@Starver, you may like Windows XP but for developers, it is very annoying to continue to support old systems and WinXP is officially dead. I perfectly understand the decision from Qt devs to drop support for WinXP and you must understand that if DT works on WinXP, it is accidental, and if an improvement requires a syscall not available on WinXP, I will still use it. If you like old operating system, at one point, you will have to use old applications (old Qt and old DT).
@jecowa You should read
this issue (there are instructions to follow at the end) and
this pull request. If there is anything you don't understand please comment (on github or here if you don't have a github account) so the instructions can be improved.
@Fleeting Frames Current DT icons use a very light and desaturated colors, I tried to make them more saturated with medium brightness, but, as people commented, there is not enough contrast (the border is too thin). I may get better results if I try to also modify the white in the center instead of just applying color filters to the whole image in gimp. I tried redrawing them in Inkscape using unicode characters, but it is hard to get sharp borders with a 16x16 icon. I may need to redraw the symbols so they align properly on the pixel grid.
Edit: I found this post about sexual orientation from someone of authority.
Can you confirm what the numbers in the ORIENTATION token mean? Research tells me they're probably female_chance:bisexual_chance:male_chance, but I could be wrong (especially in the middle).
It's a by-caste tag, so you'd use it twice for each caste if you want to set all the numbers. <male/female>:<disinterested chance>:<lover-possible chance>:<commitment-possible chance> It uses the chances to put an individual critter into any of the 9 possible configurations. Defaults are, if I remember, 75:20:5 for the same gender, and 5:20:75 for the opposite. That leads to a 3x3 grid, with numbers in it. I'm not invested in the current ones if there are better ideas, but it's probably not all that easy to make a good selection when the categorization is ad hoc anyway. I would have used caste instead of gender to allow more interesting outcomes for many-casted critters, but the optimizations would be a nightmare (already had to jump from 2 to 6 relationship pools...). Of course, all relationships are still eternal, so the lover thing is kind of broken now (sometimes it won't advance beyond lover because one of the parties is not interested in committing, but still neither ever breaks it off, ever... not unrealistic in individual cases, but strange overall).
Oddly enough, we thought retired adventurers would start forming relationships with 0.40.01+, so we wanted to have a better spectrum available, but then we didn't get around to the gen/pre-retirement specification menu, so all adventurers are still tagged with the special "undetermined" flag...
If Toady describe sexual orientation as a pair of tri-state (disinterested/lover-possible/commitment-possible) values, I think I should do the same. I checked with dfhack on a fortress, and I did not see anyone with both lover+commitment flags for the same target sex. I may not be enough checking, but that hints toward two-bit values (00, 01, 10) instead of independent flags as current DT and DFHack see it.
Author
Topic: Dwarf Therapist v42.1.5 | DF 50.12 (Read 397809 times)