Bay 12 Games Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4

Author Topic: How Immigration Ruins the Game  (Read 9027 times)

Salmeuk

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: How Immigration Ruins the Game
« Reply #15 on: August 27, 2016, 12:24:25 pm »

As Shonai_Dweller has said, this suggestion might make sense for the current state of the game but it would soon become irrelevant as context-based immigration is introduced. I did think this suggestion was well thought out.

Like many other things in this game, your best bet is to exhibit self-control and roleplay around the missing features. This game is not hard unless YOU make it hard. I suggest defining a series of wealth goals which correlate to an increase in maxpop in the init file. That way, you have a reason to engrave literally everythingm and build obscene amounts of high-quality goods since it's the only way to get more dwarves.

I also suggest trying to incorporate the individual bio's of every dwarf into your assignment of labors. You might find it kind of refreshing to have a more democratic fortress where dwarves self-elect into positions they personally think would be a best fit. You can base their preferences off of a favorite material, a personality trait, or even their intellectual abilities. And by refreshing I mean obscenely difficult, like "everyone wants to be a carpenter but I've embarked in a desert."
Logged

Celebrim42

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: How Immigration Ruins the Game
« Reply #16 on: August 27, 2016, 12:54:37 pm »

As Shonai_Dweller has said, this suggestion might make sense for the current state of the game but it would soon become irrelevant as context-based immigration is introduced.

I'm a little mystified to keep seeing this sort of thing as a response, because much of my suggestion is intended to make immigration seem more realistic to the context.  If context based immigration is implemented, it would have work much like this.

There are of course other contexts that are possible than economic migrants and migrants that are refugees from disasters.  Yes, presumably a Duke could order you to house a dozen dangerous prisoners, and some sort of 'prisoner transfer' immigration could occur.  However, while that's possible it doesn't do anything obvious to enhance gameplay, and to make it enhance gameplay would require massive overhaul of far more subsystems than merely immigration - cages would have to be less absolute, the loyalty system would need revamping, NPCs would have to be able to engage in their own goal directed sapping/tunneling behavior, the behavior of stone when tunneled therefore might need to change, you'd need much better fog of war so that things could take place outside your omnipresent observation and so forth.   And many of those changes would have major impact on gameplay elsewhere which wouldn't necessarily be positive, so you'd have to be asking, "Why am I making any effort at all implementing penal colonies when not only do lots of things not work already, but if I implemented them fewer things would work." 

So when someone answers, "These changes you suggest aren't needed [because magic is going to happen and then somehow immigration is going to work].", I frankly don't think they've ever designed a game in their life.   Moreover, I don't think even they know what they mean by 'contextual immigration'.   I did actually take the time to read through the development notes before posting suggestions, and they certainly aren't clear about what immigration is intended to be like.

There are no ways to get the whole system to be simulated from first principles.   You aren't going to be able to check each of the 100,000 entities in the game world to see if they want to immigrate, and if you tried to do those sort of first principles, you'd almost certainly screw it up - like trying to simulate an economy from first principles you'd never have enough realism to make it work.   Any attempt at fixing immigration is going to have to rely on some sort of abstraction informed by desired gameplay.
Logged

GoblinCookie

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: How Immigration Ruins the Game
« Reply #17 on: August 27, 2016, 03:17:36 pm »

I'm a little mystified to keep seeing this sort of thing as a response, because much of my suggestion is intended to make immigration seem more realistic to the context.  If context based immigration is implemented, it would have work much like this.

There are of course other contexts that are possible than economic migrants and migrants that are refugees from disasters.  Yes, presumably a Duke could order you to house a dozen dangerous prisoners, and some sort of 'prisoner transfer' immigration could occur.  However, while that's possible it doesn't do anything obvious to enhance gameplay, and to make it enhance gameplay would require massive overhaul of far more subsystems than merely immigration - cages would have to be less absolute, the loyalty system would need revamping, NPCs would have to be able to engage in their own goal directed sapping/tunneling behavior, the behavior of stone when tunneled therefore might need to change, you'd need much better fog of war so that things could take place outside your omnipresent observation and so forth.   And many of those changes would have major impact on gameplay elsewhere which wouldn't necessarily be positive, so you'd have to be asking, "Why am I making any effort at all implementing penal colonies when not only do lots of things not work already, but if I implemented them fewer things would work." 

So when someone answers, "These changes you suggest aren't needed [because magic is going to happen and then somehow immigration is going to work].", I frankly don't think they've ever designed a game in their life.   Moreover, I don't think even they know what they mean by 'contextual immigration'.   I did actually take the time to read through the development notes before posting suggestions, and they certainly aren't clear about what immigration is intended to be like.

There are no ways to get the whole system to be simulated from first principles.   You aren't going to be able to check each of the 100,000 entities in the game world to see if they want to immigrate, and if you tried to do those sort of first principles, you'd almost certainly screw it up - like trying to simulate an economy from first principles you'd never have enough realism to make it work.   Any attempt at fixing immigration is going to have to rely on some sort of abstraction informed by desired gameplay.

No your suggestion does not regard the context at all, it applies the logic of an entirely alien context that either cannot exist at present or would not exist under most circumstances.  You make heavy use of real-world analogies but then you reference multiple historical eras at the same time as though immigration was somehow timeless.  The only real problem with immigration at the moment is that it provides an endless supply of bodies that are willing to throw away their lives for the player's incompetent or malevolent goals.  The only factor that immigrants take into account is how much wealth you have produced, that as a simplistic mechanic makes complete sense but there should be some accounting for the degree to which your fortress is a death-trap and there should also be emigration as well, people who continually get neglected/abused by the fortress government should eventually leave the fortress.  Once those two factors are in then immigration will completely and totally WORK for the present context since it is the lack of regard for security and inability to emigrate that makes it not work. 

The key detail about context is the upcoming starting scenarios.  It is no longer intended to be the case that our fortresses be necessarily generic in function as they are at the moment, fortresses are intended to potentially have a specific specialist function.  Based upon that function we can surmise that the immigrants we will be getting will be different so as to allow us to carry out that specialist function rather than being sidetracked into lots of different things.  If your fortress is a prison, the duke in your scenario should always send the dangerous prisoners your way and other non-prison sites present inmates should also send their existing prisoners to you as well.  However if there is no prison then if there is a sudden influx of prisoners such as if your civilization wins a major battle other non-prison sites will get handed the prisoners fairly equally but if the civilization has a prison site then all the prisoners will end up there instead. 

Any suggestions about immigration must be based around the starting scenario of your fortress and the general situation.  People of a given type should be drawn to a given type of site, indeed they must for the starting scenario system to work and make sense.  Combined with emigration we could see an exodus from generic sites or sites with the wrong starting scenario of a certain type of dwarf, so that the generic sites will tend to specialize over time based upon the circumstances but civilizations that are small will tend to have only generic sites that try to do everything.  The buildup of citizens of a given type in generic sites or sites with a starting scenario could act as a trigger leading to the creation of new sites using that scenario or the conversion of other sites to that scenario.  In that way political and economic circumstances in the wider world will not only effect your emigration/immigration patterns but will actually dictate what starting scenarios your fortress is allowed to adopt, while that starting scenario will determine what kind of immigrants you attract. 
Logged

Shonai_Dweller

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: How Immigration Ruins the Game
« Reply #18 on: August 28, 2016, 06:25:35 pm »

Your suggestion is based on what you perceive to be realistic society, law and economics for the world the game presents you with.

However, when implemented, just like the creation of the universe, laws and societies and (possibly) economic systems will be unique for each world (and each society in each world). They'll also be customisable.

Which is why your suggestion is kind of limited right now since nobody really knows how any of that will work. Migrants will act (hopefully vaguely realistically) according to the social, legal and economic pressures placed on them and will turn up at your site depending on what your site's role in your civilization is supposed/perceived to be.

Lots of people suggest without taking into account the bigger picture, which is fine I guess, all ideas are useful, but people probably wouldn't be jumping on this thread if it weren't so "the simulation is broken!!" focussed.

The simulation isn't complete. Migrants (amongst many other things) are leftovers from a 2D game about a fortress in a static world. The "short term" plans include implementing procedurally generated society, laws and economics.

How to get that all working to create both unique and mod-friendly worlds probably needs a lot of good suggestions.


-- edit, I appreciate of course, that Toady's words are scattered all over the internet and it can be pretty difficult to keep track of what's been said recently in interviews, panel discussions, future of the fortress replies and various other places. Just going by the development notes isn't quite enough. Although my suggestion to put together a Toady knowledge base seems to have dropped off the front page...
« Last Edit: August 29, 2016, 04:09:51 am by Shonai_Dweller »
Logged

Celebrim42

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: How Immigration Ruins the Game
« Reply #19 on: August 29, 2016, 09:22:04 pm »

Your suggestion is based on what you perceive to be realistic society, law and economics for the world the game presents you with.

Yes. 

Quote
However, when implemented, just like the creation of the universe, laws and societies and (possibly) economic systems will be unique for each world (and each society in each world). They'll also be customizable.

Look, I hate to break this to you but economic systems tend to be grounded in the physics of a universe, and if you changed the physics of the universe radically it would no longer have anything recognizable in it.  Laws likewise are based on basic biology, which in turn is grounded in the same sort of hard realities as economic systems are because they are both based on scarcity.  So while I can easily imagine creating an engine that diversifies minor points of ethics and traits and tendencies of a race, creating diverse gameplay and religion, when it comes to something as basic as immigration, the fundamentals here are going to be fairly similar - whether or not my race does slave trading or kidnaps the children of other races or is matriarchal or whatever because my civilizations god said, "Thou Shalt" or "Thou Shalt Not".  Things like that might create additional subsystems that you could turn on or off to create different scenarios, but they will fundamentally just be subsystems - whether or not caravans show up with sentient races in cages to be enslaved, for example.  Whether they do or not has nothing to do with economic migration.

None of those objections about me not actually seeing the big picture here are actually pertinent.   The fact that economic migration might be turned off by a flag in event of a strict prison scenario isn't actually an objection to a discussion of the basics of economic migration or refugees (which are more like 'emergency economic migrants').   In fact, what they strike me as is objections by people who themselves couldn't and can't explain the big picture, but who are bristling at perceived criticism.

Quote
Which is why your suggestion is kind of limited right now since nobody really knows how any of that will work.

Well, at least you are honest there.  And while we are at it, lets add Toady to that list of people that doesn't really know how any of that will work.   How do we know?  Because this game has as more subsystems that are broken now than work.  This is a game defined by its bugs, where the bugs are an integral part of what has created the gameplay in the past.  And I'm not just talking about the abandoned ill-thought out economic system, but core pillars of the game play like the Happiness/Stress system are broken in the 2014 release I'm playing.  Right now, it's so easy to make dwarves happy that the pillar of the gameplay might as well not exist.  And even a cursory examination of the mechanics indicates that in their basic structure they could never been tweaked to work, and it will always produce absurd results.  The whole system will need to be ripped out.  And that's not because the replacement system is fundamentally more complex, but simply because the current system is wrong.  That's because Toady is clearly learning as he goes like well... just about anyone would be.  No doubt if I was doing it, I'd go down even more dead ends and wrong paths. 

But yes, at least you are honest in admitting that sense you have no idea how any of this other stuff will work, you have no basis for claiming whether or not my suggestions would work with that stuff that doesn't exist yet.  It's fundamentally absurd to claim my stuff is invalidated by stuff whose content you don't even know, and whose specifications are still being worked out by the designer.  In the mean time... 

Quote
Migrants will act (hopefully vaguely realistically) according to the social, legal and economic pressures placed on them and will turn up at your site depending on what your site's role in your civilization is supposed/perceived to be.

Yes.  And presumably that role that could morph depending on your relationship to the civilization.  You might start out as a fort tasked to defend a trade route against goblin incursions, and such with certain constraints about that role - civilians aren't going to show up to be long term residents of a military installation, and replacements are going to depend on your relationship to the local military governor.  Fine, I get all that, but whatever your current role, once your site becomes perceived as a colony or settlement, it will begin to be subject to economic migration and be more attractive to refugees - and both those subsystems will have to work.  I suppose thinking about it we could add more factors (like a colony reputation system based on my colonies relationship to civilization ethics, am I known as a 'den of inquity' or a 'wretched hive of scum and villainy' or as a great place to raise a family), but they would be additional factors to that basic description I just made, with fairly small and obvious modifications of the default behavior.

Quote
Lots of people suggest without taking into account the bigger picture, which is fine I guess, all ideas are useful, but people probably wouldn't be jumping on this thread if it weren't so "the simulation is broken!!"

Well the simulation is broken.  I imagine no one is more painfully aware of that than Toady.  Why is it some sort of taboo to notice how broken the game is in a suggestion forum?
« Last Edit: August 29, 2016, 11:28:51 pm by Celebrim42 »
Logged

Deboche

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: How Immigration Ruins the Game
« Reply #20 on: August 30, 2016, 05:42:02 am »

Laws likewise are based on basic biology
Not really. There have been thousands of different societies, law systems and economic systems throughout history. We don't really know how it will turn out in the end or how much we'll be able to mess with it but the current economic and social system in DF isn't unrealistic.

There is no currency, no private property(in the sense of rents), no economic hierarchy, feudal hierarchy with very limited authority, crime is handled ad-hoc(or at least the crimes are so ridiculous and the legal system so pointless you're better off without it) and there's no poverty. If you take away the ruling deity(the player) it's not that different from certain societies that have existed.

A little tweak in how much power nobles wield, implementing money, implementing religion and a number of different things would result in a completely different society.
« Last Edit: August 30, 2016, 05:50:20 am by Deboche »
Logged

GoblinCookie

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: How Immigration Ruins the Game
« Reply #21 on: August 31, 2016, 11:44:41 am »

Look, I hate to break this to you but economic systems tend to be grounded in the physics of a universe, and if you changed the physics of the universe radically it would no longer have anything recognizable in it.  Laws likewise are based on basic biology, which in turn is grounded in the same sort of hard realities as economic systems are because they are both based on scarcity.  So while I can easily imagine creating an engine that diversifies minor points of ethics and traits and tendencies of a race, creating diverse gameplay and religion, when it comes to something as basic as immigration, the fundamentals here are going to be fairly similar - whether or not my race does slave trading or kidnaps the children of other races or is matriarchal or whatever because my civilizations god said, "Thou Shalt" or "Thou Shalt Not".  Things like that might create additional subsystems that you could turn on or off to create different scenarios, but they will fundamentally just be subsystems - whether or not caravans show up with sentient races in cages to be enslaved, for example.  Whether they do or not has nothing to do with economic migration.

None of those objections about me not actually seeing the big picture here are actually pertinent.   The fact that economic migration might be turned off by a flag in event of a strict prison scenario isn't actually an objection to a discussion of the basics of economic migration or refugees (which are more like 'emergency economic migrants').   In fact, what they strike me as is objections by people who themselves couldn't and can't explain the big picture, but who are bristling at perceived criticism.

Scarcity is quite simply a lie; what is more not only is scarcity a lie but it always has been, even in the world of nature prior to humans ever existing.  What economics and biology are both based upon is economic surplus or in a market situation surplus value.  This means the amount of stuff a worker (or creature) produces above the amount that the worker themselves consumes, this means that if a fisherman produces 10 fishes but eats only 5 of them we have a surplus value of 5 fish.  What happens to the 5 fish the fisherman produces on top of what he himself eats, that is ab economic question but at core is a political question, so economics is but the smoke rising from the political fire. 

What happens if there is actually scarcity in a world?  All life becomes impossible in that world, this is because in order for a population to survive long-term it must produce a surplus value sufficient to feed a number of children equal to it's own numbers until they can themselves produce sufficient value to sustain themselves.  A world where there is scarcity is a world where it is not possible for any children to be born to said creatures so in the end the whole population dies out.  Not of starvation but simply of old age since they were unable to get enough food to feed any children to replace them.

Well, at least you are honest there.  And while we are at it, lets add Toady to that list of people that doesn't really know how any of that will work.   How do we know?  Because this game has as more subsystems that are broken now than work.  This is a game defined by its bugs, where the bugs are an integral part of what has created the gameplay in the past.  And I'm not just talking about the abandoned ill-thought out economic system, but core pillars of the game play like the Happiness/Stress system are broken in the 2014 release I'm playing.  Right now, it's so easy to make dwarves happy that the pillar of the gameplay might as well not exist.  And even a cursory examination of the mechanics indicates that in their basic structure they could never been tweaked to work, and it will always produce absurd results.  The whole system will need to be ripped out.  And that's not because the replacement system is fundamentally more complex, but simply because the current system is wrong.  That's because Toady is clearly learning as he goes like well... just about anyone would be.  No doubt if I was doing it, I'd go down even more dead ends and wrong paths. 

But yes, at least you are honest in admitting that sense you have no idea how any of this other stuff will work, you have no basis for claiming whether or not my suggestions would work with that stuff that doesn't exist yet.  It's fundamentally absurd to claim my stuff is invalidated by stuff whose content you don't even know, and whose specifications are still being worked out by the designer.  In the mean time... 

I take it you are willing to volunteer all the time needed to rip everything out and replace everything from scratch?  Basically find yourself another game to play Celebrim42. 

Yes.  And presumably that role that could morph depending on your relationship to the civilization.  You might start out as a fort tasked to defend a trade route against goblin incursions, and such with certain constraints about that role - civilians aren't going to show up to be long term residents of a military installation, and replacements are going to depend on your relationship to the local military governor.  Fine, I get all that, but whatever your current role, once your site becomes perceived as a colony or settlement, it will begin to be subject to economic migration and be more attractive to refugees - and both those subsystems will have to work.  I suppose thinking about it we could add more factors (like a colony reputation system based on my colonies relationship to civilization ethics, am I known as a 'den of inquity' or a 'wretched hive of scum and villainy' or as a great place to raise a family), but they would be additional factors to that basic description I just made, with fairly small and obvious modifications of the default behavior.

You seem there is some kind of migration *other* than economic migration; there is not.  If soldiers or prisoners are sent to your fortress they come because you have the economic means to support them.

Well the simulation is broken.  I imagine no one is more painfully aware of that than Toady.  Why is it some sort of taboo to notice how broken the game is in a suggestion forum?

The simulation is incomplete, not broken.
Logged

Appelgren

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: How Immigration Ruins the Game
« Reply #22 on: September 04, 2016, 01:06:18 pm »

I think Celebrim42 puts his or her finger on a real flaw in DFs current gameplay and has some interesting ideas on how to fix it. That the starting scenarios update is going to change how immigration works makes this sort of analysis more useful -not less. I sort of wish discussion centered around how to solve the problems OP points out, rather than which models of immigration are the most realistic.
Logged

Deboche

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: How Immigration Ruins the Game
« Reply #23 on: September 05, 2016, 06:15:51 am »

I think Celebrim42 puts his or her finger on a real flaw in DFs current gameplay and has some interesting ideas on how to fix it. That the starting scenarios update is going to change how immigration works makes this sort of analysis more useful -not less. I sort of wish discussion centered around how to solve the problems OP points out, rather than which models of immigration are the most realistic.
Some of his ideas don't make sense, others were discussed. Why not discuss them yourself instead of pointing out that others should?
Logged

GoblinCookie

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: How Immigration Ruins the Game
« Reply #24 on: September 05, 2016, 03:08:57 pm »

I think Celebrim42 puts his or her finger on a real flaw in DFs current gameplay and has some interesting ideas on how to fix it. That the starting scenarios update is going to change how immigration works makes this sort of analysis more useful -not less. I sort of wish discussion centered around how to solve the problems OP points out, rather than which models of immigration are the most realistic.

Most of the OPs problems are not problems at all.
Logged

lightstar

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: How Immigration Ruins the Game
« Reply #25 on: September 12, 2016, 04:18:47 am »

I think Celebrim42 puts his or her finger on a real flaw in DFs current gameplay and has some interesting ideas on how to fix it. That the starting scenarios update is going to change how immigration works makes this sort of analysis more useful -not less. I sort of wish discussion centered around how to solve the problems OP points out, rather than which models of immigration are the most realistic.

Most of the OPs problems are not problems at all.

Handwaving away problems is not going to make them disappear. I agree that putting constraints on immigrations will help make gaming more goal-oriented.

In general, a lot of systems in this game have been implemented in a broken fashion. For example, as a player, it is much more meaningful to have three different kinds of wood (light, medium, heavy) and a meaningful role for each, compared to having hundreds of different kinds of wood trees.

This is not meant as criticism, which like the OP's post, people seem to have taken offense to. It is meant to discuss regarding the direction new development can take.

In this context, scenarios development seems like a good place to make immigration more meaningful to the player.
Logged

Deboche

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: How Immigration Ruins the Game
« Reply #26 on: September 12, 2016, 06:16:58 am »

Handwaving away problems is not going to make them disappear. I agree that putting constraints on immigrations will help make gaming more goal-oriented.

It is meant to discuss regarding the direction new development can take.
I don't think people did that. The OP started a discussion about the current system of immigration specifically, not a suggestion about an ideal system. Should the game remain essentially as it is, some of his suggestions, however gamey, might make sense. But as was said, it's pointless to address it in that way right now because we know significant changes are coming which would make OP's suggestions useless and ultimately a waste of time.

We can discuss immigration and the role it should take in a future version of Dwarf Fortress but I wouldn't even know where to begin. I have no idea what the game will look like years from now, especially when hill dwarves are implemented.
Logged

GoblinCookie

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: How Immigration Ruins the Game
« Reply #27 on: September 12, 2016, 01:49:29 pm »

Handwaving away problems is not going to make them disappear. I agree that putting constraints on immigrations will help make gaming more goal-oriented.

In general, a lot of systems in this game have been implemented in a broken fashion. For example, as a player, it is much more meaningful to have three different kinds of wood (light, medium, heavy) and a meaningful role for each, compared to having hundreds of different kinds of wood trees.

This is not meant as criticism, which like the OP's post, people seem to have taken offense to. It is meant to discuss regarding the direction new development can take.

In this context, scenarios development seems like a good place to make immigration more meaningful to the player.

There are very few serious problems with the present system under present game-world conditions. 
Logged

Putnam

  • Bay Watcher
  • DAT WIZARD
    • View Profile
Re: How Immigration Ruins the Game
« Reply #28 on: September 12, 2016, 10:05:41 pm »

Handwaving away problems is not going to make them disappear. I agree that putting constraints on immigrations will help make gaming more goal-oriented.

In general, a lot of systems in this game have been implemented in a broken fashion. For example, as a player, it is much more meaningful to have three different kinds of wood (light, medium, heavy) and a meaningful role for each, compared to having hundreds of different kinds of wood trees.

This is not meant as criticism, which like the OP's post, people seem to have taken offense to. It is meant to discuss regarding the direction new development can take.

In this context, scenarios development seems like a good place to make immigration more meaningful to the player.

I don't like the direction implied by "three different kinds of wood". It requires a complete and total misunderstanding of what Dwarf Fortress actually is.

Celebrim42

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: How Immigration Ruins the Game
« Reply #29 on: September 13, 2016, 08:41:36 pm »

There are very few serious problems with the present system under present game-world conditions.

There are more things that are broken to the point of being fatally flawed than there are things that actually work.   The gameplay as it exists is more defined by the emergent properties of its bugs, broken systems, and inattention to detail than it is by its design.  Like for example, its the only game I know of where experienced players have to steer their gameplay away from activities that would break the game engine, and yet whose design is built around those very activities.   It's the only game I know where there are more abandoned subsystems - happiness, economy, contaminants, etc. - than there are working subsystems.  It's the only game I know that lavishes more attention on things that have no functional impact on the game than it does on the actual pillars of its gameplay.  It's kind of interesting in the same way that a messenger RNA mutates until it reaches the limits of where it can still fulfill its function as a molecule, but never any further, and thus is defined by its accumulated baggage.  But as a game system, right now things are a brilliant train wreck. 

Brilliant enough I sent him money to continue his dream, but a train wreck nonetheless.

Maybe he'll be able to use that money to produce a game that doesn't crash every three hours or so.

Seriously, I enjoyed playing this game but how is it possible that anyone could actually have played this game and came away with the idea that it works, that it has ever worked, or that it ever will 'work' - least of all if they have an actual degree in Computer Science and game design credentials.   This in the industry is called a 'Fantasy Heartbreaker', and like all fantasy heartbreakers it is a thing of aching stunning beauty and a source of inspiration, and a terrible tragedy at the same time.  This did not start as any attempt to put down DF but as a heartfelt and honest suggestion to improve one area, but since you have insisted on throwing your chips down on the idea that this game is without flaw and criticism is inappropriate - I call.
« Last Edit: September 13, 2016, 08:43:12 pm by Celebrim42 »
Logged
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4