Bay 12 Games Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  
Pages: 1 ... 140 141 [142] 143 144 ... 162

Author Topic: Future of the Fortress  (Read 434051 times)

FantasticDorf

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Future of the Fortress
« Reply #2115 on: May 28, 2019, 05:21:12 am »

I did contemplate whether to just ask you to link your suggestion thread on the topic implicitly Shonai somewhere without drawing a lot of attention to it as its pretty much interlinked, we'll know what Toady thinks when he returns with replies to our questions eitherway.
Logged

Moonshadow101

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Future of the Fortress
« Reply #2116 on: May 29, 2019, 12:38:21 pm »

In the most recent front page update, you said that a Dwarven Civ can breach the underworld and be overtaken. At this point, a new civilization is formed.

Is this new demon-ruled Dwarven civ playable?
Logged

Shonai_Dweller

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Future of the Fortress
« Reply #2117 on: May 29, 2019, 04:29:53 pm »

In the most recent front page update, you said that a Dwarven Civ can breach the underworld and be overtaken. At this point, a new civilization is formed.

Is this new demon-ruled Dwarven civ playable?
It's a demon and goblin civ. The dwarves are dead. So almost certainly not.
Logged

PlumpHelmetMan

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Future of the Fortress
« Reply #2118 on: May 29, 2019, 10:47:19 pm »

I mean I could see a few dwarves escaping or being enslaved, but it still doesn't strike me as a playable situation.
Logged
It's actually pretty terrifying to think about having all of your fat melt off into grease because you started sweating too much.

Shonai_Dweller

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Future of the Fortress
« Reply #2119 on: May 29, 2019, 11:12:52 pm »

I mean I could see a few dwarves escaping or being enslaved, but it still doesn't strike me as a playable situation.
One plucky lad with an adamantine wafer tucked in his sock escapes. The epic tale starts here.
Logged

PatrikLundell

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Future of the Fortress
« Reply #2120 on: May 30, 2019, 03:52:55 am »

I mean I could see a few dwarves escaping or being enslaved, but it still doesn't strike me as a playable situation.
One plucky lad with an adamantine wafer tucked in his sock escapes. The epic tale starts here.
If the plucky lad escapes, it implies to me that he's a refugee from the destroyed ("struggling"?) civ, not the replacement one. Goblin civs assimilating conquered dorfs (and elves, and humies...) are still goblin civs, regardless of the race of individual members, or even the majority/all of the members (and a dwarven civ that has no dorfs, but only members of other races is still a dwarven civ, made embarkable only by the power of the void [dwarves]).
Logged

bieux

  • Escaped Lunatic
    • View Profile
Re: Future of the Fortress
« Reply #2121 on: May 30, 2019, 05:12:29 am »

Considering you mentioned alliances in the second most recent devlog, is adding more diplomatic options and interactions to fort mode something planned for this release?
Logged

PatrikLundell

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Future of the Fortress
« Reply #2122 on: May 30, 2019, 07:51:37 am »

Considering you mentioned alliances in the second most recent devlog, is adding more diplomatic options and interactions to fort mode something planned for this release?
A complication when it comes to diplomacy is that it mostly happens on the civ level, not the site one (the elven tree quota demands is an exception to this), and as far as I know a Fortress doesn't act as the head of a civ even when it's the Mountainhome with a monarch. This is something that will have to be addressed eventually, but I'd expect the bulk of it to wait until the Law & Customs arc where significant parts of the associated framework probably would have to be modified quite significantly. I'm interested in Toady's response regarding the short term, of course.
Logged

Eschar

  • Bay Watcher
  • Foo, bar, quux, baz...
    • View Profile
Re: Future of the Fortress
« Reply #2123 on: May 30, 2019, 11:29:19 am »

You noted on usesthis that you listen to music constantly; do you listen to music while programming DF and if so, what kind?
Logged
"Continue struggling, laws of physics be darned."
 - NRDL
"What, are you stupid or something? Every one of the snake's bones is crushed! Its internal organs are torn apart! There is no way you can - (6) You resuscitate the snake."
- Gatleos

FantasticDorf

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Future of the Fortress
« Reply #2124 on: May 30, 2019, 11:32:42 am »

Considering you mentioned alliances in the second most recent devlog, is adding more diplomatic options and interactions to fort mode something planned for this release?
A complication when it comes to diplomacy is that it mostly happens on the civ level, not the site one (the elven tree quota demands is an exception to this), and as far as I know a Fortress doesn't act as the head of a civ even when it's the Mountainhome with a monarch. This is something that will have to be addressed eventually, but I'd expect the bulk of it to wait until the Law & Customs arc where significant parts of the associated framework probably would have to be modified quite significantly. I'm interested in Toady's response regarding the short term, of course.

I think i went over asking a similar question earlier in the thread, you won't get a diplomat to use who might be capable of making things happen until very late in the game anyway when the Monarch has arrived. Its like the General turning up, and demanding control and access to all of the army controllers and where they go from them, the Fortress mode doesn't have the authority/features to do that right now.
Logged

EternalCaveDragon

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Future of the Fortress
« Reply #2125 on: May 31, 2019, 08:08:21 pm »

To add another question to the mix at almost the last minute. Do the new organized religions interact with megabeast worship at all? I'm not sure if it's really that different since it isn't now other than megabeast worship being prompted by a megabeast attack (or two) and deity/force worship exists from the beginning of world generation. The megabeasts are simply listed as another deity when creating a temple to my knowledge. So are megabeasts that become objects of worship treated the same as regular gods and goddesses in this regard?
Logged

Toady One

  • The Great
    • View Profile
    • http://www.bay12games.com
Re: Future of the Fortress
« Reply #2126 on: June 01, 2019, 01:05:29 am »

Quote from: FantasticDorf
Do you think more investment into active diplomacy would break the cycles of DF that any small hitch in the working relationships of your fortress and outside civs eventually leads to a conflict without resolution?

To kind of add, gifting artifacts to my knowledge is meant to smooth things over as are demanding them but usually there's only really a few out of probably many (when you have a set of 10 therabouts) that other civs actually covet. Once you start a war often by accident of bugs without meaning to strain your relationship the only REAL resolution is to prepare to kill the entire population of the enemy which is often unfeasable.

Im aware of it being a abstact concept, but do you have any kind of view on making DF's war & politics more 'game' like for accessibility-(concepts like 'War Score' for instance to determine after how many raids, battles and razings the war's direction is going to pressure diplomatic action like surrender and peace) -or will the game always have other civs or 'actors' as it were in the abstract?

The breakdown and very scatty diplomacy breaks many wars this way, which are status quo because the relevant people are offsite or dead already and they won't quit, i think i had a near extinct human civ once battle a large elf nation for 200 years because they retreated (or bandits did) into the caves where they wouldn't be found once, that was a wierd world save (I've lost it now anyway).

Sure, more work would make it better.  It doesn't give you nearly enough information or provide you with nearly enough tools to manage your affairs in a more peaceful fashion.

Quote from: Egan_BW
Given that you're having music made for the steam version, does that mean that we shouldn't expect you to ever record more songs for the vanilla version?

Shonai_Dweller: http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=169696.msg7964315#msg7964315

Well, it hasn't happened for the last X years, so I think having an expectation now would be a bit much, but I have no idea.  It's hard to find long chunks of time.

Quote from: FantasticDorf
Its odd and im sure someone can pick up a similar question asked previously, would you ever support DLC for the steam version collaboratively as a 'add on' or 'technical polishing' of a mod?

To provide a example, a popular mod like Masterwork utilises elements of the game through DFhack to incur the desired effect by reusing game assets or mechanics exploitatively on script command (teleportation etc), if you were to code over these, it would constitute besides what assets the mod creator can bring themselves like sprites to creating a premium package.

I'm not sure I understand.  I don't know what 'code over' means here.  Like when we improved the job priority stuff, which aligned (as I understand it) with some of what workflow was doing?  I dunno what that has to do with DLC.

Quote from: PatrikLundell
Regarding the latest dev log: It's an interesting "preview" of sphere influence logic to allow necro towers to change the evilness of their surroundings. Are you planning any counters to this (e.g. razing or conquering a necro tower causing the evilness to dissipate and the world tiles to gradually return to their base state) to avoid a gradual decay of the world into complete evilness as necro towers are created and stomped out?

We haven't done anything, but the problem is apparent of course, and we were hoping at some point to add a reversion mechanic.  It's not currently a huge problem, since the process is pretty slow, so it may or may not happen before the general scrapping that comes with the magic stuff.

Quote from: Shonai_Dweller
I assume not, but just in case, will we be able to experience the creeping evil biome in fortress mode if we embark on the edge of the evil and leave the tower alone for years?

Opening the map and discovering you're now the one good square in a sea of evilness is kind of fun too, I guess...

Yeah, I don't predict you'll see any local map changes if you come before the evil does.  It's a bit to code, with the magic stuff looming on the horizon.

Quote
Quote from: ZM5
Regarding the newest devlog's mention of regions slowly becoming evil due to necromancer influence, will that be a hardcoded thing linked to towers or will that be more linked towards the caster type itself, so that modders could make the region become good over time instead
Quote from: Shonai_Dweller
Could necromancer evil-biome spread be moddable at all for those with custom secrets mods and so on (spread of savagery, different site type spreads evil, etc)? Or has it been made in a way very specific to Necromancers and Tower sites?

Shonai_Dweller: http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=169696.msg7967234#msg7967234
PatrikLundell: http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=169696.msg7975438#msg7975438
Shonai_Dweller: http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=169696.msg7975443#msg7975443

I didn't set up any kind of framework for it, as there's just nothing comparable going on in world gen AI and I'm not sure what I'll need yet for the real deal later.  I guess it could be linked to good zombies or something, but they don't use other sorts of interactions as I recollect.

Quote from: voliol
Intelligent zombie lieutenants (with historical backgrounds!) are an exciting addition. Are they an automatic consequence of any corpse-raising interaction, or are they being restricted to the vanilla necromancers until the big magic rework? If they aren't restricted, is there a way to control the kind of names they are assigned depending on the interaction?

They use the existing resurrection effect that was used for mummies previously.  The names work exactly as with the necromancers and mummies and vampires - they are just a string that can be typed into the raws, or, for the vanilla stuff, is generated at the beginning of world gen for each interaction.  I didn't really end up adding anything new at all, though perhaps there are tweaks that'll need to be made during testing in post w.g. to get the resurrections to work there.  We had wanted to add a placeholder more-costly ritual to stop it from being used too freely, but right now, it's just a separate power of the necromancer that is as easy to use as regular corpse raising, which is kinda deeply silly, but that's okay for the moment.

Quote from: FantasticDorf
Since the abilities of a necromancer become the abilities of the player generally when they become a necromancer themselves, will we be able to raise our companions and important NPC's as intelligent zombies if they die?

A comparison i guess can be drawn from is the 'RPG Arcanum: Of Steamworks and Magic' where a specific skill branch of magic could allow you to speak to dead characters (killed by yourself or others) with lots of custom NPC lines arranged for that occasion. I wonder if revived zombies will be more talkative with you in death than they were life about sensitive subjects.

Yeah, the raising power should work if the body of the companion is fit for resurrection.  It applies a standard mummy-like syndrome that makes them more resilient in many ways so they shouldn't (usually) die again immediately.

Their personalities remain unchanged currently.  Some people in world gen don't retain their personalities (mostly for mem reasons), but your companions should be more or less intact.

Quote from: Hapchazzard
1. Will creatures with a very high intrigue/divination abilities be biased towards responding to threats from the player's party more rapidly compared to AI entities, at least to a small degree, for plot purposes?

2. Will characters with a vendetta against a villain be able to offer to join your party if they find out you're directly fighting said villain?

3. Will villains be able to send agents to try and infiltrate the player's party itself, for example by pretending to be a bereaved party seeking revenge (like in 2.)

4. Similar to 3, will villains be able to try and sow discord within an entity by pitting important members against each other through false evidence and slander, up to and including the player's party?

5. Will agents of villains be able to stalk the party, interrogate people that the party has talked to for info, etc.

6. Will 'disposable pawns' be a thing for sufficiently ruthless villains? e.g. tying up loose ends by killing low-level members that have fulfilled their purpose if they know too much, setting up low-level members to take the fall for a crime, etc.

7. Will the villains do petty, not-entirely-rational villainous actions if they're particularly vicious, arbitrary and it aligns with their personality in general? By this, I mean things like:
a) Killing subordinates for minor or imagined slights, perceived failure in their duties, or if they're unhinged enough, just for the heck of it
b) Dolling out disproportionate retribution to entities that have cooperated with their enemies, like butchering and burning down an entire village just because some peasant in it let the heroic adventurers stay overnight
c) Making a spectacle out of eliminating their enemies, e.g. publicly parading and then executing them, intentionally assassinating them in a brutal fashion in public, killing them in front of friends and loved ones (if said friends and loved ones are also prisoners, but also possibly keeping hostages around just to do this later if the villain expects a direct confrontation in the near future)
d) Destroying artifacts of sentimental value to their foes, if said artifact isn't too useful to them, or even destroying highly useful artifacts out of spite if they feel that their loss is imminent

1-7. I'm not sure we'll get to any of this.  '5' to some extent, though that depends on what information can even be available.  '4' is similar to the framing that we have, but not identical; 'lies' that have a function more broadly are still a difficult problem.

Quote from: Bumber
Are our adventurers able to be raised as intelligent undead, or is it world-gen figures only?

The power can't see the difference, if you have a reasonably intact corpse fit for resurrecting.  So a player necromancer could do it, and depending on how the AI shakes out, the necromancers should continue doing it as well, to both the older and newer bodies.

Quote from: CaptainArchmage
1. Will we have the new intelligent undead in the old saves, so existing necromancers can get rolling with this in their villainy?

2. Will we have the same zombie caps as adventure-mode necromancers?

3. Will we be able to get stone to build proper necromancer towers and expand our zombie caps?

4. Will we be able to integrate zombies into our dwarf forts and set a "zombie policy" for resident necromancers to follow?

5. Will we be able to push back the evil regions spreading out from towers?

6. Will the evil regions spread from towers also have evil weather and blanket re-animation effects, or will it just be a normal region with zombies?

Personally, one advantage of the old system (DF2010) was that there wasn't an un-counterable blanket re-animation effect from the biome, and there wasn't say, evil rain that made a mess of the map. The zombies and skeletons coming in from the side was just great. The gloom clouds are another matter - I really liked that addition.

PatrikLundell: http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=169696.msg7967628#msg7967628
iceball3: http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=169696.msg7967634#msg7967634
PatrikLundell: http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=169696.msg7967690#msg7967690
FantasticDorf: http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=169696.msg7967746#msg7967746
PatrikLundell: http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=169696.msg7967791#msg7967791

1. Nope.  Restructuring the (generated) raw definitions in old saves is too dangerous.

2+3. It's just a different situation - we don't have a way for adventurers to interact with abstract populations.

4. Nope!

5. We haven't done anything with this yet, but it's still on the table in case the evilness becomes too annoying.

6. Yeah, we have a new regional profile that brings that stuff along, though I haven't tested it in the post w.g. modes yet.  This doesn't rename the region, but lets it understand how to use the unexpected evil value.

Quote from: iceball3
After a few years trawling through DF's raws, i noticed that a quite a few values seem to be set as placeholder or default values. For example:
-The attack-recover period of all weapons and almost all natural attacks (excluding kicks)
-The force multiplier of natural attacks
-The bodily-material toughness and thickness of everything made of flesh and bone, particularly concerning the lack of differences between beasts of drastic size difference (this may just be intended outright)
-The lack of differences in base stat attributes between beasts
-Plant thread and various other flexible materials fracturing with little bending or impact force, in particular, they seem to have various of both yields and fractures set as low as 10,000 in many cases.

My question is just thus, in your opinion, are these values:
-Intended to be as they are, as the role they serve is vague and combat calculations mysterious enough that they work good enough as is?
-Placeholders for an eventual material and physics detail rework?
-Left at values that work well enough, specifically so the modding community and contributors can refine the values for full conversion mods or otherwise general contributions?
or
-Some other intention?
 
There are quite a few things I know that -are- planned that would largely change the balance of materials, which is why I figure that a lot of the values acting as placeholders for the time being would make sense, like the multi-material-weapons feature and so forth.

Mostly we're waiting for the combat and item rewrites, yeah, or they are otherwise unfinished (creature sounds, etc.)  Stuff like attributes for animals just wouldn't have any game effects right now, mostly.  Like, a crow should be more creative than a carp, but it would have no meaning in-game, so worrying about numbers would be a waste.

Quote from: KittyTac
Will there be a setting for the power of magic? So that in some worlds, wizards would be godlike, in others they would be on par with mundane sentients, and so on.

PatrikLundell: http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=169696.msg7967791#msg7967791
therahedwig: http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=169696.msg7967851#msg7967851
Miuramir: http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=169696.msg7967899#msg7967899
KittyTac (op): http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=169696.msg7968044#msg7968044

The final set of settings/sliders is still a long way from being determined.  Such a setting is certainly reasonable, important and fits with the goal of allowing a variety of fantasy settings to be generated.

Quote from: Eric Blank
Will every secret-knower with a reanimation effect try to take over the world, or does it depend as well on their personalities or other interaction/syndrome tokens or other factors?

It matters to me specifically because I have mods with multiple secrets with reanimations, but I didn't want all of them to be aggressive world-conquerers or even necessarily villains in the first place.

PatrikLundell: http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=169696.msg7967791#msg7967791
therahedwig: http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=169696.msg7967851#msg7967851

The vanilla ones are all generally outcasts, since communities all kick them out for not aging after a time, and they often pre-empt that by leaving first, and see plots as required.  We needed a higher rate of troublesome behavior since not enough of them do anything spectacular otherwise, pretty much, so we also have the shock of learning the secrets of life and death make their personalities more extreme, which is sufficient.  That'll be something you can do or not in your mods.

Quote
Quote from: falcc
There's a different tile for creatures that swim under the water, there's a sun direction, there is field of view, so: Is it possible, if only in a long-term development sense, to have reflections off of water and/or silvered mirrors?

I was listening to something in the LudoNarraCon talks before yours and was reminded that photorealism can't handle reflections at all. But even when your graphics are a bit more sophisticated, will it ever be possible to 'l'ook at something reflective and have the game know what tiles should be visible in that thing from your own position? Or, could a reflective mirror assembled somewhere add to your adventurer's field of view tiles?I'm just super curious if your kind of graphics have this advantage over non-text games.
Quote from: therahedwig
Besides reflection, are there plans for other vision weirdness things? Darkness is a thing already, but what about refraction/simple distortion or fog?

therahedwig: http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=169696.msg7967998#msg7967998

I think doing general tile-by-tile effects would still be too expensive, even in our graphical situation, and we should be using the processor for other stuff.  Doing reflections in terms of single lines for specific purposes is more possible, or in a situation where it is describing in text what important things you can see in a mirror, say.

Quote from: golemgunk
When necromancers attack cities, are they just trying to kill everyone, or do they stop after seizing power?

I've just always wondered if a necromancer's idea of world domination is anything less than "extinction of all life" and if the living have any place under their rule.

Edit: Additionally, will the death of a necromancer have any affect on their raised undead?

I know it currently doesn't, but it seems apropos for that to change now that the activities of zombies are being considered.

PlumpHelmetMan: http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=169696.msg7968047#msg7968047

These necromancers are interested in killing everybody.  They convert all candidate living populations to zombies through mass execution and raising.  Killing the necromancers stops them from utilizing their pack of zombies, but they don't all just fall over or whatever.  There are many issues about what sort of control is happening that we are leaving vague until we have more information, during the actual magic release.  There'll be some contradictions, but we don't have time to sort them out now.

Quote from: Pillbo
Are you considering allowing any of this 'undead runaway performer' thing to stay?
Do the intelligent undead have their old goals, dreams or preferences or are they clean slates?
Will the undead have any of their own agency or will they act solely under direction? Are they considered Opposed To Life?
Also what happens to an army of intelligent undead when their necromancer is bumped off?

LordBaal: http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=169696.msg7968966#msg7968966
FantasticDorf: http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=169696.msg7969072#msg7969072

We don't have a notion of control right now (outside of the vault stuff, which still isn't used in w.g.), since that's out of the bounds of something we can easily code without a more comprehensive rewrite (and so should just wait for the big magic guttings).  So the undead just join the necromancer entity+plot and show the typical amount of loyalty one shows there (i.e. total automated loyalty, most of the time.)  If the undead find themselves imprisoned and freed or etc., they can sort of rejoin society, but they have the typical problem of not aging and being cast out.  Since performance troupes can move around, they might still find a more permanent home in one.  I haven't searched for such characters, but I suspect they are still around.  It was just disgorging them from the tower into arts/scholarship/etc. when the bug was happening though, in part because of how unlike the tower is from typical sites, so I had to cut it off there.

Intelligent undead are not opposed to life (just as necromancers are not.)  Mummies used to be opposed to life, but that has been removed to make their interactions more consistent.

The intelligent undead continue to chill in the entity if they are still a part of it, but they don't know how to raise more dead and so the conquest plot doesn't continue at all typically.

Quote from: Shonai_Dweller
I guess it may be a matter for Kitfox, but what do you envisage the Steam release to go like? Generally right now it's Release, Emergency patch or three, settle into small updates/bug fixes. This time might it make more sense to Free release, emergency patches then Steam release to avoid Steam backlash/refunding?

Or do you perhaps have a playtest with Kitfox/others planned? Or even a closed beta?

PatrikLundell: http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=169696.msg7968882#msg7968882

Yeah, we can't just release it on Steam without testing.  I don't know how that's going to be structured.

Quote from: EternalCaveDragon
1. With the necromancers getting world conquest as a goal. Will other supernatural villains (vampires, werebeasts, and demons) that currently exist be getting similar goals as well? Such as for example a vampire wanting to increase the amount of vampires in the world and/or induct everyone into their associated cult. Or a werebeast getting the idea of turning everyone they can into werebeasts of their type.

1a. Same as above, but will the conventional villains also gain such aspirations? Would it require that their aspiration in life is to rule the world?

We are out of time to do anything more than what we've described; the vampires have their new immortality promises, and they still enact their tyrant laws and mass murder if they become rulers, but we didn't go beyond that.  The traditional villains do have their goals to rule the world and attain rank, though, and those are respected.

Quote from: Rubik
In many talks, specially the 9th one, I think (since that's the one I was listening some hours ago), you mention that you took classes in many areas aside from math. This combined with all the research you do for the different mechanics (also mentioned in the talks) gives a polymath air.
Are there any books you have read on sciences and history that you'd recommend to people, because you found them really good?

Are rogue adventurers(not belonging to any civ) gonna be able to acquire pets and mounts in adventure creation mode?
I kinda wanted to do an eragon mod and this question came to mind
If a sapient does not belong to any civ, which creatures does he have access to?

FantasticDorf: http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=169696.msg7968958#msg7968958
Shonai_Dweller: http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=169696.msg7969187#msg7969187
FantasticDorf: http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=169696.msg7969201#msg7969201
EternalCaveDragon: http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=169696.msg7969202#msg7969202
PatrikLundell: http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=169696.msg7969209#msg7969209
Mel_Vixen: http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=169696.msg7969257#msg7969257

Hmm, I don't really have any book recommendations along those lines.  I'm always hesistant to recommend what counts as good here since I'm not particularly qualified to speak on science or history, or most other things.

I just started up an outsider adventurer, and it looks like they can pick anything during creation.
Logged
The Toad, a Natural Resource:  Preserve yours today!

Toady One

  • The Great
    • View Profile
    • http://www.bay12games.com
Re: Future of the Fortress
« Reply #2127 on: June 01, 2019, 01:05:52 am »

Quote from: ZM5
Question about advanced worldgen, since I'm struggling with a mod I'm doing - does setting the parameter for bogeyman generation to 0 completely disable bogey attacks, even if custom ones are in the raws folder, or does it only prevent vanilla bogeymen from generating?

The number of bogeyman types parameter just determines how many new raw defs are created which have NIGHT_CREATURE_BOGEYMAN.  When generating the regions, it just appears to query for that flag.  I don't see immediately why a modded one wouldn't show up even if the parameter is set to zero.

Quote from: Mel_Vixen
Does the game, in WG fights, tally the dead after a big fight or is there some kind intermediet tally? Like are they fighting for X rounds and count the dead afterwards or do they count them each round?
Could a necro raise the fallen if they were part of one of the sides f.e. if they were under a coveridentity?

The non-historical creatures are broken into squads and there is a process of rounds and so forth, some of which is recounted in the events, when historical figures are involved, but it doesn't yet provide a great picture of the process.

Necros still separate themselves from society in most cases, but if they happen to be around in a regular civ, they don't try anything.

Quote from: Buttery_Mess
Will it be possible for players to become intelligent undead thralls?

Can "villainous" networks be used for good, either by NPCs or players? In fiction, heroic spy networks are quite common. Not sure how heroic they are irl.

FantasticDorf: http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=169696.msg7969826#msg7969826

With the parties it'll be especially easy, I imagine, if one of you becomes a necromancer and the rest of your party is dead, and then you raise everybody and then flip into them.  Otherwise, I'm not really sure how it'll react.  The raised undead has the same historical figure id, and so *might* appear in the list of retired adventurers, but they might not, depending on how the flagging works there.

You can do whatever you want with your networks as a player.  Maybe stealing an artifact or assassinating a target is good, depending on what/who/why.  The 'good' counterintelligence people don't actively plot outward yet, so the other networks generally have selfish goals, but their actions might seem good for a time depending on where they are pointed.

Quote from: FantasticDorf
#1: Only diplomats have the [Make Peace Agreements] responsibility etc currently, does this mean we won't be able to push our proposals of alliances if the option is open until in the post king + metropolis lategame when they arrive and become properly settled?

#2: Also sort of tied to the first question (by means of getting to the required noble which in theory should do diplomatic actions), will we be able to attack our allies or break our alliances directly?

The implicits here is that by the use of tags, unless the messenger plays a part, we'll receive alliance offers because our leaders can recieve diplomats or be locked into a pre-existing alliance that might or might not be favorable for us if our ally is doing silly things like starting wars (attacking a civ site with more enemy allies than us) we don't want to partake in or we assume that we're actually strong enough to beat them up too for looting and razing.

PatrikLundell: http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=169696.msg7969869#msg7969869
FantasticDorf: http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=169696.msg7969966#msg7969966

#1: Currently, that would make the most sense, but I'm not sure what we'll end up with for this time.  It may be that there are just some additional simple options to play with, but I might not be able to do that if site-based alliances screw everything up.

#2: I assume you'll be able to do whatever you want here, though in some future version you might be cast out of the civ for it.

Quote from: Bumber
Have you given any thought to Steam trading cards for the game yet? You could probably do some crayon drawings or a small ASCII scene (like some regional tiles, the intro movie art, or a mayor's office.) Collect the full set and you get a badge of the DF logo dwarf for your Steam profile.

Haven't had a chance to think about them or even achievements much yet.  I'm kind of siloed off into villain work until I get that done, so we can bring our full attention over when we switch gears.

Quote
Quote from: Shonai_Dweller
Will civs form alliances against anyone threatening to take over the world? (Mostly goblins, but elves get a lucky rng break every so often, and of course all those delightfully OP civs added by modders) or is it solely for zombie threats?  Or perhaps "supernatural threats" if that's a defined thing now?

Will "natural enemies" (Babysnatcher civ and non-babysnatcher civ, etc) join alliances together if threatened, or do they stick to their own?
Quote from: FantasticDorf
Do distant in far away lands or normally hostile (see shonai's quoted green question on goblin allies) allies trade with your site or alter their behaviour after signing a agreement?

Because beside poking them with a raid or summoning caravans with DFhack (as the masterwork mod does, though thats not applicable here) you'd normally require to embark closer to them. Goblins can't trade but not ruling out peddlers in the future, it could afford us some respite from babysnatchers while the alliance (/truce?) is up.

Right now im pretty sure the only way you can get goblin instruments (cave croc bone drum has pride of place in my tavern) and miscellaneous things is by exorted tribute or looting.
Quote from: FantasticDorf
Toady, do enemy civs ally together in response to player aggressiveness trying to scoop up settlements forcefully to eventually reach nobility targets like baron, duke and count? it seems like it'd be either too much of a deterrant going that path or a easy way to incur fun if you are the percieved world ending threat of a conquerer.
Quote from: EternalCaveDragon
Going off of the latest dev log, would it be correct to assume that forming alliances as a response to a particularly evil threat will also occur in response to modded in entities that fit that criteria as well? I do hope it is, it'd immerse modded in entities much more into modded worlds if they can interact just like the vanilla entities can with the new update.
Quote from: GoblinCookie
It sounds like folks only form alliances against those who are Kill Neutral Required.  Does that mean that goblins will never ally with other races to stop the zombie invasion because goblin civs will not ally with other races to stop another goblin civilization taking over the world? Would two goblin civilizations ally against a zombie invasion?
Quote from: Shonai_Dweller
Hi, just to clarify, by "requires the killing of neutrals", did you mean civs (including zombies) which have the tag "Ethic:Kill_Neutral:Required" or something else?

FantasticDorf: http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=169696.msg7970270#msg7970270
voliol: http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=169696.msg7973363#msg7973363
therahedwig: http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=169696.msg7973413#msg7973413
Shonai_Dweller: http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=169696.msg7973624#msg7973624
Shonai_Dweller: http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=169696.msg7974023#msg7974023
FantasticDorf: http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=169696.msg7974767#msg7974767
Shonai_Dweller: http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=169696.msg7974891#msg7974891

Yeah, it is limited currently, by the ethic setting.  That may or may not change before the release, but the current setup accomplishes what we needed.  I'm not sure it'll be easy to extend with the time we have left, though simple strength comparisons merged with the love/hate numbers might be enough to make them act vaguely plausibly in broader situations.

Quote from: WordsandChaos
You mentioned villains having a chance to follow through or not on their power-sharing promises to their minions -I'm interested to know if the minions will be able to act on thwarted aspirations?

Poor minions waiting forever in blue-balled limbo without acting, while their masters make a continuous stream of new promises they have no intention of fulfilling (we could make a society out of this. No don't). Although this sort of thing is the fulcrum of many a story - the enraged minion who has been denied one too many times and decides to take matters into their own hands. Although on the flip side, I suppose you've then got to take into account every person in fiction (and history) who ever said "Yes, Urist McMinion, you'll be rich/powerful beyond your wildest dreams!" before having the recipient of said promise disappear in one way or another (which I'm assuming is just a whole new tangled sub-branch of code in this very dense canopy...)

It's a note, but we didn't get to writing up the checks/timers for it.

Quote from: FantasticDorf
little bit of a callback question to the prophets and religious work of this arc, while i was explaining this to someone else asking about diverse migrants to help them with their suggestion thread It struck me that the current fortress prayer method of using (no-specific-denomination) might end up mass attracting potential migrants already visiting in other areas of your civ if foriegn long term residents are allowed to pray, possibly leading to annoying build up like the adventurer spam a few versions ago.

Its a common thing that cross species migration can happen if enough citizens simply enter the civ to stay (rarely if never normally except in following point), like for example hundreds of 'slaves' made fast citizens after goblins go on a civ conquering rampage and displace them all virtually. Funnily enough quite like your elf vs zombie mountain halls fight in the recent devlog, just a snowball effect, the dead making more undead and goblin raids making more goblin(ish) raiders.

Are varied migrants called by faith actively disabled/enabled in fortress mode; and would these general faith sites vs specific ones break anything later in background w.g hazarding a guess?

Right now, I haven't done anything with organized religion, and it looks like only temples associated to the general practice of worshiping a specific deity will attract believers.  If we get to the organized religion stuff in fort mode, which we are hoping to do, then visitors with those religious practices will come to associated temples.  But they shouldn't come to generic temples.

Quote from: bieux
Totally unrelated to the most immediate upcoming features, has multiplayer been analysed before as a possible feature to be added? What conclusions were drawn about the requirements/likellyhood/desire to add such feature?

Bumber: http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=169696.msg7972565#msg7972565
PatrikLundell: http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=169696.msg7972697#msg7972697

We just aren't interested, though people can pass their saves around and so forth.

Quote from: EternalCaveDragon
Semi-related to FantasticDorf's question above, but referring to the previously noted lack of pushback by demons and druids on organized religions converting those in their sphere for goblins and elves respectively. Is tackling this in the works for the initial release or has it been pushed to a related release after the main villains release?

FantasticDorf: http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=169696.msg7972700#msg7972700
EternalCaveDragon: http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=169696.msg7972702#msg7972702

There's a note about it, but I'm not sure I'll do anything with it at this point.  Going to wait and see how odd the typical worlds are in practice first, since addressing it will take some work.  Had the additional interesting case of a compromised elf queen conspiring to replace the existing druid with a goblin...  at some point, the other elves should raise their eyebrows, but we don't have anything like that kind of broader awareness yet.

Quote from: Shonai_Dwellers
So are these new civs basically goblin civs lead by a released demon? Or actual full-on hell civs packed with demons and a couple of goblins thrown in? Do they create the initial goblins?

They have goblins so that they can behave normally, but they have a pack of 5-20 non-civ-leader underworld demons to make them scarier, and they also have a standard demon leader.  All of these creatures are created on the spot, as the underworld is assumed to have unnumbered amounts of such beings currently, though the goblin is faked and indeed it just checks for the EVIL tag on them, the good old EVIL tag.  I didn't bother simulating their underworld pops on account of time and the upcoming magic release clarification of these matters.

Quote from: golemgunk
you mentioned that one of these new intelligent undead was killed defending its tower from an attack by another necromancer. Does that mean that necromacers aren't always on the same side, and undead can be made to attack each other now?

Currently I think raised zombies will ignore anything that's also undead, so vampire adventurers can just stroll right into a tower unimpeded. If they're taking their group affiliation into account now, I imagine this will change.

Shonai_Dweller: http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=169696.msg7973338#msg7973338

They still don't fight in local play.  It hasn't been worth it making things consistent, while the nature of undead control is completely unspecified.

Quote
Quote from: voliol
1. Is there any difference between the different kinds of intelligent undead, or are the different names just there for procedural flavor and to give the player a hint to who raised them?

2. Does the computer-controlled dwarves breaking into hell mean that they get access to adamantine? If they do, how is this handled, considering fortress mode wagons have a seemingly endless supply of all kinds of metals, and I have a hard time imagining players should get access to adamantine without the risk of mining it themselves?

3. New goblin(?) or at least demon-lead civs being born excites me, as that would indicate a change from the current status quo where civilizations only die out instead of being created. However, how about the other forces of evil? Are big enough undead empires considered full civilizations (showing up like that on the c-screen etc.) or are they still considered only expansions of one necromancer's villainous network?

4. Do elves eat the undead? Or, rather, the dead undead that they have just killed?
Quote from: Bimbus
With the Dwarves being able to breach the Underworld, will Adamantite finally be used in worldgen?

PatrikLundell: http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=169696.msg7973348#msg7973348
Shonai_Dweller: http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=169696.msg7973350#msg7973350
FantasticDorf: http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=169696.msg7973354#msg7973354

1. It's all flavor now.  There are enough existing interactions to give them some power differences, and that was on the table during the supernatural additions, but we ran out of time.  Still on the table if we decide to play around with it, but we do have to finish sometime, and the magic release will blow it all up.

2. Ha ha, not yet!  I suppose we could have been kind to them, but we don't really have a good way of limiting the amount of a material yet, since the w.g. numeric stockpiles aren't linked to the equipment used, so it would end up being too common.  Another job for the future economy.

3. It ended up having to be an odd cobbled together solution of sites umbrella'd over each other.  I really need to destroy the civ/site entity concepts at some point, as they've been causing various issues over the years, but that's not on the table for a while.

4. They shouldn't, if the checks work.

Quote from: therahedwig
For the new demons creating new goblin civs, is it planned to have that happen in post worldgen background sim as well. That is, if a player fort fails due breaching hell, will we see the consequences once we have a new fort, or will this be a bit too much for this release?

We are hoping to get to this with fort mode, at least the part where the demons are understood to be out and able to do a bit, though clearly we can't have an unnumbered amount of them running about.  I'm not sure if that means goblins will also be introduced.  Maybe not, the way everything is up in the sky.

Quote from: Death Dragon
You said the new intelligent zombie can "can retain much of their old identity". What part of their old personality is missing exactly? Their memories and relationships?

Can necromancers revive intelligent beings as a "good" deed? (For example, reuniting old family members or helping with a murder case.) Or is that more of a magic update thing and beyond the scope of the current update?

Can a mummy be appeased by delivering the lost artifact back to it?

I just wasn't sure how much of it is cleaned up by the living left behind; their marriages, for instance, are removed by the other partner while they are still dead.  Maybe a few other bits like that, plots that have been patched away from them, etc.  But everything else is retained, if they were deemed important enough on the moment of their death for the memory in use to be kept active.

Necromancers don't think particularly good thoughts at this time.  I think you might be able to play an adventurer that way.

Nope, the mummy doesn't have a ghost-style trigger to put it to rest, though over time we should be generalizing concepts like that.

Quote
Quote from: Enemy post
Will the mummies' curses be changed now that they can leave their tombs without the player's prompting?
Quote from: Shonai_Dweller
And if not, will they curse other histfigs they come across who survive the encounter?

FantasticDorf: http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=169696.msg7973826#msg7973826

I haven't changed anything about mummies, aside from the ability to raise intelligent undead and to be disturbed in world gen, as far as I remember.  The rest comes from the general villain/necro AI being applied to them.  The curse is the same.  It always had the "DISTURBER_ONLY" tag, so it shouldn't come into broader use.

Quote from: Beag
1. With the new geographical effects necromancers have in the upcoming update if a player necromancer makes a camp and collects enough undead minions can they cause a region to turn into it's evil version?
2. Since the new intelligent undead are technically sentient if a player adventurer gets killed and then raised back to life as an intelligent undead will we be able to play as them again if we select play as a specific creature reentering adventure mode?
3. Will player necromancers be able to create intelligent undead and if so how much of a corpse is required for it? For example could we make an intelligent zombie severed head?
4. Who controls intelligent undead if their necromancer master is slain? Do they become free willed undead?

FantasticDorf: http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=169696.msg7974720#msg7974720

1. I haven't done anything in adv mode yet.  It's there to consider, though it isn't an insta-raise-in-bulk the same way w.g. works, so we need to quantify it some other way if we do anything.

2. Answered with the Buttery_Mess question above.

3. Yeah, you can raise them.  The resurrection fitness function has always required a central part (the upper body in most cases), to avoid the historical figure from ever being attached to two separate creatures (which would crash the game currently, but we'd like to support in some way later, for various weird situations.)

4. They are always free-willed, as much as entity members ever are, as described above, just due to not wanting to try to code up undead control.

Quote from: Moonshadow101
In the most recent front page update, you said that a Dwarven Civ can breach the underworld and be overtaken. At this point, a new civilization is formed.

Is this new demon-ruled Dwarven civ playable?

Shonai_Dweller: http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=169696.msg7976155#msg7976155
PlumpHelmetMan: http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=169696.msg7976288#msg7976288
Shonai_Dweller: http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=169696.msg7976292#msg7976292
PatrikLundell: http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=169696.msg7976338#msg7976338

Yeah, it's a goblin-demon civ.

Quote from: bieux
Considering you mentioned alliances in the second most recent devlog, is adding more diplomatic options and interactions to fort mode something planned for this release?

PatrikLundell: http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=169696.msg7976391#msg7976391
FantasticDorf: http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=169696.msg7976465#msg7976465

It's on the table, though as the quoted people say, it's a bit off to have you acting as a proxy for civ-level interactions through most of the life of a typical fort.  The embark scenarios later are meant to clarify this situation and give you a requested level of autonomy, often at some reasonable or unreasonable cost.  For now, we might still do a bit just because it's there, but if it proves inopportune for whatever technical reason, it'll have to wait.

Quote from: Eschar
You noted on usesthis that you listen to music constantly; do you listen to music while programming DF and if so, what kind?

Yeah, I can't program without music.  Various sorts...  winamp tells me they are blues, folk, metal, electronic, electronica/dance, jazz, pop, reggae, industrial, hip hop/rap, R&B, rock, alternative, alternative & punk, classical, country, world, and other.

Quote from: EternalCaveDragon
Do the new organized religions interact with megabeast worship at all? I'm not sure if it's really that different since it isn't now other than megabeast worship being prompted by a megabeast attack (or two) and deity/force worship exists from the beginning of world generation. The megabeasts are simply listed as another deity when creating a temple to my knowledge. So are megabeasts that become objects of worship treated the same as regular gods and goddesses in this regard?

There still aren't prophets for non-deities, like the forces and megabeasts, which stops organized religions from happening.  I'm not sure how long we'll keep this restriction, but since the forces aren't personified, they don't work with the current prophecies.  They also aren't in the initial list, so they have a disadvantage in shrine building by the non-historical pops when they start, and they need a powerful state actor to create shrines for them.  Then these shrines can turn around and finally affect the pops.
Logged
The Toad, a Natural Resource:  Preserve yours today!

Real_bang

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Future of the Fortress
« Reply #2128 on: June 01, 2019, 01:37:37 am »

Thanks for the answers!
Logged

PlumpHelmetMan

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Future of the Fortress
« Reply #2129 on: June 01, 2019, 04:21:56 pm »

Thanks Toady, good luck with the home stretch of the villain release. :D
Logged
It's actually pretty terrifying to think about having all of your fat melt off into grease because you started sweating too much.
Pages: 1 ... 140 141 [142] 143 144 ... 162