Bay 12 Games Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  
Pages: 1 ... 56 57 [58] 59 60 ... 211

Author Topic: Future of the Fortress  (Read 682665 times)

Untrustedlife

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
    • My Website
Re: Future of the Fortress
« Reply #855 on: November 03, 2016, 09:40:20 am »

Oh yeah, green for the Toad: I used dfhack and checked the fame levels with some poking around, mentioned it before I think, but after sharing literally dozens of bandit kills/prevented robberies I was only around 8 or so of the 100 needed for "Legendary Protector of the Weak" which I confirmed is in by setting the value directly.

I trust you as you play adventure mode a lot like I do, but you did tell people about your kills and wait for the rumor to spread right?
Logged
i LIKE LOVECRAFT
My website:
untrustedlife.com
Check out the open source simulation game I am developing!
Thrive

FantasticDorf

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Future of the Fortress
« Reply #856 on: November 03, 2016, 10:55:43 am »

It looks like it would be a major improvement, both in the long run and in the short one with the additional stuff that would be revealed. Conversion would be a mess (but probably a lot less so than the compiler switch), but for compiled code the compiler would flag all the things that have incorrectly guessed names (with the very unfortunate case of a guessed name accidentally matching an actual name of something else). For scripts, however, it might be worth the effort to create a tool that looked at everything that seemed to refer to DF data and flag those that didn't match anything in the correct structure.
There's no need to rename them all in DFHack. I meant that it would be necessary to figure out how Toady's names correspond to DFHack's, e.g. DF's "plot_info" is DFHack's "ui".

And now Toady forgets the scorpions even when I'm not the one bringing them up this time. Senpai will notice poor neglected GDS. ;w;
Was there a question asked about them?

From the previous thread's may response here, imaged because quoting has been disabled via it being closed



So pretty much on hold indefinitely until there are more plans on board with a course of action. 

I have closely related bug reports to perhaps hurry the fix cannibalism Here regarding butchery & death being a little twisted (10057) & related/interjoined bug here causing wobbly un-intentional ethics/factional problems via site population being (wild) nonwilling entity members when a place is settled (10059)
Logged

Max™

  • Bay Watcher
  • [CULL:SQUARE]
    • View Profile
Re: Future of the Fortress
« Reply #857 on: November 03, 2016, 11:39:03 am »

Edit: Whoops, you were talking about a different butchering bug, the link to Random Dragon made me assume you meant the inability to eat sapients regardless of ethics.

Looks like the butchery thing is down to all corpses which had can_learn having one of the flags which we have named as dead_dwarf set, which prevents their use and consumption regardless of ethics, toggling that off is sufficient. For reference it's the 8th flag under items.flags1, not sure if we got that name from Toady or not.

This also applies to things like taking control of a wild animal, say, a giant lion, and killing people to eat. Even after adding grasp tags to my teeth so I could use a tool to butcher my kills I couldn't eat them.

Later I got a reaction working that accepts corpses and "extracts" a small stack of meat for consumption, but it doesn't work on kills with can_learn or corpses with dead_dwarf.
Oh yeah, green for the Toad: I used dfhack and checked the fame levels with some poking around, mentioned it before I think, but after sharing literally dozens of bandit kills/prevented robberies I was only around 8 or so of the 100 needed for "Legendary Protector of the Weak" which I confirmed is in by setting the value directly.

I trust you as you play adventure mode a lot like I do, but you did tell people about your kills and wait for the rumor to spread right?
Yar, in multiple areas, and had people greet me with the "a legend here, thank you for all you do" stuff on the street. Fame accumulation for some types is just really slow, protector of the weak, loyal soldier, and killer I think are all at a similar "1 per incident" rate, while performing, heroism, and hunting are on an "x per incident" rate with x=quality of performance/notoriety of beast/size of prey.
« Last Edit: November 03, 2016, 11:44:36 am by Max™ »
Logged
Engraved here is a rendition of an image of the Dwarf Fortress learning curve. All craftsdwarfship is of the highest quality. It depicts an obsidian overhang which menaces with spikes of obsidian and tears. Carved on the overhang is an image of Toady One and the players. The players are curled up in a fetal position. Toady One is laughing. The players are burning.
The VectorCurses+1 tileset strikes the square set and the severed part sails off in an arc!

PatrikLundell

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Future of the Fortress
« Reply #858 on: November 03, 2016, 12:22:19 pm »

It looks like it would be a major improvement, both in the long run and in the short one with the additional stuff that would be revealed. Conversion would be a mess (but probably a lot less so than the compiler switch), but for compiled code the compiler would flag all the things that have incorrectly guessed names (with the very unfortunate case of a guessed name accidentally matching an actual name of something else). For scripts, however, it might be worth the effort to create a tool that looked at everything that seemed to refer to DF data and flag those that didn't match anything in the correct structure.
There's no need to rename them all in DFHack. I meant that it would be necessary to figure out how Toady's names correspond to DFHack's, e.g. DF's "plot_info" is DFHack's "ui".
:
:
Not changing over to the official names means trading short term convenience for longer term maintenance hassles. Sure, it's possible to produce Toady's future output for every release and perform a comparison to the DFHack XML structures or Toady's previous version to catch changes and update the DFHack XML to reflect the latest exported data, but it would make more long term sense to switch from using the current XML files to using Toady's output. You'd still need to run a comparison to catch what's changed, in particular if things scripts use are removed, and you still need a brain (or many) in the loop to assess which plugins and scripts ought to be updated as things change to account for new things, of course.
Logged

hanni79

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Future of the Fortress
« Reply #859 on: November 03, 2016, 12:32:43 pm »

Quote from: hanni79
do you have any plans to enable stills and/or kitchens to have detailed work orders, so I can make my dwarves brew/cook specific drinks or meals in the near future ?

The actual recipes we wanted to do would likely eliminate work in this direction, though I'm not sure when we'll finally tackle them now.

Thanks for your answer Toady One :)

If I only knew what it meant :D Could someone elaborate ?
Logged

Random_Dragon

  • Bay Watcher
  • Psycho Bored Dragon
    • View Profile
Re: Future of the Fortress
« Reply #860 on: November 03, 2016, 12:39:48 pm »

Was there a question asked about them?

Back with DF 0.42.04, the "file changes.txt" stated:
Quote
removed redundant savage_tropical file -- will add replacement scorpion later

It looks like all the other removed creatures have been restored. But not the Giant Desert Scorpion. Question: Is the return of the GDS still planned? Or was it forgotten because, unlike the other savage_tropical creatures, there is no non-giant version? I ask because the latter seems to be a commonly-held belief. At least, when I ask other players about it, that's the response.

FantasticDorf

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Future of the Fortress
« Reply #861 on: November 03, 2016, 01:28:56 pm »

Edit: Whoops, you were talking about a different butchering bug, the link to Random Dragon made me assume you meant the inability to eat sapients regardless of ethics.

Looks like the butchery thing is down to all corpses which had can_learn having one of the flags which we have named as dead_dwarf set, which prevents their use and consumption regardless of ethics, toggling that off is sufficient. For reference it's the 8th flag under items.flags1, not sure if we got that name from Toady or not.

This also applies to things like taking control of a wild animal, say, a giant lion, and killing people to eat. Even after adding grasp tags to my teeth so I could use a tool to butcher my kills I couldn't eat them.

Nope its the same bug. Universal to butchery of sapients & pets and everything that isn't 'Huntable' non intelligent animals, just hear me out.

Interesting but not the conclusion i came to, which i detailed in my bug-report as the BP health system (at the same time that 42.01 (Z) status got updated) not having a death state (only severe injuries), so that creatures who 'die' pre-emptively turn into corpse objects with severe health ailments (skeletons go blind when their eyes rot and dead bodies don't breathe, headless corpses asphyxiate on decapitation but are not struck down) . Its technically alive but the unit's physical body is destroyed with the same code in force if it was alive right now, anything you do to destroy a body in the current state will not really 'kill' units. Crush under a block of slade, encase in ice, drop down a void pit = Nothing, the corpse of the unit is dead but its ID (the (Z) status on your dwarves) is still active, therefore it will never go away in your dead units screen or ever leave your game after loading/unloading.

(Technically wouldn't it be in your game save file under the listed units? Try deleting them there)

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

This non-active destruction of a creatures body but not its 'soul' causes conflict with the game system, slaughtered sentients with appropriate ethics for instance are ignored as unethical (which is sort of related to your dwarf-set and that may be a factor) because the game fails to recognize that they are dead. The lingering ID's of units causes them to still possess whatever product they have (trolls possess their own ivory & guts, the goods are not forbidden but remain in ownership after being slaughtered alive legally by goblins & right ethics) which is also why ivory crafting is broken, since you can't harvest teeth from the living in previous code. Apparitions also appear when extra body parts like teeth are not collected causing ghosts and all BP parts of the undead to rise.

The second bug report is that all creatures regardless of intelligence (blowing your strict intelligent dwarf set slightly out of the water but not outside the realm of possibility) have a overlaying site affiliation with where-ever a creature lives if it is local or non-local population and based there and the brawling/emotional system is also shared between all DF.Units described as animals by the df structure. (On one hand making all entity 'animals' globally follow the behavior as intended but also making every other animal like that globally too)


Maybe dwarf-set its related to checking its active id state when in fortress mode vs adventure mode? (like when the player is playing/not playing a sentient animal) Im not sure. Apologies for being long winded, but its a set of bugs with some serious scope for being 80% of the game's mantis bugtracker problems in some way or form right now.

Question for toady

At the time of the health systems bp flags being put in, was it a oversight that there isn't a BP health indicator for death? Or at the time was it thought to be unnessecary or too complicated given there are different ways to die and having to categorize those? (brain death etc.)
« Last Edit: November 03, 2016, 01:41:19 pm by FantasticDorf »
Logged

Dirst

  • Bay Watcher
  • On hiatus
    • View Profile
Re: Future of the Fortress
« Reply #862 on: November 03, 2016, 01:55:56 pm »

It looks like it would be a major improvement, both in the long run and in the short one with the additional stuff that would be revealed. Conversion would be a mess (but probably a lot less so than the compiler switch), but for compiled code the compiler would flag all the things that have incorrectly guessed names (with the very unfortunate case of a guessed name accidentally matching an actual name of something else). For scripts, however, it might be worth the effort to create a tool that looked at everything that seemed to refer to DF data and flag those that didn't match anything in the correct structure.
There's no need to rename them all in DFHack. I meant that it would be necessary to figure out how Toady's names correspond to DFHack's, e.g. DF's "plot_info" is DFHack's "ui".
:
:
Not changing over to the official names means trading short term convenience for longer term maintenance hassles. Sure, it's possible to produce Toady's future output for every release and perform a comparison to the DFHack XML structures or Toady's previous version to catch changes and update the DFHack XML to reflect the latest exported data, but it would make more long term sense to switch from using the current XML files to using Toady's output. You'd still need to run a comparison to catch what's changed, in particular if things scripts use are removed, and you still need a brain (or many) in the loop to assess which plugins and scripts ought to be updated as things change to account for new things, of course.
There is nothing to prevent two different names from pointing at the same address.  Could keep the old names under DF.global and the correct ones under DF_official.global (or something more compact).
Logged
On hiatus. Feel free to adopt or update:
(0.42 & 0.43) The Earth Strikes Back! v2.15 - Pay attention...  It's a mine!  It's-a not yours!
(0.42 & 0.43) Appearance Tweaks v1.03 - Tease those hippies about their pointy ears.
(0.42 & 0.43) Accessibility Utility v1.04 - Console tools to navigate the map

lethosor

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Future of the Fortress
« Reply #863 on: November 03, 2016, 02:18:17 pm »

Not changing over to the official names means trading short term convenience for longer term maintenance hassles. Sure, it's possible to produce Toady's future output for every release and perform a comparison to the DFHack XML structures or Toady's previous version to catch changes and update the DFHack XML to reflect the latest exported data, but it would make more long term sense to switch from using the current XML files to using Toady's output. You'd still need to run a comparison to catch what's changed, in particular if things scripts use are removed, and you still need a brain (or many) in the loop to assess which plugins and scripts ought to be updated as things change to account for new things, of course.
You seem to think this is exposing way more information than it really is. Only addresses of globals are involved here (and maybe their names), i.e. some stuff in symbols.xml. It would take more effort than it's worth to change DFHack's global names. Unless Toady renames globals frequently (which is unlikely because it would force him to do even more work), DFHack would just need a simple way to map DF global names to DFHack global names (assuming DF even exposes the names).
Logged
DFHack - Dwarf Manipulator (Lua) - DF Wiki talk

There was a typo in the siegers' campfire code. When the fires went out, so did the game.

PatrikLundell

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Future of the Fortress
« Reply #864 on: November 03, 2016, 05:31:54 pm »

Not changing over to the official names means trading short term convenience for longer term maintenance hassles. Sure, it's possible to produce Toady's future output for every release and perform a comparison to the DFHack XML structures or Toady's previous version to catch changes and update the DFHack XML to reflect the latest exported data, but it would make more long term sense to switch from using the current XML files to using Toady's output. You'd still need to run a comparison to catch what's changed, in particular if things scripts use are removed, and you still need a brain (or many) in the loop to assess which plugins and scripts ought to be updated as things change to account for new things, of course.
You seem to think this is exposing way more information than it really is. Only addresses of globals are involved here (and maybe their names), i.e. some stuff in symbols.xml. It would take more effort than it's worth to change DFHack's global names. Unless Toady renames globals frequently (which is unlikely because it would force him to do even more work), DFHack would just need a simple way to map DF global names to DFHack global names (assuming DF even exposes the names).
Ah, yes, if that's the case it's still useful info, but nothing to get really excited about, and my comments miss the mark completely.
Logged

Shonai_Dweller

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Future of the Fortress
« Reply #865 on: November 03, 2016, 05:41:51 pm »

Quote from: hanni79
do you have any plans to enable stills and/or kitchens to have detailed work orders, so I can make my dwarves brew/cook specific drinks or meals in the near future ?

The actual recipes we wanted to do would likely eliminate work in this direction, though I'm not sure when we'll finally tackle them now.

Thanks for your answer Toady One :)

If I only knew what it meant :D Could someone elaborate ?
At some time in the future, Dwarves will be able to learn, craft and invent all sorts of recipes in a complex system like music, these will gain in fame and value over time. This was planned for the taverns release but was cut along with games and festivals (in-game as opposed to just world-gen) because of time and that it really needed the economy implemented to be worth doing anything with.

The current system of prepared meals and drinks are a placeholder.

So Toady means, there's would have been no point in adding specific meals to a kitchens details menu as it would have been replaced by the real recipe system. Unfortunately they're off in the far future now. But adding a placeholder 'details' to kitchens and stills probably would be a waste of time and effort since the concrete details of how they should be are already known.
« Last Edit: November 03, 2016, 05:44:33 pm by Shonai_Dweller »
Logged

hanni79

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Future of the Fortress
« Reply #866 on: November 03, 2016, 06:01:55 pm »

@Shonai_Dweller:

Thanks a lot for your detailed explanation, I appreciate it a lot ! :)
Logged

Putnam

  • Bay Watcher
  • DAT WIZARD
    • View Profile
Re: Future of the Fortress
« Reply #867 on: November 03, 2016, 07:44:26 pm »

-snip-

This is basically all wrong.

Dead units are, in fact, counted as dead. They have a "dead" flag that is "true" when they die. The health screen not showing them as dead does not mean they're not actually dead.

Units have nothing to do with butchery. Items are what are being butchered. When a unit dies, it leaves behind a corpse item. Max explained exactly what's happening there but you seemed to simply ignore it and talk about something completely unrelated.

Random_Dragon

  • Bay Watcher
  • Psycho Bored Dragon
    • View Profile
Re: Future of the Fortress
« Reply #868 on: November 04, 2016, 12:21:32 am »

FantasticDorf has basically dumped a fuckton of random musing that I don't really think are at all helpful for fixing Toady's cannibalism, regression, nor most other bugs. Especially if this can be falsified by striking a human victom down verus letting them bleed out.

I've done both, your weird !!SCIENCE!! does not make my human tooth amulets return to me. ;w;

FantasticDorf

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Future of the Fortress
« Reply #869 on: November 04, 2016, 04:20:17 am »

-snip-

This is basically all wrong.

Dead units are, in fact, counted as dead. They have a "dead" flag that is "true" when they die. The health screen not showing them as dead does not mean they're not actually dead.

Units have nothing to do with butchery. Items are what are being butchered. When a unit dies, it leaves behind a corpse item. Max explained exactly what's happening there but you seemed to simply ignore it and talk about something completely unrelated.

FantasticDorf has basically dumped a fuckton of random musing that I don't really think are at all helpful for fixing Toady's cannibalism, regression, nor most other bugs. Especially if this can be falsified by striking a human victom down verus letting them bleed out.

I've done both, your weird !!SCIENCE!! does not make my human tooth amulets return to me. ;

I haven't come to argue but the finer points of the problem Putnam is that unit does not convert properly to being dead in status, when the fatal blow is dealt it premptively turns into a corpse item and is registered by the game as dead. Its status as a unit remains seperate and holds onto anything manifest of it left in the world, my point of the health system is that in confliction, everything's physical condition is limited to severe injuries leading to a death of the body, but not a literal death (death=true) of the unit ID to dispel it and release control. (under no conditions, even with poison are units 'struck down' in fortress mode where this applies', Arena mode is separate, i literally provided photographic evidence both in my response on this thread and in both bug reports)

Un-intelligent wild animals are a huntable class of creature to be hauled back by hunters and butchered and are made in precisely that way as to ignore everything else, which is why it is a dicstinction between pets not being slaughtered (despite being factional huntable creatures) and wild animals working seemingly fine but not dissapearing off the unit dead screen when butchered because of a lack of (dead=true) for its status.

If you want irrefutable proof, wait for a member of your fortress to die/arrange a death, have a medical dwarf and by accessing a friend of that dead dwarf, jump from their relationship list on Z to view the dead dwarf's screen. Moving over to the health, there are traits associated to the level of decomposition such as inability to see from rotting eyes, unable to grasp and unable to breathe. To further re-iterate that this is not a static screen, and by manipulation post-death with letting it rot & setting burial zones, the states update for both health and holdings. Thoughts do not update because it only functions in a active body.

And Randomdragon in my 'musing' i never actuallly claimed that bleeding out humans would make them usable, any death even slaughtering (full body destruction) does not properly facilitate, and thank you for proving further my method of it being a universal death feature. Its based on how you can buy objects from the caravan that are ethically controversial and use fine but appropriate to your site (human skin book on trophy ethics etc) but when the unit on the site is involved (as it has to be with butchery) it fails to work. This is not a problem with site ethics precisely, but objects made out of & produced from still belonging to the unit it was sourced from who has been destroyed but not died.

All my 'musing' is based off observation and method, and in my bug-reports i have a save on the depot here that explains with method examples which i hope to expand to greater scope. I have acknowledged Max's suggestive finding but I don't feel its as centrally relevant to the issue though it may be related.

Done what science precisely? Random_Dragon?
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 56 57 [58] 59 60 ... 211