Bay 12 Games Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  
Pages: 1 ... 291 292 [293] 294 295 ... 306

Author Topic: Future of the Fortress  (Read 1842499 times)

Bumber

  • Bay Watcher
  • REMOVE KOBOLD
    • View Profile
Re: Future of the Fortress
« Reply #4380 on: June 02, 2016, 09:19:46 pm »

This reads to me like "I know you've said that you made goblins [NO_EAT] for lore reasons, but that's so dumb you must have other reasons, maybe subconscious ones. What are these other real reasons? Also, when do you think you'll realize how dumb [NO_EAT] goblins are and change it back to how they should be?"
The stated reason was that they didn't want "meat herding" goblins. I want to know if it's Word of Toad that vanilla DF goblins as a race must inherently not need to eat, or whether any alternative that ends in the same aesthetic is still on the table.

People can change their minds when circumstances change. The decision was made in 2011 when we didn't have goblin citizens. Those don't seem to fit in with the wasteland goblins as previously described, nor is their lack of needs fun from a fort standpoint.

One of my offered solutions involved it being a supernatural power (Hey, Myths and Magic Arc!) that was bestowed via pact upon the civ or individual, not the race. They could even have demonic artifacts (e.g., that refill with demon blood) that nourish them. I'll put my ideas in Suggestions if and only if Toady says he's still willing to consider alternatives. Otherwise, there's no point.
« Last Edit: June 02, 2016, 09:37:04 pm by Bumber »
Logged
Reading his name would trigger it. Thinking of him would trigger it. No other circumstances would trigger it- it was strictly related to the concept of Bill Clinton entering the conscious mind.

THE xTROLL FUR SOCKx RUSE WAS A........... DISTACTION        the carp HAVE the wagon

A wizard has turned you into a wagon. This was inevitable (Y/y)?

conflictensues

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Future of the Fortress
« Reply #4381 on: June 02, 2016, 10:52:19 pm »

...
One of my offered solutions involved it being a supernatural power (Hey, Myths and Magic Arc!) that was bestowed via pact upon the civ or individual, not the race. They could even have demonic artifacts (e.g., that refill with demon blood) that nourish them. I'll put my ideas in Suggestions if and only if Toady says he's still willing to consider alternatives. Otherwise, there's no point.

I doubt ideas are unwelcome even if the object is not held in common.  People have, as you mentioned, the right to change their minds.  I guess I'm just saying to use your voice!  ^.^
Logged

Thundercraft

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Future of the Fortress
« Reply #4382 on: June 03, 2016, 10:59:28 am »

Why are some large predators like the Dingo and Wolf not hunting or war trainable, while other large predators like the Leopard and Lion are hunting / war trainable? (Also applies to Giant versions.) Even more confusing: Why is the Black Bear not hunting / war trainable when both Grizzly and Polar Bears are?

I'd love to know the reasons why. Does it have to do with size? The Black Bear may be smaller than a Grizzly or Polar Bear, but it's still quite large compared to other trainable animals. The Wolf is a rather large, too. The domestic dog is trainable and it's rather small, by comparison. Canines are known to be quite intelligent, so they should be at least capable of training. And in terms of tameness and potential to turn on handlers, are Wolves really any worse than Lions and Leopards?
« Last Edit: June 03, 2016, 11:07:26 am by Thundercraft »
Logged

Random_Dragon

  • Bay Watcher
  • Psycho Bored Dragon
    • View Profile
Re: Future of the Fortress
« Reply #4383 on: June 03, 2016, 12:13:45 pm »

I always assumed it was based off whether Toady could find historical evidence regarding the training and use of a given species. And as I can confirm, having done similar such things for types of stone, research is a big pain in the ass when you're looking for something like "did anyone historically use this" instead of more concrete things like material data.
Logged
On DF Wiki · On DFFD

"Hey idiots, someone hacked my account to call you all idiots! Wasn't me you idiots!" seems to stretch credulity a bit.

Button

  • Bay Watcher
  • Plants Specialist
    • View Profile
Re: Future of the Fortress
« Reply #4384 on: June 03, 2016, 01:23:15 pm »

Why are some large predators like the Dingo and Wolf not hunting or war trainable, while other large predators like the Leopard and Lion are hunting / war trainable? (Also applies to Giant versions.) Even more confusing: Why is the Black Bear not hunting / war trainable when both Grizzly and Polar Bears are?

I'd love to know the reasons why. Does it have to do with size? The Black Bear may be smaller than a Grizzly or Polar Bear, but it's still quite large compared to other trainable animals. The Wolf is a rather large, too. The domestic dog is trainable and it's rather small, by comparison. Canines are known to be quite intelligent, so they should be at least capable of training. And in terms of tameness and potential to turn on handlers, are Wolves really any worse than Lions and Leopards?

I always assumed it was based off whether Toady could find historical evidence regarding the training and use of a given species. And as I can confirm, having done similar such things for types of stone, research is a big pain in the ass when you're looking for something like "did anyone historically use this" instead of more concrete things like material data.

I find it extremely unlikely that anyone has historically used polar bears for war or hunting, given that they're the most dangerous-to-humans predator on the planet; while we know for a fact that people have used wolves.

I suspect the distinction between which animals are TRAINABLE or not is mostly an accident of creation order: a large fraction of the TRAINABLE animals (not counting variations, which just inherit) have been around since 40d.
« Last Edit: June 03, 2016, 01:28:16 pm by Button »
Logged
I used to work on Modest Mod and Plant Fixes.

Always assume I'm not seriously back

Jimmius

  • Bay Watcher
  • Fond of Drink and Industry
    • View Profile
Re: Future of the Fortress
« Reply #4385 on: June 03, 2016, 06:12:31 pm »

Which features are you most looking forward to working on post-myth arc? Or does it vary from day to day?
Logged

Random_Dragon

  • Bay Watcher
  • Psycho Bored Dragon
    • View Profile
Re: Future of the Fortress
« Reply #4386 on: June 03, 2016, 06:37:59 pm »

I find it extremely unlikely that anyone has historically used polar bears for war or hunting, given that they're the most dangerous-to-humans predator on the planet; while we know for a fact that people have used wolves.

I suspect the distinction between which animals are TRAINABLE or not is mostly an accident of creation order: a large fraction of the TRAINABLE animals (not counting variations, which just inherit) have been around since 40d.

True. :V
Logged
On DF Wiki · On DFFD

"Hey idiots, someone hacked my account to call you all idiots! Wasn't me you idiots!" seems to stretch credulity a bit.

Pseudopuppet

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Future of the Fortress
« Reply #4387 on: June 06, 2016, 01:00:56 am »

With the introduction of alcohol inebriation, taverns, and temples, I feel as if the effects of the stress system have become quite rare. It's almost as if one needs to intentionally and actively stress out the dwarves to actually see the effects of it nowadays. It's not like we need to go back to the old days where a tantruming dwarf can send a fort into ruin, but is the current state of almost-permanent euphoria among your dwarves intended for now?
Logged

Random_Dragon

  • Bay Watcher
  • Psycho Bored Dragon
    • View Profile
Re: Future of the Fortress
« Reply #4388 on: June 06, 2016, 01:53:16 am »

With the introduction of alcohol inebriation, taverns, and temples, I feel as if the effects of the stress system have become quite rare. It's almost as if one needs to intentionally and actively stress out the dwarves to actually see the effects of it nowadays. It's not like we need to go back to the old days where a tantruming dwarf can send a fort into ruin, but is the current state of almost-permanent euphoria among your dwarves intended for now?

See issue: http://www.bay12games.com/dwarves/mantisbt/view.php?id=9660

I made a fort with the explicit purpose of going WELL beyond intentionally and actively stressing out the starting seven, and it did jack shit for a year and a half or so.
Logged
On DF Wiki · On DFFD

"Hey idiots, someone hacked my account to call you all idiots! Wasn't me you idiots!" seems to stretch credulity a bit.

TheFlame52

  • Bay Watcher
  • Master of the randomly generated
    • View Profile
Re: Future of the Fortress
« Reply #4389 on: June 06, 2016, 02:07:42 pm »

In worldgen, when will there be fights of more than just one-on-one?
« Last Edit: June 07, 2016, 07:47:47 pm by TheFlame52 »
Logged

Mr S

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Future of the Fortress
« Reply #4390 on: June 06, 2016, 06:19:29 pm »

In worldgen, will there ever be fights of more than just one-on-one?

Ever, is a very long time frame. If you're referring to how armies fight in worldgen, then yes, improved abstraction of group combats, sieges, skirmishes and such are planned to be worked on as Toady gets to them. As usual, the answer is somewhere around "Sounds good. No timeline."
Logged

Capntastic

  • Bay Watcher
  • Greetings, mortals!
    • View Profile
    • A review and literature weblog I never update
Re: Future of the Fortress
« Reply #4391 on: June 06, 2016, 11:45:01 pm »

I am posting here to ensure global coverage:

PM me questions for Toady to answer live at the Dwarfmoot event.
Logged

pikachu17

  • Bay Watcher
  • PADORU PADORU
    • View Profile
Re: Future of the Fortress
« Reply #4392 on: June 08, 2016, 09:28:08 am »


just what do PATTERN_FLIER and UNDER_SWM do?

Logged
Sigtext!
dwarf 4tress from scratch
The Pikachu revolution!
Thank you NatureGirl19999 for the avatar switcher at http://signavatar.com

A warforged bard named Gender appears and says"Hello. I am a social construct."

TheFlame52

  • Bay Watcher
  • Master of the randomly generated
    • View Profile
Re: Future of the Fortress
« Reply #4393 on: June 08, 2016, 03:17:36 pm »

just what do PATTERN_FLIER and UNDER_SWM do?
UNDERSWIM is a relic from the days when DF was only 2D, and does nothing. Don't know about the other.

FantasticDorf

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Future of the Fortress
« Reply #4394 on: June 08, 2016, 08:02:39 pm »

just what do PATTERN_FLIER and UNDER_SWM do?
UNDERSWIM is a relic from the days when DF was only 2D, and does nothing. Don't know about the other.

Actually underswim is relevant to whether a aquatic creature can naturally dive and stay under the water as opposed to being on top of it if memory serves (unless in later additions as you point out [aquatic] has replaced this notion)

Normally because they are tagged together aquatic and underswim are rarely seperated from one another. Simultaneous underswim and aquatic tags are relevant to specific holding conditions, such as aquariums for vermin fish (which cannot be interred into cages, so your most valuable river fish can be sorted into aquariums and sold at a profit rather than eating them) and larger aquatic creatures. (If you can excuse the bugs surrounding them dying of beaching due to dwarves being careless to their requirement to breathe water and save states not resetting when they are put in the tank.)
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 291 292 [293] 294 295 ... 306