I don't want for the various reasons stated in the original post.

The second-most efficient. The most efficient would be to set the child cap to zero.

Forgive my ignorance, but does this just affect dwarfs and will it work for existing saves/worlds? Won't people still migrate with children/babies?

[fricy]

This just happens to be the most efficient and effective way to dispose of dwarfen babies whom I don't want for the various reasons stated in the original post.

The second-most efficient. The most efficient would be to set the child cap to zero.

Forgive my ignorance, but does this just affect dwarfs and will it work for existing saves/worlds? Won't people still migrate with children/babies?

Works on any forts, the new pop-cap is set when the liason leaves your map alive. If your population is lower at that moment then the pop-cap set in the init you'll still get migrants.

[Loud Whispers]

I am ambiguously outraged by this misapplied use of baby.

[enolate]

Burrow restrictions don't solve the problems of "mooding children" who default to stone moods, nor does it fix issues from poor breeding.

The former needs you to abuse therapist, and the latter requires culling.

Your own experiments seem to show traits aren't inherited, anyway.

[wierd]

True, but there isn't enough data to be conclusive yet. only preliminary data that strongly suggests a hard coded percentile distribution mechanism.

5 generations of data or so would be enough to draw a rough scatterplot to nail the lid on that coffin.

Regardless, all that means is that having a fortress of uberdwarves comes at a very high ethical cost, as well as a serious micromanagement cost.

[Kerbalrocketry]

I've always just set children to a burrow underneath a drawbridge...
The parents barely notice when they are standing around in a legendary dining room admiring the masterwork statues and engravings.

[Necromunger]

@Wierd Thanks, for the effort you put into your replies, i understand what your trying to say and i have thought about it myself. Quite a bit actually. I think the main thing i freaked out about is the generalization of baby smashing =P.

But were all adults here lol (or young adults) and were not going to be desensitized to the protection of RL children.

Ill let this tangent go now though lol the other guys don't like this debate, but just know i have seen and think allot about what your saying.

[wierd]

Meh, don't worry about it. I'm actually elated that you DO actually think about such things. Many people these days really don't, which is one of the reasons why we have such absurd silliness about internet censorship, NSA analprobulating wiretaps, and other such attrocities against reason and sanity. It isn't just restricted to parental behavioral changes in cognition, just that people with children who are so predisposed represent a sizable portion of the population, and can and ARE actively coerced into irrational, emotion-based hysterionics by people with "causes".

I consider the act of such exploitation obscene; like offering a recovering alcholic a martini at a party. The alcoholic has a similar predisposition, and inhibited regulatory processes, just in regard to alcohol and other addictive substances. The alcoholic has to actively choose, each and every time, to abstain, in order to avoid succumbing to a deleterious spiral down the rabbit hole of addiction all over again. Exploiting the "fear and disgust" reactions from parents to further a political goal, especially one that has been gutloaded with pure premium evil, is beyond inconsionable to me. But, much like with addiction and alcoholism, the person with the predisposition needs to be both aware of the predisposition, and actively choose to do something about it.  That's all I really want from parents. Be aware of the predisposition, and take remedial actions to retain a sound and rational mindset. Indulging the fear or disgust, is like taking the drink. It creates very persitent, self-reinforcing behaviors that defy reason and rational criticism.

"Who are you to tell me how to raise my kids!", "You are a horrible person!", et al, are very frequent epithets hurled in my direction in that regard. Having evaluated, and re-evaluated the situation a great many times, and finding only further evidence to support the biological predisposition theory, and having only subjective, and emotionally charged slurs hurled my direction under most situations, and dazed bewilderment and confusion set in at best, I really don't think I am in error, but would indeed welcome riggorous discussion on the subject.

If you want to continue, i'd be happy to take this to PMs.

I am just rather sore over the subject. (It *IS* rather undesirable to most parents to contemplate.)

[Sutremaine]

Forgive my ignorance, but does this just affect dwarfs and will it work for existing saves/worlds? Won't people still migrate with children/babies?

It affects just dwarves, and while children can appear during migrant waves I've never seen that many (perhaps because I tend to run worlds much shorter than the dwarven lifespan?). You can still end up with children, but there won't be a constant trickle of them, they won't start at age zero, and once you're up to your pop cap you won't have any more appearing. They're much more tolerable this way, and while they're individually still a net drain on the fortress* it's not really a capital offence to be under 13.

I've never seen a dwarf arrive carrying a baby -- has anyone else?

*You could burrow them in a food / drink / farm / child bedroom area and have them be the nearest available dwarves when something pops up in the farm, since it's about the only work they'll take on. Then they're more useful.

[Ravendarksky]

This game is too perfect sometimes:



Clearly my dwarven gods do not approve and so this activity must cease.

[Larix]

Forgive my ignorance, but does this just affect dwarfs and will it work for existing saves/worlds? Won't people still migrate with children/babies?

It affects just dwarves, and while children can appear during migrant waves I've never seen that many (perhaps because I tend to run worlds much shorter than the dwarven lifespan?).

The number of children you get in migration depends very much on the world you're working with, but in my experience, children make up somewhere between 10 and 20% of immigrants and take on average four to five years to grow up. Their age at immigration is properly calculated from their predetermined date of birth: if you're twelve years or more past the end of world generation, dwarfs may immigrate with the job of 'child' but they're all already past the actual adulthood cutoff; they'll upgrade on their next birthday but will unfortunately only grow up to be skill-less peasants.

I've never seen a dwarf arrive carrying a baby -- has anyone else?

Only immigrants from abandoned older forts. "Dwarven baby" is an immigrant "job" just like "dwarven child" and will only be checked for appropriateness at the next birthday. You can have "babies" of three or more years who crawl around randomly and can't survive when their mother doesn't hold them. They're also somewhat bugged because immigrants arrive separately - i.e. the "baby" will not immigrate on its mother's arm and won't automatically generate the "seek infant" job. You have to save and restart the game to fix it.

[kaenneth]

This game is too perfect sometimes:



Clearly my dwarven gods do not approve and so this activity must cease.

That's downright creepy. If you don't stop, maybe she'll come for you Sadako-style.

[wierd]

You are clearly misinterpreting that iconography!

She is CLEARLY making a plaintive gesture FOR YOU TO CONTINUE!

It is now abundantly obvious that the gods not only approve of this exercise, but beg for more!