Bay 12 Games Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  
Pages: 1 ... 5 6 [7]

Author Topic: What should dwarf fortresses be bad at?  (Read 11689 times)

HAMMERMILL

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: What should dwarf fortresses be bad at?
« Reply #90 on: May 28, 2010, 03:39:27 pm »

That made me chuckle.  It's also getting entered in the List of Things I Am No Longer Allowed to do in ShadowRun.

You play pen and paper Shadowrun? I used to GM Shadowrun sessions and after that group disbanded its hard to find folks that have even heard of it.

If this was a bar I'd buy you a drink. Well, a cheap drink, anyways.
Logged

Hyndis

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: What should dwarf fortresses be bad at?
« Reply #91 on: May 28, 2010, 06:22:45 pm »

This means that a single farm tile can produce 8 x 5 = 40 plants per year. More if you bother to fertilize it, but most stacks of plants top out of 5.

As each dwarf only needs 8 units of food per year, 1 single tile of farm land can feed 5 dwarves.

This would be like feeding 5 adult humans from a piece of land the same size as a dining room table.  :o

Exactly.  And they'd only have to plant it once a year.

The only thing I can think of that's like that is zucchini (ever grown zucchini?  1 vine feeds 100 people for a month)
'

You'd still need to tend the farm year around. Remember, that value is depending on getting 8 harvests of plump helmets in, which is doable if you have enough farmers.

But its still an absurd crop yield per unit of land. A 10x10 plump helmet farm will feed 500 dwarves! Forever! Also drinks too from booze.  :o

Probably the best solution is to drastically increase growing time. Making dwarves eat more often would be bad as it would cut significantly into productivity, as they would spend all of their time in the dining room. Making them eat more at once could be doable though.

Perhaps add in rations? Make it a global option.

Meager = 1 food per meal = unhappy thought
Normal = 2 food per meal = neutral thought
Extra = 3 food per meal = happy thought
Double = 4 food per meal = extremely happy thought

Or it might be easier to just increase growing times, which will reduce the yield of each unit of land, requiring much more land to sustain a large population.
Logged

Draco18s

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: What should dwarf fortresses be bad at?
« Reply #92 on: May 28, 2010, 08:49:55 pm »

That made me chuckle.  It's also getting entered in the List of Things I Am No Longer Allowed to do in ShadowRun.

You play pen and paper Shadowrun?

Oh yeah.  My group just finished up the Renraku Shutdown campaign (4e rules, 3e module (IIRC)).  Cashed out with a final payout exceeding 1.3 million per player* (I figured out I could buy a permanent lifestyle of 7k/mo. rent--Runners Companion's advanced lifestyles are awesome; 7k/mo is between middle and high lifestyle, and slightly above what I'd started the game with--and turn the rest into karma at the GM's indicated rate and end up with a 10 Public Awareness: high enough to have a trid made about him).

We're transitioning over to the Dresden Files RPG for our next game though.  GM wanted to try something new.

*Know what pays that much to 6 people?
Logged

Nikov

  • Bay Watcher
  • Riverend's Flame-beater of Earth-Wounders
    • View Profile
Re: What should dwarf fortresses be bad at?
« Reply #93 on: May 29, 2010, 06:55:46 am »

I'm trying a new little mod to longland grass; 2500 grow duration and cluster sizes of ten, mill value of one. Lets see if I can support an entire fortress off a more reasonable amount of land than the base game.
Logged
I should probably have my head checked, because I find myself in complete agreement with Nikov.

Rowanas

  • Bay Watcher
  • I must be going senile.
    • View Profile
Re: What should dwarf fortresses be bad at?
« Reply #94 on: May 29, 2010, 09:07:37 am »

Yay! People aware of Shadowrun (not the crappy xbox game). I think that game may be partly responsible for my transhumanist philosophical outlook.
Logged
I agree with Urist. Steampunk is like Darth Vader winning Holland's Next Top Model. It would be awesome but not something I'd like in this game.
Unfortunately dying involves the amputation of the entire body from the dwarf.

Deathworks

  • Bay Watcher
  • There be no fortress without its feline rulers!
    • View Profile
Re: What should dwarf fortresses be bad at?
« Reply #95 on: May 29, 2010, 10:45:57 am »

Hi!

I'm trying a new little mod to longland grass; 2500 grow duration and cluster sizes of ten, mill value of one. Lets see if I can support an entire fortress off a more reasonable amount of land than the base game.

I hope you will inform us about your results (like how much farmland you actually needed and how the experience compared to the standard).

About Shadowrun: Well, my group and I gave it one or two tries back then, but I am too cynical a game master, so it always ended miserably for the party. Add to this that I had a real problem getting a feeling for the effectiveness of armor and things... Let's just say that that none of the runs ended pretty (^_^;;

Deathworks
Logged

Draco18s

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: What should dwarf fortresses be bad at?
« Reply #96 on: May 29, 2010, 11:57:07 am »

About Shadowrun: Well, my group and I gave it one or two tries back then, but I am too cynical a game master, so it always ended miserably for the party. Add to this that I had a real problem getting a feeling for the effectiveness of armor and things... Let's just say that that none of the runs ended pretty (^_^;;

You should try and dial it back towards "Pink Mohawk" where you expect the players to do their planning thus:

A: "Do we have enough grenades?"
B: "No, you can never have enough grenades."
C: "Lets drive the van through the front door and then shoot everyone anything that moves."
A & B: "Sounds good, lets roll!"

As for armor, figure every 3 points of armor is worth a point of damage (and the players only have 10 or 12 of those!)  Except that really high values of armor (over 10, as its rare that an attack from man-portable weapons will achieve enough hits to do that much) means that they'll be taking stun, not physical (recover in hours, rather than days).
Logged

Schilcote

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: What should dwarf fortresses be bad at?
« Reply #97 on: May 29, 2010, 02:29:06 pm »

About Shadowrun: Well, my group and I gave it one or two tries back then, but I am too cynical a game master, so it always ended miserably for the party. Add to this that I had a real problem getting a feeling for the effectiveness of armor and things... Let's just say that that none of the runs ended pretty (^_^;;

You should try and dial it back towards "Pink Mohawk" where you expect the players to do their planning thus:

A: "Do we have enough grenades?"
B: "No, you can never have enough grenades."
C: "Lets drive the van through the front door and then shoot everyone anything that moves."
A & B: "Sounds good, lets roll!"

As for armor, figure every 3 points of armor is worth a point of damage (and the players only have 10 or 12 of those!)  Except that really high values of armor (over 10, as its rare that an attack from man-portable weapons will achieve enough hits to do that much) means that they'll be taking stun, not physical (recover in hours, rather than days).

Sounds a lot like an NPC fight in GMod...
Logged
WHY DID YOU HAVE ME KICK THEM WTF I DID NOT WANT TO BE SHOT AT.
I dunno, you guys have survived Thomas the tank engine, golems, zombies, nuclear explosions, laser whales, and being on the same team as ragnarock.  I don't think something as tame as a world ending rain of lava will even slow you guys down.

Draco18s

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: What should dwarf fortresses be bad at?
« Reply #98 on: May 29, 2010, 05:54:22 pm »

Sounds a lot like an NPC fight in GMod...

What ShadowRun is varies from group to group (and player to player).

Mirror Shades aka Black Trenchcoat is very hard-core professional serious.  Stealth, stealth, and more stealth.  If it comes to a gunfight, you've fucked up big time.  Visually characters look like the Matrix characters.

Pink Mohawk is on the other end of the spectrum.  So named for the outrageous hair styles often sported by the characters in this trope, but plays out like the Matrix (especially the bank lobby scene).  Murdercycles, grenades, full auto shotguns, panther cannons, grenades, missiles, more grenades, and full auto grenade launchers.
Logged

Deathworks

  • Bay Watcher
  • There be no fortress without its feline rulers!
    • View Profile
Re: What should dwarf fortresses be bad at?
« Reply #99 on: May 29, 2010, 06:11:03 pm »

Hi!

Thank you for the advice, but I have become inactive as far as pen and paper roleplaying is concerned several years ago (I tried Shadowrun when the second edition was fairly new).

I mainly focused on AD&D 2nd edition (plus the skills expansions, later) and got a good feeling for that, although I also collected other rule books of games I never got around to play (most notable Wraith:The Oblivion which has really some fantastic concepts behind it and some great source books). Also had a rather small look at GURPS and a handful of Japanese pen and paper RPGs.

So, I think I have answered all questions/cleared up any uncertainties, so we should probably take the pen and paper discussions elsewhere and not further derail this thread (^_^;;

Deathworks
Logged

darkflagrance

  • Bay Watcher
  • Carry on, carry on
    • View Profile
Re: What should dwarf fortresses be bad at?
« Reply #100 on: May 29, 2010, 06:44:06 pm »

This means that a single farm tile can produce 8 x 5 = 40 plants per year. More if you bother to fertilize it, but most stacks of plants top out of 5.

As each dwarf only needs 8 units of food per year, 1 single tile of farm land can feed 5 dwarves.

This would be like feeding 5 adult humans from a piece of land the same size as a dining room table.  :o

Exactly.  And they'd only have to plant it once a year.

The only thing I can think of that's like that is zucchini (ever grown zucchini?  1 vine feeds 100 people for a month)
'

You'd still need to tend the farm year around. Remember, that value is depending on getting 8 harvests of plump helmets in, which is doable if you have enough farmers.

But its still an absurd crop yield per unit of land. A 10x10 plump helmet farm will feed 500 dwarves! Forever! Also drinks too from booze.  :o

Probably the best solution is to drastically increase growing time. Making dwarves eat more often would be bad as it would cut significantly into productivity, as they would spend all of their time in the dining room. Making them eat more at once could be doable though.

Perhaps add in rations? Make it a global option.

Meager = 1 food per meal = unhappy thought
Normal = 2 food per meal = neutral thought
Extra = 3 food per meal = happy thought
Double = 4 food per meal = extremely happy thought

Or it might be easier to just increase growing times, which will reduce the yield of each unit of land, requiring much more land to sustain a large population.

Another solution would be to alter the growing seasons of crops, so that, for example, plump helmets might only be grown in Winter, and Sweet Pods in Spring. So you have all of 1 season to get food to last the rest of the year.

A bit unrealistic for underground crops though.
Logged
...as if nothing really matters...
   
The Legend of Tholtig Cryptbrain: 8000 dead elves and a cyclops

Tired of going decades without goblin sieges? Try The Fortress Defense Mod

Kogan Loloklam

  • Bay Watcher
  • I'm suffering from an acute case of Hominini Terravitae Biologis. Keep your distance!
    • View Profile
Re: What should dwarf fortresses be bad at?
« Reply #101 on: May 29, 2010, 08:17:27 pm »

A Growdur of 1680 is 5 in-game months. That makes it only 2.5 harvests a year, or 15 food. 1 tile would feed 2 dwarves, a 10x10 would barely be adequate for 200 dwarves with booze. That is with legendary growers. I think if you set your growdurs to 1680, it'd work out pretty well.

Here's a "Plant Mod" to work with as a base
The former 300 timeframes have been converted to 1680(5 months), and the 500s and unlisted to 2800(8 months and 9 days.) 

We can adjust things from there I think.

Spoiler: plant_standard (click to show/hide)
Logged
... if someone dies TOUGH LUCK. YOU SHOULD HAVE PAYED ATTENTION DURING ALL THE DAMNED DODGING DEMONSTRATIONS!
Pages: 1 ... 5 6 [7]