Print

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

[CLA]

Does the new map screen include access to information from legends mode in some way? Specifically, will we be able to search for location/event names?

[Shonai_Dweller]

I love that even though they're not in the fortress, Dorfs can still annoy us by suddenly going Socialize! when they're supposed to be doing something important.

[Random_Dragon]

I love that even though they're not in the fortress, Dorfs can still annoy us by suddenly going Socialize! when they're supposed to be doing something important.

Urist McArtifactHunter cancels Purge the fucking goblins: hosting party.

[Max™]

Hmmm, could a squad sent off map lose members and wind up with a single survivor, and if so, could that survivor get beat up by bogeymen?

[FantasticDorf]

> If they are trimmed in consistency because of regular event spam in legends, could you send out fortress members to participate in events like the dwarflympics and poetry readings with forewarning a event is going to happen in order to earn some social skills & personal notoriety for the dwarf? With the little readout whether they 'won' or not

Let your famous bard with his original composition get his word out etc. It could be reformatted that its held locally but like rival football teams travelling to your pitch, a bunch of rival teams arrive from all over the realm to visit the official mountainhome games.

[Shonai_Dweller]

Hmmm, could a squad sent off map lose members and wind up with a single survivor, and if so, could that survivor get beat up by bogeymen?

Do visitors get attacked by bogeymen on the way to your fortress right now?
Seems to be just an adventurer thing.

[Chase]

What in Dwarf Fortress is still scripted that you hope to simulate in the future?

[Eric Blank]

The economy, prices of goods and trade is an obvious answer. Right now its all pretty much scripted. The variation in price is scripted, not a function of actual supply and demand. And its on the dev page for future updates already.

[FantasticDorf]

The economy, prices of goods and trade is an obvious answer. Right now its all pretty much scripted. The variation in price is scripted, not a function of actual supply and demand. And its on the dev page for future updates already.

Adding onto that, many of the sites don't actually have space to store stuff that is currently scripted to be demanded so a map rework might be needed too.

• Goblin dark towers ask for things sometimes in trade with a bit of modding when playing as the same civ, but surely by the thousands of pieces of equipment they have in base, they don't need more spears or helmets so a simulated economy would not work in that context unless those stockpiles were set to ALL or loosely divided up.

[Chase]

Couple questions

1. Are epidemics something you want to simulate? Could a world have their very own version of a bubonic plague that could completely wipe out races and also cause a higher demand for soap and disease resistance clothing and medical professions? (i.e. Plague Doctors outfit/usage)

2. Do you plan on adding/simulating hurricanes, tornados, earthquakes, or blizzards?

[GoblinCookie]

Incorrect in game terms, sadly. Mechanically, far as I can tell citizens will never use a dining room assigned to someone else, and people with an assigned dining room will favor it over an unassigned one. And assigning a dining room is how you meet the room requirement.

Thus, dwarven nobles always dine alone. :V

They will never use a chair or a bed assigned to somebody else, but they are fine with sharing the room with infinity+1 other folks.  That is because the dining/bedroom/tomb areas are attached to the furniture but can overlap with any number of other such room designations of any time. Talking from experience I have never, ever given my nobles separate dining rooms but have simply given them their own chair in the dining hall that everybody else uses.  That way everybody else has more a more valuable dining room at the same time and I do not have to recreate everything over again.  Nobles eating in their office is however a social problem sometimes though, which is why it is best to have all nobles share the same office as well.

Hmmm, could a squad sent off map lose members and wind up with a single survivor, and if so, could that survivor get beat up by bogeymen?

Do visitors get attacked by bogeymen on the way to your fortress right now?
Seems to be just an adventurer thing.

Yes they do get killed off by 'night creatures', just not very often. 
***************************************************************************************************************************************************

With the introduction of the ability to send squads of your own dwarves it seems to me that the Fortress Mode and Adventure mode are beginning to compete with eachother economically speaking (not that this matters at present). If the sites can just send their own folks off to kill any beasties they fancy, retrieve any artifacts they fancy, hunt down any bandits that annoy them, rescue any lost children and so on what need to have to wait around to reward random adventurers for doing those jobs for them.  This creates a problem since the adventurers reliable depend upon the sites for stuff they need but since the sites no longer reliably benefit from having adventurers around they will not provide them with a reliable income.  I can think of a number of possible extreme solutions to this problem.

1. Deliberately restrict what the sites are able to do using their own members by some means or other however realistic or otherwise so that there are a whole raft of things that need doing that can only be done by said special characters.  For instance all dwarves that have the skills to hunt down dragons and lost children in the wilderness know they have the skills, opting to become adventurers resulting in the sites being forced to get adventurers to do those jobs.

2. Make the economies of fortress mode and adventure mode mostly self-sufficient to each-other, perhaps by using the same system of production and exchange for adventurers as is used by nomadic groups of creatures in the wilderness. In this system the lack of a consistent value of adventurers is not a problem at all since all the adventurers produce all the goods and services they collectively need, with any economic contact with sites being basically sporadic and opportunistic.

3. Merge Fortress Mode and Adventure Mode economies together completely.  This means that the adventurer plays simply an ordinary guy in exactly the same position and function towards the site he is in as a regular dwarf in fortress mode, whatever that is.  Since we still need the player to be able to reliably get stuff done in fortress mode, that means that we are going to have to make adventure mode far more mission based, with adventurers being regular folks given explicit tasks to perform by site governments rather than being independent entities 'following their own destiny'.

What are your thoughts on this?

[Knight Otu]

Couple questions

1. Are epidemics something you want to simulate? Could a world have their very own version of a bubonic plague that could completely wipe out races and also cause a higher demand for soap and disease resistance clothing and medical professions? (i.e. Plague Doctors outfit/usage)

Yes, diseases and plagues are planned (Bloat144 on here, among others), and were almost in 0.31.01, but were among the features to get cut in favor of a release. The deadly diseases would certainly be able to wipe out cities and civs (this may be more common at higher deadliness world settings), though the economic and cultural consequences may not be part of the same (set of) release(s).

2. Do you plan on adding/simulating hurricanes, tornados, earthquakes, or blizzards?

Weather improvements like hurricanes are on the page I linked above in the long-term arcs (though that may or may not be accurate anymore), and Toady has mentioned other catastrophes as well such as here as a "Sure, but no timeline" (I think he also mentioned that they should be "fun" in some way rather than a game-over button).

[Random_Dragon]

They will never use a chair or a bed assigned to somebody else, but they are fine with sharing the room with infinity+1 other folks.  That is because the dining/bedroom/tomb areas are attached to the furniture but can overlap with any number of other such room designations of any time. Talking from experience I have never, ever given my nobles separate dining rooms but have simply given them their own chair in the dining hall that everybody else uses.  That way everybody else has more a more valuable dining room at the same time and I do not have to recreate everything over again.  Nobles eating in their office is however a social problem sometimes though, which is why it is best to have all nobles share the same office as well.

Don't rooms lose value if they overlap though? Or is that only if the rooms are both assigned?

[PatrikLundell]

Shared rooms result in each user getting a share of the rooms value (up to some maximum divisor) which can be compensated for by making the room larger and equipped with more stuff. Beyond the maximum divisor, adding dorfs to a room does not reduce the value for others, so you essentially get it for "free". Not that wealth is any problem currently, and expect fun if you share bedrooms and add cabinets...

[Max™]

Overlapping rooms works great if they're large enough, except for one crippling bit of bugginess: any shared storage items, boxes, cabinets, etc, will be owned by all, and everyone spends all their time shuffling items in and out of each one. Hilarious but it's why I like to have my overlapping rooms with little private closets for storage/eating and a toggled interior/exterior door when expanding it into the room.