Bay 12 Games Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  
Pages: 1 ... 167 168 [169] 170 171 ... 174

Author Topic: Future of the Fortress  (Read 520887 times)

Mort Stroodle

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Future of the Fortress
« Reply #2520 on: October 31, 2019, 06:13:06 pm »

Kobolds and snatchers always get stopped from stealing anything because someone immediately sees them and they leave or get killed. Will villains have some more sneaky way to steal stuff and do their dirty work? What's to stop someone from seeing the thief the moment they walk through a main hallway with artifact in tow, rendering them a hostile and initiating a great dwarven dogpile? If you've got some other system in mind for sneaky thievery, will kobolds and snatchers be able to make use of it?
Logged

Death Dragon

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Future of the Fortress
« Reply #2521 on: November 01, 2019, 02:16:07 am »

Do villainous infiltrator agents show up as visitors or also as migrants?
Logged

Shonai_Dweller

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Future of the Fortress
« Reply #2522 on: November 01, 2019, 02:28:06 am »

Do villainous infiltrator agents show up as visitors or also as migrants?

If they do show up as migrants, please take a look at bug 0010490 before release. It's going to end up with a lot of innocent dwarves killed if spies for your own civ insist on retaining their somewhat loose disguises when they migrate to your fortress.


Who is the traitor? The guy with the false name and occupation of "criminal" of course! What, he was a war hero? Spied for decades, disguised as a criminal deep in the Dark Pits? Oops. Should have mentioned that before applying magma. Oh well.
« Last Edit: November 01, 2019, 02:33:47 am by Shonai_Dweller »
Logged

falcc

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Future of the Fortress
« Reply #2523 on: November 02, 2019, 10:26:40 am »

Can a royal official that trusts you get you access to talk to the king, now that they can trust and be verbally sparred?

Is it possible, theoretically, to talk your way all the way up an organizational chart, befriending every member, so as to convince them all to leave you alone?

How much harder is it now to convince every ruler that peace is good?

Are people less likely to listen to value arguments of people they don't like? Can talking people around through the verbal "fights" make them more receptive to value changes as well?
Logged

Nopenope

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Future of the Fortress
« Reply #2524 on: November 02, 2019, 04:57:30 pm »

Why did you remove the AMBUSHER token from goblin civilizations?

Formally, is there any difference between a member of your party and a regular companion? If yes, is there any way to move one from the other?

Can you acquire pets beyond your starting party?

Are adventurer villainy and fortress villainy still on the table? What kind of plots are we expected to be able to carry out?

Do pilgrims physically move around to holy cities post world-gen?

Is your fort able to become a holy city? (For instance, if you're one of two cities with a religion and one gets razed) Can religions, prophets and persecutions spontaneously arise in your fortress?

Can pilgrims arrive in your fort if you have a shrine?

Can your fort be a host to a holy relic (e.g. if you host a religion's high priest)?

Logged

PatrikLundell

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Future of the Fortress
« Reply #2525 on: November 02, 2019, 05:11:12 pm »

- According to dev logs, you can control companions but not other party members.
- This whole 1 year extra arc is about Villainy (well, a number of months in the beginning was about finishing the Raiding stuff, before it was turned into an arc), with the dev logs indicating the adventure part is mostly implemented and the fortress part has just begun, with some work back-and-forth currently.
- Pilgrims can come to visit your fortress now as soon as you have a temple dedicated to their god. It's unlikely that will be ripped out... As far as I understand only "armies" move about the world as such, with migrants and visitors teleporting/slipping by unnoticed.
Logged

Shonai_Dweller

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Future of the Fortress
« Reply #2526 on: November 02, 2019, 11:02:44 pm »

- According to dev logs, you can control companions but not other party members.
- This whole 1 year extra arc is about Villainy (well, a number of months in the beginning was about finishing the Raiding stuff, before it was turned into an arc), with the dev logs indicating the adventure part is mostly implemented and the fortress part has just begun, with some work back-and-forth currently.
- Pilgrims can come to visit your fortress now as soon as you have a temple dedicated to their god. It's unlikely that will be ripped out... As far as I understand only "armies" move about the world as such, with migrants and visitors teleporting/slipping by unnoticed.
I assume it means "adventurers being villains" which is done, and "fortresses being villains(?) which isn't and was never in the plans.

Incidentally I imagine" because ambushing is a buggy mess" would be a reasonable answer to the ambusber tag. It's not like ambushing in the earlier versions of the game where small groups would attack before major sieges begin. It's just invisible sieges right now (and feels very incomplete).

I mean, elves still have it but you don't have to put up with a hundreds strong elven ambush spamming ambush announcements very often.
« Last Edit: November 02, 2019, 11:07:31 pm by Shonai_Dweller »
Logged

Khalvin

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Future of the Fortress
« Reply #2527 on: November 03, 2019, 04:48:48 am »

Will Museums, Sculpture Gardens, and Tombs/Memorial Halls eventually operate in the same system as the Taverns, Libraries, and Temples?
Will we see social events like marriages and funerals in Temples like we see spontaneous Performances in Taverns?
Logged

Shonai_Dweller

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Future of the Fortress
« Reply #2528 on: November 03, 2019, 05:18:05 am »

Will Museums, Sculpture Gardens, and Tombs/Memorial Halls eventually operate in the same system as the Taverns, Libraries, and Temples?
Will we see social events like marriages and funerals in Temples like we see spontaneous Performances in Taverns?

Museums and sculpture gardens operate right now as part of taverns, libraries and temples. Push l to assign them to a location. My tavern is usually a sprawling multi-layer pleasure palace of dance areas, dining rooms, sculpture gardens and museums (and booze) which the dorfs happily spread themselves out across.

And spontaneous performances happen in temples right now (but very rarely).
« Last Edit: November 03, 2019, 05:27:13 am by Shonai_Dweller »
Logged

Nopenope

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Future of the Fortress
« Reply #2529 on: November 03, 2019, 10:13:45 am »

"fortresses being villains(?) which isn't and was never in the plans.

From the 05/29/2019 devlog:

Quote
Finally, with all the core mechanics and tweaks in place, we hit the fortress mode changes: relationship improvements sparked by the villain upgrade, villains against the fort, any plotting that you yourself can do as a fort (either as counter-espionage or more actively), and any other bits from religions, mercenaries, etc. that make it over, though these last are undecided.
Logged

Shonai_Dweller

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Future of the Fortress
« Reply #2530 on: November 03, 2019, 01:23:11 pm »

"fortresses being villains(?) which isn't and was never in the plans.

From the 05/29/2019 devlog:

Quote
Finally, with all the core mechanics and tweaks in place, we hit the fortress mode changes: relationship improvements sparked by the villain upgrade, villains against the fort, any plotting that you yourself can do as a fort (either as counter-espionage or more actively), and any other bits from religions, mercenaries, etc. that make it over, though these last are undecided.
Ah, counter-espionage is working against villains. Doubt you'll have the opportunity to kidnap the demon villains. But we'll see.
Logged

FantasticDorf

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Future of the Fortress
« Reply #2531 on: November 03, 2019, 02:44:54 pm »

The most amusing thought popped into my head.

With the correct configuration of ethics, will modders have the ability to disband the penalty/aggressively pursue conviction for incorrectly or misjudged arrests, or will the multiple factors like attitudes to justice affect this no matter which typical or tweaked entity civilization you will play?


Im just thinking of running a Dwarven (or other modded race) North Korea, unscrupulous and unquestioning law enforcement suppression where crafting a unfavorable likeness of the supreme leader has them thown into the jail and forgotten about.
Logged

Toady One

  • The Great
    • View Profile
    • http://www.bay12games.com
Re: Future of the Fortress
« Reply #2532 on: November 03, 2019, 04:40:09 pm »

Quote from: FantasticDorf
So... if i flooded my civilization with elven propaganda redistributed by a trained scribe id probably have a lot of animal people turn up into the civ (not nessecarily fort, unless somehow it prompts a lot of sanctuary petitions) within 200 years? Neat. Elsewise its just something to configure with in modding in mind.

Doesn't seem to affect generated animalpeople all that much, you often have (suprisingly often carnivorous, i wonder if there's a connection) -people like saltwater crocodile men appear around dark towers, though that might be due to goblins being free to settle and border those regions.

The pop joining has never worked post w.g. generally, as far as I remember, so it wouldn't work yet.

Quote from: prawn
Any plans to implement martial arts/body enhancing magical tags? I.e. bone enhancing, skin hardening, super speed? If so, would these spells be passed down in monasteries or kept down on paper?

Shonai_Dweller: http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=169696.msg8032986#msg8032986

Ha, yeah, we're not sure timeline-wise, but it might just be another spell-casting method as far as the generator is concerned, and some of our earlier examples worked that way, so I wouldn't be surprised.  Once stuff like that goes in, the options for how it is passed down would cover the same breadth as other types.

Quote
Quote from: Shonai_Dweller
While conversation may be a safer option than beating someone into submission, will excessive enquiring raise suspicion and eventual retaliation from villains too?
Quote from: ZM5
Will adventurers get a negative reputation for accosting people too much with intimidation for no reason?

On that subject, will villains and their agents also get suspicious if they catch wind of the player questioning people around town?

MrWiggles: http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=169696.msg8034157#msg8034157
Shonai_Dweller (op): http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=169696.msg8034401#msg8034401

Yeah, even non-violent options can lead back to you, but it might be slower, or not happen at all, if you are effective.  It all depends on the kind of rumor that is generated - if you learn something, and no rumor is generated, it won't go up the chain, but non-intimidation can still generate rumors sometimes.  For instance, if you ask a question and fail a persuasion check, you are now, possibly, "asking questions."

And for negative reputation, yeah, being a bully is a thing, though we want to be a little careful about context if we can.  As you say, the "no reason" cases are worse, and we need to catch those (similar to arresting anybody you want in fort mode.)

Quote from: therahedwig
Will it be possible for Villains to trick someone into performing tasks for them? So for example, a villain histfig asking the player to bring artifact a to point b, without the player knowing the whole thing is sorta illegal? Or do you think that's going to have to wait till a later release?

I don't think that sort of thing will happen yet.  All of the villain asks are pretty clear-cut in terms of whether they'd be illegal or not.

Quote from: Asi Kom, Legendary Scribe
Will we be able to send out our own spies to neighboring civilizations in order to gather information about other civs and their intentions in fortress mode? Not in an aggressive manner I mean, but in a "I like to know what's going on to keep the peace" kind of way

PatrikLundell: http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=169696.msg8034831#msg8034831

Yeah, it's not 100% settled even at this point where the investigation infrastructure will end up, and how extensive off-site investigations will need to be.  But in order to get up the villain chains, you'll need to have some non-hostile off-site options, and allowing mid-level figures like barons to have "keeper of the seal" position-led espionage/counter-espionage operations is also becoming more proper, given the world gen structures we have.  So we have some options, and it'll be led by what ends up being the most core and fun and doable for countering what the villains do in the forts.

Quote from: Death Dragon
"Bribes, reputation, presented evidence and the new relationship variables 'loyalty', 'trust/distrust', 'fear', 'love/hate', and 'respect' are all in the mix."
1 Does the player have any way to change the 'loyalty', 'trust/distrust', 'fear', 'love/hate', 'respect' values an NPC has to them or are we stuck with the default values? I could see it be possible to increase the fear and maybe respect values, but what about the other stuff?
2 Would reciting a poem exceptionally well make an NPC respect us more and thus more likely to share secret information with us?
3 Will we be able to use coins to bribe people even though there is no economy?
4 If we are able to bribe people with money, will this money then be added to that hist fig's "account" or are the accounts still just world gen only for now?

For adventure mode, yeah, these values are all subject to change, between the NPC and your adventurer, and it is important to change them to advance an interrogation/etc.  Actions like flattery can increase trust but decrease respect, for example, depending on the personality of the NPC.  Coins are on the table, though yeah, the relationship between "account" and real coins is an iffy one currently and will likely be very weird -- accounts *do* work post w.g., for the various villainly plots, but they don't automatically get turned into a giant coin sack.  I'm not sure about poems, ha ha -- of course they should be, for certain NPCs, but it'll take us a while to hit all the rep change points/etc.

For fort mode of course, it's more complicated since there are all sorts of people running around, and we're still seeing how that'll turn out.

Quote from: squamous
1. Given that vampires will be getting such an overhaul come next update, can we expect something like being able to ask for/demand blood and gain it in a non-violent/non-lethal fashion, or will NPCs continue to be murderous? On that note, is there a way to create vampires which need to feed on blood, but don't have the BLOODSUCKER tag? I've tried experimenting with just using [CE:COUNTER_TRIGGER:DRINKING_BLOOD:1:NONE:REQUIRED] but it didn't seem to work.
2. I've noticed that sometimes when I put an adventurer in cities, they'll run into asterisks which will turn out to be things like crocodiles and cave dragons in the streets. Are these LARGE_PREDATOR type animals conducting raids on the town or do they live in the sewers or something and come out to cause mischief?

Untrustedlife: http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=169696.msg8037842#msg8037842
squamous (op): http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=169696.msg8037904#msg8037904
Untrustedlife: http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=169696.msg8038288#msg8038288

Like, vampires in the fort?  I'm not sure we'll get to immortality pacts etc. happening right in your fort, though they are still on the table and we have the framework for it now because of the w.g. work on them.  The BLOODSUCKER tag is one of those annoying tags that has bundled in too much logic.  I'm not sure when I'll get a chance, but it should be broken up.

Ha ha, I have no idea about these predators...  there are the named historical animals, and it might not be putting them back in their sewer homes correctly, because of their historical status?  That seems possible, but bugs can do all sorts of things, and yeah, as Untrustedlife says, depending on exactly what it was doing, it might have wandered from a nearby predator lair - this would be the least buggy option; it's only somewhat inappropriate because the game doesn't yet recognize that the predator being in a town would be more of an event.

Quote
Quote from: Enemy post
What happens if a necromancer tries to incorporate a modded creature with custom bodyparts into one of their hybrid creatures?
Quote from: voliol
I guess it is interesting that the word "humanoid" is used. Are the "humanoid" necromancer experiments actually humanoids, made from any captured creature with the right body plan (uses one of the HUMANOID body tokens, or has the right amount of stance/grasp parts), including livestock that do? Or is it just a shorthand for an INTELLIGENT/CAN_LEARN creature, in which case "humanoid" experiments from snakeman and centaur civilizations would not end up truly humanoid?

Shonai_Dweller: http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=169696.msg8038410#msg8038410
voliol: http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=169696.msg8038465#msg8038465

Yeah, generally people should not get too enthusiastic about the exact composition of the experiments -- we have not remotely attempted the "centaur" or other problems yet.  Those will require much more dedicated work than what we threw together here.  So the system can handle whatever, but it won't be super reflective of what you give it.

'Humanoids' require two stance points and also learns, I think?  It allows wiggle room on the number of graspers and legs in the input, but the output is humanoid in shape, for the smart ones.  So there's some leaning on 'learns' and the body plan, in the most boring possible way.  It won't generally try to make intelligent creatures with interesting body plans.  DF has been bad at dealing with fliers and those without grasps etc., when trying to incorporate them into civs and especially forts.  We'll have to tackle that later when it comes up as a more core issue (the weird myth slider worlds seems like a good candidate time, but we'll have to see.)

Quote from: Bydth
Will the activities of a player fort influence its post-retire activities, such as a fort with a powerhouse glass industry continuing to export glass objects? Will forts that produced lots of high-quality weapons and armor give equipment level bonuses to armies/mercenary groups recruited/based in that fort?

Bumber: http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=169696.msg8039058#msg8039058

Yeah, as Bumber says, the later economy additions will help.  We just don't have enough infrastructure to quantify that stuff now -- post w.g. sites of all kinds don't have economies/production at all, so there's nothing to do yet.

Quote from: Buttery_Mess
For the Myth & Magic arc, would I be correct in thinking that spheres will be the underlying general mechanic behind magic under which procedurally generated world-specific systems operate, rather than being an esoteric world-specific system in its own right?

Do you conceive of magical effects combining spheres, or will reach magical effect require only one sphere to use? For instance, would you need to or be able to combine a fire and a telekinetic sphere 8n order to cast a fireball spell (i.e one sphere to make the fire, another to move it)?

Will every game object be attached to a sphere and vice versa, for mechanical purposes? I'm thinking of elemental rock-paper-scissors, so you could smash a stone forgotten beast with a water effect but not a lightning effect, for instance. With so many spheres and game objects/actors, would this be impractical or would it simplify working out how magical effects interact with the world?

To what extent do you already have satisfactory physical processes implemented in the game for marrying up to spell effects? For example, fire, heat, etc.

Is there a possibility that the Myth and Magic release will lead to the inclusion of ambient light levels in fort mode? Light and darkness are such important fantasy staples that it would seem like a missed opportunity for them to not be included.

PatrikLundell: http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=169696.msg8039627#msg8039627
voliol: http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=169696.msg8039701#msg8039701

Yeah, the spheres are basically just a recognition that there are real world or real worldish concepts the game needs to understand as primitives, and that these can be mashed up with myths in various satisfying ways (a more advanced version of the way that spheres are used for the deities' domains currently.)  They aren't their own esoteric magic system.

Combinations/attachments are complicated, because, as concept place-holders, a sphere could be introduced to cover any case, and we already see this -- some existing systems in other games see magma for instance as a "fire + earth" effect, where we could do that or just use the existing volcano sphere, or even add a new magma sphere (that's certainly a fair enough domain for a deity - specificity has never been an issue with the real world deity domains, but we do want to keep a somewhat manageable list of concepts.)  We'll likely have to deal with multiple cases that produce the same effects.  This is good in the end, because it allows us to have more diverse underpinnings to our systems.  50 different ways to produce a fireball would be a great thing, among different generated settings (and many settings without fireballs, naturally.)  Some of our systems in side projects/planning notes have been very fiddly, where the fire + telekinetic etc. component was specified down to a ~5 step process requiring multiple skills (we set up Tales Foretold this way intentionally, with the typical spells being the hardest to pull off, with some odder effects as the base ones), etc., whereas others were just like "fireball."  This is all fine as long as it fits with the myths etc., and works with a friendly enough interface/implementation etc.

The players can judge as well as I where we already have satisfactory processes.  Obviously we are farther along with heat and fire and water than we are with, say, electricity.  Or light/darkness, as you mention.  There are enough missing basic systems that I'm not going to be able to promise one over the other at this point.

Quote from: Buttery_Mess
What if you want to raise a dismembered corpse as a lieutenant? Can you raise an intelligent undead from both a severed head and its headless body? Would they share a soul or have two separate new souls, or is this just not possible?

For that matter, could you raise your own severed hand, for instance, as an intelligent undead? If your original body was then decapitated, could your severed hand then raise your body and head? This is assuming that the raised parts retain knowledge of life and death.

Is there already a mechanism in place for different bodies sharing a soul, and if not, do you plan to implement it? Either in the short term, or as part of Myth and Magic, do you intend to implement a mechanism whereby souls can be copied or cloned, so that they retain the original's memories and personality but thereafter grow and change as individuals?

Untrustedlife: http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=169696.msg8041302#msg8041302
Shonai_Dweller: http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=169696.msg8041346#msg8041346
Untrustedlife: http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=169696.msg8041348#msg8041348

The lieutenants require the 'fit for resurrection' style bodies, so they need to be more intact, and there shouldn't be issues with having shared souls.  Though we start to get into weird situations at some point with limb regrowth and all that, perhaps, at some point.  We might still be safe unless two central body parts (like the upper body) can be created.  And once we recognize the head as somehow being 'more' important than the body (due to brains, etc.), then we'll be back in trouble again, ha ha.  But at least it is harder to do by accident.

We haven't done anything for the short term, but copying souls would be fairly straightforward.  Doing a shared soul in two different bodies is more difficult, in terms of how goals and things work.  This is something that needs to be tackled in the deity-avatar sense, for those kinds of situations, and there are various ways to go about it.  Sometimes the multiple avatars don't know they are both aspects of the same deity (or whatever), but that's not the hard case.  Actually having goal structures etc. that are cohabitating with a shared skill/etc. set probably requires splitting the soul into pieces.  Which we were more-or-less planning to do, for metaphysical reasons as much as anything - even without the multi/sharing setups, having spells that can pop out and move about soul chunks is fun.  However, there isn't a canonical way to systematize soul chunks.  The best we can probably do is break them into the smallest coherent pieces we can think of, and then have an artificial structure living on top of that that groups them this way one time, this way another.  So in one universe you might have (personality-skills) + (memories), and another might have (personality-memories) + (skills), in two different "two soul chunk" setups.  But we'll see.  This might not happen on the first pass if we don't have good mileage to get out of it, compared to some of the big ticket items.

Quote from: Shonai_Dweller
I forget if it was asked before, but if you play your adventurer as a villain and indulge in bribary, kidnapping and general intimidation, what happens on retire? Does the adventurer revert to whatever their standard values and goals were (and therefore possibly quit being villainous altogether), or will they remember that they have a gang and carry on being bad, possibly even expanding their networks?

Is it possible to end up having to track down your ex-adventurers and will they start leaving evidence all over the place for you to follow? Or is the system not going to be that robust just yet

I haven't gotten there yet, but given how the data structures work, I think the default behavior is that it will continue.  They'll have plots and subordinates (just to get those plots to work), and that'll lead to more activity.  The specific plots hang under umbrella plots that encompass larger goals, and once these exist, they aren't eliminated based on value/goal checks or anything.  In the longer run, it'd be nice for things to be coherent, and for the game to understand what kind of 'villain' you intend to be (especially since a plot could just be the means to an end in a very specific situation), but currently, I think it assumes you are a lifelong participant in scheming.

And then...  yeah, i guess investigations of ex-advs might work?  All around?  That'd be nice.  The plots you do yourself, while playing, might not leave the same sort of data (I'm not sure yet, but there will be a lot of overlap), but anything that happens after would be subject to all the same systems.

Quote from: Buttery_Mess
Will we be able to use physical coercion and fear in lieu of intimidation checks? Such as, say, breaking fingers, or slaughtering all their mates in front of them? Does reputation count in intimidation checks? What about physical size and brawniness?

The physical attributes matter, as modifiers for the skill check, but it doesn't use creature-based sizes currently.  We'd considered it, and it's mostly appropriate, though it's such a weirdly skill-based game still, in terms of who would win, that it's not entirely proper to do it based on physicality.  Hopefully it'll be transparent enough, in any case.

There are many types of fear in the game now.  We haven't merged them all yet, but we're hoping to get it behaving consistently, in which case, yeah, purely action-based intimidation would work.

Quote from: Shonai_Dweller
Another question about alliances, as I realised the second part of my question on them back in May wasn't clarified (answer focused on who people would form alliances against).

Which civs will form alliances with each other? And, for modding reference, how is this determined? Does it take into account Babysnatcher/Item_Thief tags, current states of war, ethics?
I play with a mod which uses these tags to divide up the many different civs in my world so would be nice to know who's likely to be teaming up when the zombie apocalypse strikes.

PlumpHelmetMan: http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=169696.msg8044283#msg8044283
Shonai_Dweller (op): http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=169696.msg8044336#msg8044336
voliol: http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=169696.msg8044548#msg8044548
Shonai_Dweller (op): http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=169696.msg8044783#msg8044783
EternalCaveDragon: http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=169696.msg8044943#msg8044943

They don't use the babysnatcher etc. tags.  They use the kill neutral "required" response, as this is meant to preclude diplomacy.  We'd like to get beyond that at some point (they already trade, even if it's supposed to be kinda under the table), but it didn't come up as the alliances were working well already.  Only people that don't kill neutrals will ally, and those can all ally, provided they can communicate with each other (intelligent/speaks, not 'utterances'), and they aren't currently warring.  I'm not sure if that last bit will stay - it seems to work well enough now, and it's nice to allow war-causing villains to shake things up even in the face of gobs/undead, but the undead snowball is also worth stopping an elf-dwarf war over.  I might need to smear that out to some halfway point.  But currently, they must be at peace to ally.

Quote from: Broms
A question about these "accounts" historical figures and mercenary groups and the like have now. Are there any plans to incorporate those into fortress mode? If so, would there be an option to "pay coin" to a mercenary company to assassinate or capture someone?

Not currently.  We aren't to the mercenary company vs. fort part yet, and we don't have the fort hiring anybody either, when they can just use squads.  Of course, there are reasons you'd want to use somebody else, especially if your fort is wealthy, but we haven't gotten into the economy issues again there.
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 #2533 on: November 03, 2019, 04:40:26 pm »

Quote from: tpssurvivor
Question about relationships.
As for now, if I'm not mistaken the dwarves only seem to build relationship with others when they are at a meeting hall or tavern, under the "Socialize" job. With the upcoming villain update and the rewrite of social interactions, will dwarves (or whatever race you are playing fort mode) be able to "chit chat" or interact with others while doing other stuff? (e.g. Hauling objects; building stuff; comming across others while going somewhere; While they raid sites; Train in the squads).

PatrikLundell: http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=169696.msg8045390#msg8045390

Generally, the socialization bugs/issues are a whole topic, and we've collected various matter on that and will do something there.  Some of it will come with the current relationship rewrite, and some of it will come when we handle the stress/etc. stuff, which relates more to the pre-Steam release cleanup.  We haven't decided yet how the latter is going to be structured (between what happens with the actual Steam release, and what happens in the bug-fix period before we start doing graphics coding and all that.)

Quote from: Eric Blank
Latest devlog (10/24/2019) again mentions the possibility of losing because officials are corrupted. Do you intend for that to be a hard "game over" type lose? For instance, I could still run the fort if those corrupted officials stick to only stealing away things occasionally but still follow my orders re; posting militia to keep goblins out. Say, they're only ignoring part of my orders, those that are counter to their own objectives. That would still be playable, theyd basically just be slightly more obstinate than usual.

PatrikLundell: http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=169696.msg8045911#msg8045911

Yeah, as PatrikLundell says, we're not quite settled on this yet, but we are definitely trying to avoid a hard "game over" in all situations, no matter how screwed up they get, at least to the point where you have one last hurrah (should you want to give it a shot - you could just retire.)  People that are stealing stuff etc. will follow your orders generally.  When they aren't, those'll be the times they are literally moving an artifact around, and if you see that with your own eyes, you should just be able to arrest them and handle it (without being penalized, since you'll know what to ask about - this is sort of a weird unavoidable meta-game aspect to this.)

Quote from: PlumpHelmetMan
I know the adventure mode party work for this release is more-or-less done, but here's something I never thought to ask that just occurred to me:

Are the pets in custom adventuring parties directly controllable? Or are they restricted to just following the P.C.s?

Pets are not directly controllable.

Quote from: Death Dragon
Can you explain what you meant with:
"The first part was to add some new per-character variables to every conversation - how much a person wants to stay, whether they are pleased with things, and how confident/dominant/composed they are feeling"
Does that maybe mean there will be less "it was inevitable/ it is terrifying" and more actual emotion in people's reactions while talking?

therahedwig: http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=169696.msg8047870#msg8047870

Ha ha, yeah, sorry, therahedwig is correct in that a lot of that placeholder text is based on larger structural issues.  We're just doing some basic conversation flow metering to make sure basic exploits won't be possible during interrogations etc., and to give the conversations slightly better feelings/exposition based on relationship status.

Quote from: Weirdsound
With artifact theft plots coming to Fortress Mode, will we get more options on how we store, protect, manage and/or display our artifacts? Right now it is easy to choose where in the fortress your artifact bed or mechanism lives, but a pain in the ass to get an artifact sock or toy axe exactly where you want it.

therahedwig: http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=169696.msg8047870#msg8047870

Yeah - unless there's a bug I'm missing, therahedwig is correct that we've relatively recently corrected this by allowing you to use a pedestal or display case to get them exactly where you want them, and the witness/etc. system should make guards pretty effective even against citizen-thieves, if the location isn't too open.

Quote from: therahedwig
So, I know creatures with a nature loving trait get a happy thought from seeing an animal, but do you think you have the time to let dwarves pet their animals? In general, a key characteristic of villains is that they cause a lot of stress in others. Is there any kind of balancing in terms of destressors you guys are planning?

DG: http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=169696.msg8047979#msg8047979
therahedwig (op): http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=169696.msg8048112#msg8048112

The adventurer party was petting the pets (in particular, when they weren't under player control), so as far as I know, dwarves are on the petting train already.  However, it might not be visible anywhere in reports, and there isn't an associated thought, as I recall.  So this could be brought into line with pet 'chat', perhaps.

There isn't a particular anti-villain stress plan, but as noted, the whole thing is up for a larger look.

Quote from: Beag
2. You mentioned modifiers such as loyalty and love in how interrogation will work, does this mean our adventurers will finally be able to have friends and romantic interests to sate their needs for such things since those modifiers imply such relations will be possible?
3. With how easy it is to just loot valuables from warehouses in adventure mode in mind how effective do you think bribing NPCs to talk will be? I ask this as less scrupulous adventurers can easily procure a supply of goods to bribe people with from warehouses.
4. If our adventurer's use violence in interrogation in a town and word got out of that would they be penalized with a violent reputation still?

(note: 1. appears above, since it fit in with a another question)
2. Nope!
3. Generally, it's just not sensible yet and won't be -- the possessions are still not secured and we're not going to balance against that.  We'll need to get proper guarding and a justice system at some point.
4. Yeah.  Violence continues to be treated as a conflict incident in the same way as usual, with the same rep modifiers.

Quote from: DerMeister
Will butchering sentient corpse bug solved in Villains Update?

Shonai_Dweller: http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=169696.msg8047987#msg8047987
DoorKeeper: http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=169696.msg8047990#msg8047990

Quote from: Buttery_Mess
Does this mean that dwarves can remarry and continue having children?

For that matter, will it be possible for people to adopt babies if their mother dies? Because this is one of the saddest things to watch in a game. I had one dwarf get depressed and just left her baby crawling around outside, calling, "Mama!..." It tears me up a bit thinking about it. For reals.

Shonai_Dweller: http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=169696.msg8048008#msg8048008
PatrikLundell: http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=169696.msg8048055#msg8048055

Yeah, we haven't implemented it yet, but they should be able to remarry by the time the release is up.

We haven't done the adoption bit, but well, it's been on the radar for years, like a lot of things.

Quote
Quote from: DG
In the first iteration, will priests have duties they perform or is it limited to satisfying worshipers by occupying the position?
Quote from: Beag
1. How much more do you think you will develop organizations such as religious orders, merchant companies and mercenary companies before the next release? To clarify will they have activities they do besides simply existing? And if so would these activities be seen in fortress mode only or also in adventure mode to some degree?

It depends - the release date is going to be determined by finishing the core villain stuff, and the rest will be done alongside with some dedicated time we are setting aside (Mondays, currently.)  The release will balloon forever if we don't put some dampers on it, but we know a lot of people are more excited about this side of things, so we'll be adding little independent religion/guild/etc. pieces, and we'll get to some amount.  Ideally, all pieces of the release could work this way, incrementally, but villains are really a tangle, and they don't work without a certain amount of completion.  For religions, guilds, mercs, and merchants, we're just going to go on a log-by-log basis now rather than promising anything beforehand.

Quote from: kontako
It was mentioned in the steam dev-blog:
"If you use the arrest power in a ridiculous fashion, you'll see your fort turn against you, whether there's a villain there or not"
Could you expand on this?
Assuming it creates some hostility between dwarves which are 'loyalists' and others which rebel, if said rebels win do we continue to control the fortress under their government?

Ha ha, yeah, it'll depend a lot on what the against-villain implementation ends up being.  We've changed our mind a few times on that and it'll just get hashed out when we get there.  Part of the issue is the possibility of tying it into continuing to play if you, for instance, lose in a siege vs. the goblins or otherwise - a rebellion might also be possible there (not saying we'll get to that this time, but we need to think about it.)  When you're closer to a civil war state, it calls into question our whole "official will of the fortress" model for what the player is.  Perhaps you'll need to pick a side, perhaps you'll just be the side that wins (and therefore perhaps have less control over what the sides do), we're still thinking about it.

Quote from: Mort Stroodle
Kobolds and snatchers always get stopped from stealing anything because someone immediately sees them and they leave or get killed. Will villains have some more sneaky way to steal stuff and do their dirty work? What's to stop someone from seeing the thief the moment they walk through a main hallway with artifact in tow, rendering them a hostile and initiating a great dwarven dogpile? If you've got some other system in mind for sneaky thievery, will kobolds and snatchers be able to make use of it?

A kobold is a kobold, while a turned fortress citizen could presumably conceal a smaller artifact and not be noticed, or might be noticed but not stopped (just noted for a witness report.)  In the case where the citizen isn't leaving the map, they'll still need to do a handoff to somebody that is leaving the map, and this is also witness/stop worthy, but a little easier to control than an entire sneak-path is for the kobold.  So, hopefully it'll be more interesting, and still somewhat stoppable (for instance, maybe a citizen taking an artifact on a pedestal is always considered 'theft' if there isn't a job attached -- that's still more manageable for a theft AI than an entire sneak-path, and is the kind of thing we're trying.)

Quote from: Death Dragon
Do villainous infiltrator agents show up as visitors or also as migrants?

Shonai_Dweller: http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=169696.msg8049206#msg8049206

Generally, we're going to try it both ways.  Coming as a migrant puts the agent under your control, since a citizen is bound to stay for years, so it's a cost the villain is paying (they can't use the agent elsewhere unless you expel them), though it does give them some advantages in that they are a little harder to spot and don't have to make a petition to stay at first.

SD:  Ha ha, okay, I'll check it out.

Quote from: falcc
Can a royal official that trusts you get you access to talk to the king, now that they can trust and be verbally sparred?

Is it possible, theoretically, to talk your way all the way up an organizational chart, befriending every member, so as to convince them all to leave you alone?

How much harder is it now to convince every ruler that peace is good?

Are people less likely to listen to value arguments of people they don't like? Can talking people around through the verbal "fights" make them more receptive to value changes as well?

Access is complicated, currently, in that it's really important in w.g., but we haven't committed to giving it a shot in adv mode since it'll be tricky to pull off, requiring new guard systems and so forth.  But once we have that, that'll be the idea, working your way inward.  But the physical space needs to be controlled much better for it to be meaningful - conversational controls (like refusing to talk) only work to some extent, especially vs. intimidation etc.

Befriending everybody:  After you've been targeted in some way?  The main reason to need to do this in adv mode would be because you've drawn attention to yourself by aggressively acting counter to their interests.  You don't really get on their radar as an adventurer otherwise, unless you have an artifact or something maybe.  So you'd sort of have to work yourself all the way back from being hated, I guess, and it's not something I've focused on, canceling plots midstream.  So I'd need to do a bit more, and it's sort of an edge case.

Without the access changes, philosophical debate with rulers hasn't really changed much.  The new patience stuff should find its way out that far, which would make it a little harder, and yeah, that would also depend on the more permanent relationship traits.  Just because there are lots of them, the new conversation/relationship variables won't see a lot of action out in older conversation options, but the basic patience meter should have some impact.

Quote from: Nopenope
Why did you remove the AMBUSHER token from goblin civilizations?

Formally, is there any difference between a member of your party and a regular companion? If yes, is there any way to move one from the other?

Can you acquire pets beyond your starting party?

Are adventurer villainy and fortress villainy still on the table? What kind of plots are we expected to be able to carry out?

Do pilgrims physically move around to holy cities post world-gen?

Is your fort able to become a holy city? (For instance, if you're one of two cities with a religion and one gets razed) Can religions, prophets and persecutions spontaneously arise in your fortress?

Can pilgrims arrive in your fort if you have a shrine?

Can your fort be a host to a holy relic (e.g. if you host a religion's high priest)?

PatrikLundell: http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=169696.msg8049984#msg8049984
Shonai_Dweller: http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=169696.msg8050068#msg8050068
Nopenope (op): http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=169696.msg8050216#msg8050216
Shonai_Dweller: http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=169696.msg8050307#msg8050307

Unless somebody finds a post, the AMBUSHER/goblin thing is lost to time.  I just don't remember.  Certainly both goblins and humans should be a bit more versatile, and maybe we'll see some of that when we finally take a look at sieges, whenever that happens.

Yeah, party members can be controlled by swapping and in the tactical mode, whereas regular companions always act under computer control.  We don't have a way to promote or demote them from those statuses yet - we were considering something like 100% loyalty if you wanted to do a party promote, but that's still a pretty big step.  (at the same time, if, eventually, you'll be able to be any historical figure, it's not that big a step - it's more what you should be able to do in a given game, without require a retire, to avoid easy exploits and oddness.)  On the demotion side, we still need to handle violence between party members (which is generally a player issue) - not sure what'll go on with demotion there, if anything - these situations would either be less extreme (the desired sparring, for example) or more extreme (full companionship breakup, rather than party->companion demotion.)

I have not yet done anything with post-start pets, despite that being a goal of ours.

Yeah, adventure villainy is still on the table.  We are feeling pressed for time, but it also remains fairly straightforward to add.

For the fort, it depends on how these anti-villain off-site actions play out -- you can already send a squad to destroy an entire town.  Adding a targeted assassination/'arrest'(kidnap) won't be too difficult, especially since those already exist for villains.  But we're going to start with on-site investigations and follow where that goes.  Off-site stuff seems necessary for a satisfying resolution.

Pilgrims move physically, yeah -- even the ones that come to your fort path across the world map.  I'm not sure what the comprehensive list of 'teleporters' is currently...  migrants teleport, diplomats/liaisons teleport, merchant caravans coming to the fort teleport - the oldest calendar events.  Are those the only ones left?  All of the 'heroic' and religious and scholarly professions move as armies do (to the fort and otherwise), as do siegers/thieves now.  Ah, beast attacks (mega/forgotten/etc.) are still world map teleporters -- mainly because the FBs live underground and underground travel is still annoying.

The pilgrims visit temples as usual.

We don't have a holy relic creator yet.  These are usually body parts and possessions of priests, so it'll be on the table when the high priests go in, but as with all the features associated to organized religion in the fort, it'll be log-by-log and we'll see where it goes.

Quote from: Khalvin
Will Museums, Sculpture Gardens, and Tombs/Memorial Halls eventually operate in the same system as the Taverns, Libraries, and Temples?
Will we see social events like marriages and funerals in Temples like we see spontaneous Performances in Taverns?

Shonai_Dweller: http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=169696.msg8050152#msg8050152

Yeah, as stated by Shonai_Dweller, these can be incorporated into the latter locations.  However, I do think it'll be cool later to be able to raise other types of places to 'location' status.  Certainly something recognized as a 'Tomb' or 'Museum' could have a temple in it, rather than the other way around.  We may get to more with this when we get to the embark situation stuff, we'll have to see how that all shakes out.  'Sites' themselves could also use some reconceptualizing, as far as the purposes go, and in various other ways, concerning how they are nested and so forth, at which point the site/location boundary blurs.

We'd like to do more with ceremonies of various kinds, but we aren't there yet.

Quote from: FantasticDorf
With the correct configuration of ethics, will modders have the ability to disband the penalty/aggressively pursue conviction for incorrectly or misjudged arrests, or will the multiple factors like attitudes to justice affect this no matter which typical or tweaked entity civilization you will play?

Modding values for the civ should have an impact on it, yeah, since you are already able to squelch things like people caring about wrongful convictions.  There's the problem of value randomization for individuals, which would lead to a few people still caring.  You'd also have to mod personality trait ranges to get rid of some of the other negative emotions, though.
Logged
The Toad, a Natural Resource:  Preserve yours today!

Buttery_Mess

  • Bay Watcher
  • 11x11
    • View Profile
Re: Future of the Fortress
« Reply #2534 on: November 03, 2019, 08:02:32 pm »

Thanks Toady! Much appreciated.
Logged
But .... It's so small!
It's not the size of the pick that counts... it's the size of the man with the pick.
Pages: 1 ... 167 168 [169] 170 171 ... 174