Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Aristharus]

quote:Originally posted by Oboro:
<STRONG>Immigration has actually proved too slow in my most recent game, but it's the first time. I'm only getting one wave of migrants a year, and even though it's a big wave, 25-30, it's not enough to make the entire year interesting and challenging. I'm out of work by the beginning of winter, usually.</STRONG>

I've had this for a while now, and I've never even felt the need to drown anyone, so I really don't think the number of immigrants should be cut. Of course, if so many people see it as a problem, having it as an option of some kind couldn't hurt.. maybe.

• rders -> "refuse migrants" sounded kinda easy to make. I wouldn't touch it, but if so many people want it, I say let them have it.

[Aquillion]

quote:Originally posted by Toady One:
<STRONG>I haven't had much trouble with immigration myself once I know what to expect, but we had the giant ass immigration thread discussion ways you might declare/curb immigration with natural repercussions.  I'm not sure I understand the noble mandate system for immigration.  Many people wouldn't view a mandate restricting immigration as a reward, but as a punishment which stifles their plans.  And having your declared goals directly translate into a noble mandate rubs up against the degree of autonomy the dwarves have.  You create building projects and set work goals, as well as designating areas for certain activities to be performed.  In the future, you'll be able to have more control over which dwarves work are assigned to which areas and workshops.  I don't have a well-formed picture yet, but perhaps within the bounds of your mandate as a kind of manager there's a means of immigration control that works.  Given the standing orders system, simply having a "refuse migrants" order doesn't seem so out of bounds.</STRONG>

Once you get some high-level noble, it could take the form of immigration quotas...  you could set it up to 'accept X fisherdwarves', 'accept X miners', 'accept no more than X dwarves total' or something like that.  Or maybe just set preferences as when setting up a trade agreement, with a general preference at the top for how many total you want to accept.

Then you could have illegal immigrants running the border...  risking getting eaten by wolves and elephants for a better future in your fortress...  getting stuck with low-paying hauling jobs.  And of course demagogues demanding tighter immigration controls.

...hrm.  Maybe once you get representatives from specific guilds, you could work through those guilds to attract highly-skilled workers...  like, once per season or year or something you could issue a request of some sort to each of the guilds with a representative, and one of the options could be to request a skilled worker from a skill related to their guild.  Of course, you'd have to be in good standing with the guild and its representative if you expect them to listen to you...  Maybe guilds could also request that you send them some of your workers from time to time or something...

Another idea:  While migrants are still coming towards your fortress and marked with an 'x', you could have a "reject migrant" option from their 'q' menu.  Of course, there are risks associated with doing so.  Rejecting a dwarf who is related to another dwarf may make that other dwarf leave, too, or may cause them to get upset.  The dwarf you reject might not go peacefully; they could go berserk, or grab a bunch of stuff on their way out.  Finally, if you reject a lot of dwarves whose skills fall under one of the main guilds, you might offend that guild... you might also offend some other organization behind them.

An offended guild could blacklist you, preventing you from getting any migrants from their ranks...  this could even cause dwarven traders to stop visiting you until the situation is resolved somehow.

If things come down to a fight against irate rejected immigrants, this would probably make your own dwarves unhappy...

Hrm.  The immigrant-rejection system could be expanded into a whole exile system, allowing you to kick out almost any dwarf in your fortress...  of course, you couldn't exile a dwarf in the middle of a tantrum or anything like that, and since exiling a critically wounded dwarf would be the equivalent of executing them, it would piss lots of your dwarves off.  Exiling a dwarf who is already in a bad mood would be much more likely to make him go berserk or throw a tantrum rather than leaving.  And when you exile a dwarf, you piss off all his friends, too...

Sometimes unhappy dwarves could just decide to leave your fortress instead of doing anything violent.  They might take things with them, though...

In general, dwarves leaving the fortress would have lots of potential for tie-ins either with other fortresses, or in adventurer mode.

Exiling or rejecting a noble would be something else entirely.  If it's allowed at all, it would have to have fairly dire consequences, at least if used on any noble of note.  You could easily get blacklisted by the entire civilization or somesuch just for snubbing a single high-ranking noble.  And of course the same would happen if they decided to storm out or something.

I do think that if the player wants to effectively 'cut themselves off' from Dwarven civilization, that should be possible.  It doesn't make sense to me that it would work any other way; if they make themselves known as unfriendly to dwarven outsiders, outside dwarves will eventually stop coming.  But if they're turning aside migrants and otherwise offending their mother country, they shouldn't expect regularly, friendly dwarven traders or anything like that, either...  and after snubbing them for so long, it shouldn't be easy for players to just turn around and bring in new blood.  They should be able to reconcile things eventually, probably, but it'd cost them.

[ August 30, 2006: Message edited by: Aquillion ]

[imsabbel]

quote:  I'm not sure I understand the noble mandate system for immigration.  Many people wouldn't view a mandate restricting immigration as a reward, but as a punishment which stifles their plans.

Very easy: take the united states.

-In the beginning, all immigration and "we need people"  and stuff.
-later: industrial revolution, central gouvernment, ect
-now: gouvernment issue green cards to let in a decided number of people, with cherry-picking (at least theorectically)

[Toady One]

I was reading your comment in the context of the thread discussion regarding ways for the player to actively curb immigration, not as a general process.

[imsabbel]

Well, my point about immigration is twofold:

For one, it makes for an INCREDIBLY steep lerning curve. The first two tries, without the farming section of the wiki to help, the 10 or so arrivals the first fall meant certain dead.

Otoh, this challange dissapears near completely after getting used to the game.

But that doesnt mean it should be ignored by you. Even though nobody here will have a problem, its still HARD for somebody who just has the game "as is" to ever get over that part.

OTOH, in late games, you might WANT as much immigration as possible, just for the workforce.
Or you might want to keep away peasants, but encourage the immigration of metalsmiths and farmers.

Of course, that noble (maybe "minister of border affairs" or something) wouldnt be able to really _control_ the immigration completely, but he should be able to encourage people to come, or at least reduce the number of personae ingratae.

I mean, right now i am at the point were i start really getting used to the game mechanics, and i dont really see any point in defeating demons or fighting battles.
For me, its a real nice "people simulation" game, like settlers crossed with dungeon keeper. And i just enjoy building a bigger and bigger town of dwarfes, so i would actually like to get 200, 300 or more of them...

[Tormy]

quote:Originally posted by Toady One:
<STRONG>I haven't had much trouble with immigration myself once I know what to expect, but we had the giant ass immigration thread discussion ways you might declare/curb immigration with natural repercussions.  I'm not sure I understand the noble mandate system for immigration.  Many people wouldn't view a mandate restricting immigration as a reward, but as a punishment which stifles their plans.  And having your declared goals directly translate into a noble mandate rubs up against the degree of autonomy the dwarves have.  You create building projects and set work goals, as well as designating areas for certain activities to be performed.  In the future, you'll be able to have more control over which dwarves work are assigned to which areas and workshops.  I don't have a well-formed picture yet, but perhaps within the bounds of your mandate as a kind of manager there's a means of immigration control that works.  Given the standing orders system, simply having a "refuse migrants" order doesn't seem so out of bounds.</STRONG>

Refuse migrants order would be nice.
 

[ August 30, 2006: Message edited by: Tormy ]

[Maurog]

I think if you refuse migrants, they should go away and live in the nearby woods/hills outside your map. Of course they will have to survive on their own... in the outside... under the damned sun... so one would suspect they will turn into bandits and attack caravans at some point. Or even go for an attempt at your fortress once there are enough. And in that case, even if you win, your dwarves will get depressed and kill themselves.

Yes, rejecting migrants definitely sounds like fun.

[flap]

Well, for now, the only target in DF is to grow and survive (or eventually kill some demons).

But later, as far as I have understood, the fortress will be a mean to influence the surrounding world. At this point, the more dwarf, the more power.

So, in this state of alpha version, yes DF looks like tetris, with waves of immigrants to fit in, and not much else to do. Be it might become different later.

[Xether]

Thats a nice idea,Maurog. Prehaps the rejected dwarves could make a small shanty town or as you said bandits who would attack the caravans and try raid your fortresses food supply. It would give a good disadvantage for rejecting migrants.

[ August 30, 2006: Message edited by: Xether ]

[deek0146]

You dont seem to understand the dwarf fortress defininition of fun...
For reference see http://df.magmawiki.com/index.php/Fun

[Doomshifter]

Excuse me, thread necro much? The last post was in August 30, 2006! That was almost FOUR YEARS AGO.

[Kanil]

Clearly, people were not having Fun four years ago. I think he wants us to mourn for them.

[random51]

Having your craftsdwarf beaten to death because he couldn't make enough crowns for the mayor's ever-increasing crown fetish.

Don't appoint a sheriff, ever.

Meanwhile, the goblins invading the fortress get the attention of exactly one guard.

Don't leave the front door open. With the variety of defenses at your disposal there should never be invaders inside your fortress, at least not inside areas not specifically created to destroy them. Other than a flying megabeast, it is pretty simple to keep your fort safe.

Dwarves in strange moods demanding ores that can't be found in a ten-screen radius of any point in the fortress.

This does suck. You can disable artifacts completely, or better yet you can just modify the reactions file so that your smelter can produce what you need for the strange mood.

The overwhelming urge dwarves have to clean up bodies and traps as soon as they fire. Nevermind that the enemies affected by them are still -under- them.

Forbid other Dead in the workshop orders/forbid menu takes care of the bodies. Forbidding the traps themselves prevents dwarves from cleaning/reloading them before you want the to do so.

The overwhelming urge for the entire population of the fort to stop any job worth doing to clean the rock from that mining operation near the lava, right past the fire imps.

If you let the imps out you have nobody to blame but yourself. Kill them beforehand or use one of the various ways of letting magma out while keeping the imps inside.

No I will NOT mint more coins. Use the ones you have.

Disable economy in the init file.  I always do as I don't find any of the features enabled by economy to be even remotely entertaining.

Four years? lol.  Better late then never.

[jaked122]

Asking for less immigrants and nobles is like playing Tetris and asking if it could stop dropping bricks.

am I the only one that tetris listens to then?

[Calvin]

this thread is dead STOP REVIVING THIS

/holymagic