Print

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

[BubbaBrown]

After all the time with playing Dwarf Fortress, a number things has bothered me about the systems in place.  One of those is the industrial processes.  There's a good number of extra steps and unneeded buildings in the mix with a few extra skills, too.  I'm going to point out the things that could change and not change the game for 75% of the people playing.  Of those remaining, it'll be a 50/50 split of the typical hate/love thing.

Industrial Process Reduction:
Merge the "Wood Furnace", "Ashery", "Kiln" to the "Kiln".  From research on the subject and personal experience with making charcoal, lye, and potash...  There's very little reason to have three buildings for these closely related processes.  Most people now and historically, usually, did all their wood burning tasks close to the same firepit, furnace, or kiln.

Remove "Pearlash" and replace with using "Potash".  Pearlash is just more refined Potash.  For the purposes of the game, Potash will work just fine, as Potash was used in glass for quite some time.

Merge "Tanner's Shop" and "Leather Works" to "Leather Works".  I could see a little benefit in having a separate building for tanning, but you could just build a dedicated Leather Works off to the side with a work list kept empty to handle automated tanning jobs.

Merge "Kitchen" and "Soap Maker's Workshop" to "Kitchen".  Much like the Tanner's Shop, it can be nice to have some distinct separation of buildings for tasks... but soap making isn't too complicated of a process that a Kitchen couldn't handle.  The Soap Maker's Workshop does have extra building requirements, but these could be reworked into requirements for the Kitchen.  For what the Kitchen does, it has conservative building requirements.

"Lye" should be a more of "Kitchen" task.  Lye is made by drenching Potash and collecting what seeps out from the pile.  Also... as of right now, Lye could be removed as it's only is used to make soap.  Since Lye is made from Potash in a process that could easily done in the process of soap making, Potash could replace the Lye requirements for soap.  If Lye starts to be needed elsewhere, it can be added to the Kitchen.

Merge "Bowyer's Workshop" with "Craftdwarf's Workshop".  Woodcrafters in the Craftdwarf's workshop could take care of everything the Bowyer's do, easily.

Merge "Dyer's Shop" and "Loom" to "Textile Workshop".  The Loom and Dyer's Shop are closely related and could be merged without changing the game much.  As with the Tanner's shop merge, you can set aside a Textile Workshop to handle automated tasks that the Loom does.  This also reduces the amount of stuff needing to be hauled around between different shops.

Mechanic's Workshop either needs to allow more options for input materials or just merge it with Siege Workshop to create an Engineer's Workshop.  As it stands right now, it has very important items, but not that many to really justify another building.  An Engineer's Workshop could house it all.

Industrial Skill Reduction:
Remove Crossbow-making.  There are number of other crafting skills that can take care and handle this skill's domain a few times over.

Remove Small Animal Dissection.  There probably was an intended purpose for this, but between Trapping, Hunting, and Butchering...  I can't see a strong case for it.  Anything in its domain is covered by other skills.

Merge Wood Burning and Potash Making to Kiln Operator.  This is in conjunction with the industrial process reduction.  There's just not enough reason looking at the processes involved (in game and real world) to have two limited domain skills of this nature.

Remove Lye Making.  Lye Making is no more difficult than Cooking or Soap Making.  It could be taken care of by a few other skills depending on the context of lye use.  (Also, my Lye-Makers usually end up becoming fodder for the militia draft.)

Remove Fish Dissection.  The process of cleaning a fish... is damn near dissecting it.  Also, Butchering could take care any processes that require Fish Dissection or these process could be alluded in Fishing or Fish Cleaning.  (Speaking of Lye-Makers... these guys are also part of the minute militia draftees.)

I love Dwarf Fortress, but it has some SERIOUS numeric, fodder, item, skill and process glut.  Complicated is good, but you have to be complicated with decent enough reasons or it just gets annoying.  From the experiences of designing my own pen and paper RPG with tweaking mechanics, defining skill lists, and reducing the system to key components and getting rid of extraneous parts...  You need to know when to prune.  It seems like DF was pretty front heavy early on and it might be time to cut back a few things to allow the rest of the game room to grow correctly.  And anyway, anything removed can ALWAYS be added later when it is needed again.

[G-Flex]

Keep in mind that some of the clutter you're seeing is due to the fact that some things will/may have uses later on, but don't yet. There's a lot of this in DF, actually, although more behind the scenes than what you can see. For instance, it's quite probable that lye will have more uses in the future, so removing it now might not be the smartest idea.

Some of the other suggestions make sense, although I think a tannery should be separate from the leatherworks, if only because historically, tanning was such a filthy and disgusting process (to some degree, it still is today) that nobody in their right mind would work with the finished product on-premises.

Remove Crossbow-making.  There are number of other crafting skills that can take care and handle this skill's domain a few times over.

Whoa there. I see what you mean, but I think you're misinformed. Bow-making is definitely a skill unto itself, and was treated as such historically. It's not very similar to making crafts (which are ornamental), or furniture (which mostly just has to be sturdy and ornamental), or even other weapons (which tend to work on completely different properties anyway). Especially depending on the type of bow made, bowyering is very much something that would be done by a skilled craftsman with particular skill in that field. The fact is that most of what you have to consider when building a bow, you don't have to consider quite as much in any other of the wood-oriented professions.

Remove Small Animal Dissection.  There probably was an intended purpose for this, but between Trapping, Hunting, and Butchering...  I can't see a strong case for it.  Anything in its domain is covered by other skills.

This falls into the category of stuff that isn't as useful as it probably will be at some point. There's a big difference between being able to dissect an animal thoroughly and butchering/killing it. There's some overlap with butchery, but not enough to justify merging the skills. I think this is just an issue of the skill not being terribly useful yet; I'm sure it will be when creature extracts are more than just cheap trade goods.

[catsplosion]

It seems like Toady can't make up his mind as to whether these processes are inherent in the goods or in the shops.  He's indicated that reactions are supposed to be properties of the things, but that going too far down that path will drag the game to a halt as it checks whether the dwarves' boots are reacting with the ground they walk on, and everything else, every frame.  It doesn't seem like a reasonable middle ground should be hard to reach.

The best solution, taking the need for adventurer skills into account, might be to make these transformations inherent in the reactants, and to treat the workshops as seats of dwarven capacity and convenience.  The production of lye is inherent in potash, and a dwarf that knows how can do it in a soapmaker's shop as readily as in a kitchen.  Workshops list jobs based on the desirable products they can produce, and dwarves find the most efficient way to finish the jobs.  It's a simple enough search to perform.

(Personally, I don't like workshops at all.  I think that everything should come down to simple components, like tables and chairs, but with the addition of shelves and basins and such, and that tasks should be assigned to particular dwarves or to the fortress as a whole to be carried out as they best know how.  But hey, that's why I've never finished writing a game, myself.  God help us if Toady should take such a path.)

[marcusbjol]

I agree with BubbaBrown on most points; Overloading skills is better than having more of them.

A butcher should be able to dissect as well as butcher.  Having the 2 separate skills might have some future purpose, but it is hard to see what that might be and not be linked to the process of dissembling animals for component parts.  If it is a non lethal process of fluid extraction (i.e. poison), then animal care taking is a better choice.  The same could be said for fish cleaning/dissection.

Tanning and Dying are 2 process that involved liquid chemicals that are specifically not desired in the finish product shops (no tailor I know has dye laying around in his sewing room).  They should remain separate workshops.  The rest do not add value to the end player.

Boyer skill - Eh... I NEVER use it as it stands.  I always either embark with a weaponsmith or get one mooded in the game.  Wood bolts use crafting.  So I easily make copper crossbows bypassing the skill entirely.  As this skill is valueless (pretty much) either remove it, or make all bow making use the skill, regardless of material.

[BubbaBrown]

The best solution, taking the need for adventurer skills into account, might be to make these transformations inherent in the reactants, and to treat the workshops as seats of dwarven capacity and convenience.  The production of lye is inherent in potash, and a dwarf that knows how can do it in a soapmaker's shop as readily as in a kitchen.  Workshops list jobs based on the desirable products they can produce, and dwarves find the most efficient way to finish the jobs.  It's a simple enough search to perform.

Pulling from my experiences in database theory, I'm seeing a trinary (triplet) relationship between item, zone, and method.  Items are simply items.  They just exist.  Zones are places that exist.  Methods are processes that can happen.  To "Process" something, you need item(s), place(s), and method(s).  This way you don't have needless overhead on any one part, and only need to calculate the combination of them when the "Process" happens.  You know, it might be a good means for optimization for an ER diagram of the game's different systems to be made.  Many times I have spotted loops, gaps, and faults doing so.  Also, a bit of database theory could get help get data sorted out.

(Personally, I don't like workshops at all.  I think that everything should come down to simple components, like tables and chairs, but with the addition of shelves and basins and such, and that tasks should be assigned to particular dwarves or to the fortress as a whole to be carried out as they best know how.  But hey, that's why I've never finished writing a game, myself.  God help us if Toady should take such a path.)

With the style I see many people take, it would be interesting to remove workshops and replace it with work zones.  Most people sort their workshops by purpose and materials used anyway.  You could then have a "request list" of sorts where you request items to be made.  With normalized and defined method, item, and zone tables in an internal db, the game could then process the hierarchies quickly to see if it could be done.  If it finds something missing, it can then alert the player and flag that request.  It won't cancel it, but your dwarves will tell what is missing and you can authorize them to attempt to address the issue.  It adds a bit of automation where you want it without going overboard.  Hmm...

Keep in mind that some of the clutter you're seeing is due to the fact that some things will/may have uses later on, but don't yet. There's a lot of this in DF, actually, although more behind the scenes than what you can see. For instance, it's quite probable that lye will have more uses in the future, so removing it now might not be the smartest idea.

I understand that, but it might be more prudent to remove these items until they are needed or it is time to add them.  From what I gathered a lot is hard coded right now, but moving towards a more flexible system would allow far easier modification of these parts of the game.  Remove things, but along with the creation of a system to allow their re-introduction later on.  It's good to remove the fluff to have better focus on what to do.

Remove Crossbow-making.  There are number of other crafting skills that can take care and handle this skill's domain a few times over.

Whoa there. I see what you mean, but I think you're misinformed. Bow-making is definitely a skill unto itself, and was treated as such historically. It's not very similar to making crafts (which are ornamental), or furniture (which mostly just has to be sturdy and ornamental), or even other weapons (which tend to work on completely different properties anyway). Especially depending on the type of bow made, bowyering is very much something that would be done by a skilled craftsman with particular skill in that field. The fact is that most of what you have to consider when building a bow, you don't have to consider quite as much in any other of the wood-oriented professions.

Very true.  But, if Bowyer is going to stand alone... it REALLY needs to be for something other than wooden crossbow making.  Craftsdwarfs can make a variety of things and it's not too far out of reason for them to make one.  Also, a mechanic might be a more appropriate person to make a crossbow, as crossbows are very mechanical in their design and creation, and mechanics are responsible for making some deadly things similar to a crossbow.

[Kilo24]

I have no complaints on any of the OP's suggestions1`. 

I love Dwarf Fortress, but it has some SERIOUS numeric, fodder, item, skill and process glut.  Complicated is good, but you have to be complicated with decent enough reasons or it just gets annoying.  From the experiences of designing my own pen and paper RPG with tweaking mechanics, defining skill lists, and reducing the system to key components and getting rid of extraneous parts...  You need to know when to prune.  It seems like DF was pretty front heavy early on and it might be time to cut back a few things to allow the rest of the game room to grow correctly.  And anyway, anything removed can ALWAYS be added later when it is needed again.

A succinct summary to many of my annoyances with Dwarf Fortress, along with tossing a caveats on there that merely having something be possible isn't that important, it's also how it interacts with and is balanced with everything that makes it a worthwhile addition.  To be less generic, merely having lots of skills isn't very good unless you have a good skill system, and the same with weapons, workshops, and everything else.

The best solution, taking the need for adventurer skills into account, might be to make these transformations inherent in the reactants, and to treat the workshops as seats of dwarven capacity and convenience.  The production of lye is inherent in potash, and a dwarf that knows how can do it in a soapmaker's shop as readily as in a kitchen.  Workshops list jobs based on the desirable products they can produce, and dwarves find the most efficient way to finish the jobs.  It's a simple enough search to perform.

It's realistic, but I hate it as a gameplay mechanic.  Making there be multiple ways to do the same basic task means that it becomes more confusing to figure out which workshop can do which job and if it's efficient, especially if there's a lot of workshop types or jobs that a workshop can do.  I'd rather go for a few generic workshops that can do a wide variety of  non-overlapping jobs rather than a lot of specific workshops that can do a wide variety of overlapping jobs with different efficiencies. 
Creating a workshop is inexpensive enough such that forcing the player to micromanage workshop type is a flat-out waste of player time, CPU time in making the dwarves search for the best unoccupied workshop, and programming/design time to make all the workshops viable in their own right.  And it makes the game more complex without much gain.

The previous post's work zone suggestion could work, but it would take a good bit of reworking the code to do so.  But that would allow you to more easily just designate an abstract space to build infrastructure for that permitted a number of dwarves simultaneously working as its size/9 (or number of non-overlapping 3x3 areas), and be able to restrict access by skill level/specific dwarves as currently.  Have jobs be segregated by work areas as they are currently by workshops, and have dwarves looking for work pick the highest request that they can do.   It's simpler than laying out long halls of workshops, and would cut down on the micromanagement significantly.
Having the work zones be segregated by type (metalworking, stoneworking, textile, food processing and such) would still make a lot of sense though, since you need specific constructions/tools for all of those and it wouldn't make sense for the dwarves to have to fetch, set them up, tear them down, then put them back in a stockpile for every single job they did.

[StrawberryBunny]

I agree with most of the original suggestions. Less workshops is better. The point about bow-making being separate from woodcrafting is valid. Weapons are really different from whittling a miniature anvil.

All in all, I'd love to see the condensed Kiln, Kitchen, Engineer's shop, and so on.

[G-Flex]

I understand that, but it might be more prudent to remove these items until they are needed or it is time to add them.  From what I gathered a lot is hard coded right now, but moving towards a more flexible system would allow far easier modification of these parts of the game.  Remove things, but along with the creation of a system to allow their re-introduction later on.  It's good to remove the fluff to have better focus on what to do.

That's not a bad idea, in theory, but it helps to know that the fluff works before it becomes so important, and part of getting that stuff to be important in the first place is building up the necessary framework in the first place.

Very true.  But, if Bowyer is going to stand alone... it REALLY needs to be for something other than wooden crossbow making.  Craftsdwarfs can make a variety of things and it's not too far out of reason for them to make one.  Also, a mechanic might be a more appropriate person to make a crossbow, as crossbows are very mechanical in their design and creation, and mechanics are responsible for making some deadly things similar to a crossbow.

Mechanic skill makes sense, but then you have to consider normal bows; after all, DF isn't solely dwarf-centric.

Here, we're getting into areas where skills being completely discrete starts to break down. Obviously, there's overlap between these skills (for instance, bowmaking overlaps a few other craft skills, depending on the material, which then also overlap with each other due to designing similar items). The style of DF's design seems to involve a lot of granularity and specificity when it comes to things like skills, so I really doubt we'll see fewer skills in the future than we have now; what we really need is a way for them to be interconnected, so that the player doesn't have to micromanage them so much and things flow more organically, and more specific skills can be added without the drawback of dwarves hyperspecializing.

[Cruxador]

I disagree with all of this. Industry is an integral part of DF. Dumbing it down only takes away from the game. If you want something simple and largely mindless, there are plenty of commercial games for that.

I do suppose it would be wise to merge the dissection skills, though.

[BubbaBrown]

I disagree with all of this. Industry is an integral part of DF. Dumbing it down only takes away from the game. If you want something simple and largely mindless, there are plenty of commercial games for that.

I don't see how it would "dumb it down".  Removal of extraneous steps (such as potash to pearlash) and consolidating workshops (everything dealing with burning wood and ash to one place) doesn't automatically dumb down the gameplay.  In fact, most of what I suggest is only consolidation of workshops and skills, the industrial processes are still fairly intact...  They just are housed under different workshop lists and some need skills of a different name.

When you actually play and keep track of the industrial processes you are using and how often, most of these suggestions are only altering those that are less used or don't change the inputs and outputs overall.  But, to each their own opinion.  Too bad the workshops, items, processes, and such aren't completely stored in XML or LUA files, then everyone could make it the way they wanted...  as many extra steps and workshops you could possibly care for.

[thijser]

While I do agree on the idea of less workshops I do not think the amout of skills should be lowered. I would suggest making the skills like this:
Each specific activity has it's own thing "make iron sword" these are goverend by catagories"make sword"and "iron work" both of these would be goverent by a "metalsmithing" catagory which fits into the "metalwork" catagory. Every related catagory would make experience gain go faster. This would mean that if one of my dwarf is a legendary metalsmith but a dabling iron sword maker 2 swords later he would be quite skilled in making iron swords.
Perhaps It could be like this:
First layer conection: each skill level+40% experience gain
second layer: each skill level+20%experience gain
third layer: each skill level+10%experience gain
fourth layer: each skill level +5% experience gain
ext.

[j0nas]

I'm all for reducing the clutter of DF, so aye.

But I think this would best be solved by moving all workshop-related things out into the raws, because then we can have this and so much more.

[Sfon]

Merge "Tanner's Shop" and "Leather Works" to "Leather Works".  I could see a little benefit in having a separate building for tanning, but you could just build a dedicated Leather Works off to the side with a work list kept empty to handle automated tanning jobs.

I would not want to see this unless workshops can have certain jobs disabled for them, or mark them off limits to getting tasks from the manager. Unless a feature like that exists and I am simply unaware of it, the tanner's is completely justified at least for now.

[Wyrm]

Merge the "Wood Furnace", "Ashery", "Kiln" to the "Kiln".  From research on the subject and personal experience with making charcoal, lye, and potash...  There's very little reason to have three buildings for these closely related processes.  Most people now and historically, usually, did all their wood burning tasks close to the same firepit, furnace, or kiln.

A "building" in DF is not quite the same as a building in real life. A DF building is a station where an activity takes place. In this case, a wood burner is really just a place where we burn wood to charcoal or ash, with considerations for making the process safer for our dumb dwarves (who can't seem to grasp when they are on fire). An ashery is a place where we turn ash into lye or potash, together with all the paraphenalia we need to do that. The kiln is the only building of this set that is a proper building.

Remove "Pearlash" and replace with using "Potash".  Pearlash is just more refined Potash.  For the purposes of the game, Potash will work just fine, as Potash was used in glass for quite some time.

I beg to differ. Potash refers to any potassium salt, and can refer to potassium oxide (a fertilizer), potassium hydroxide (caustic potash or lye), potassium chlorate (various uses, including in agriculture), potassium chloride (another fertilizer), potassium nitrate (saltpeter, oxidizing agent, food preservative and yet another fertilizer), and potassium permanganate (various chemical uses) as well as potassium carbonate (pearlash proper). Of these, potassium oxide, potassium chloride, and potassium nitrate are good fertilizers, as potassium is a large percentage of the chemicals by weight. Potassium carbonate (pearlash), however, is much less due to the fact that the carbonate ion is heavier than the other cations (except the nitrate ion) and the fact that it doesn't dissolve readily in water, so it is not nearly as effective at potassium fertilization as the other three.

On the other hand, none of the potashes forms of a major component in glass making except pearlash. You need to be able to refine potash to turn it into an appropriate material for glassmaking. Fertilizer quality potash is not the same as glass quality potash, having quite different chemistry.

Merge "Tanner's Shop" and "Leather Works" to "Leather Works".  I could see a little benefit in having a separate building for tanning, but you could just build a dedicated Leather Works off to the side with a work list kept empty to handle automated tanning jobs.

No. As pointed out, tannery is a potential source of unhappy thoughts for dwarves. It's messy and never performed anywhere near where you do leatherworking. By your own standards, they don't belong in the same building. They belong on opposite sides of the fort.

Merge "Kitchen" and "Soap Maker's Workshop" to "Kitchen".  Much like the Tanner's Shop, it can be nice to have some distinct separation of buildings for tasks... but soap making isn't too complicated of a process that a Kitchen couldn't handle.

No. Soapmaking involves nasty chemicals (lye), and you don't want it anywhere near where you prepare food. By your own standards, they don't belong in the same building.

"Lye" should be a more of "Kitchen" task.  Lye is made by drenching Potash and collecting what seeps out from the pile.  Also... as of right now, Lye could be removed as it's only is used to make soap.  Since Lye is made from Potash in a process that could easily done in the process of soap making, Potash could replace the Lye requirements for soap.  If Lye starts to be needed elsewhere, it can be added to the Kitchen.

Not only no, but HELL NO! Even dwarves are not stupid enough to prepare a toxic, caustic chemical in the same place they prepare stuff they actually eat.

Merge "Bowyer's Workshop" with "Craftdwarf's Workshop".  Woodcrafters in the Craftdwarf's workshop could take care of everything the Bowyer's do, easily.

As others have pointed out, a bowyer is not the same as a woodcrafter. The tools to make a bow or a crossbow are different from the tools of a woodcrafter, and the skill is different, too. Furthermore, although dwarves only use crossbows, DF is not a dwarf-only game: each civ in the game is potentially playable with the addition of a single tag, and other civs can find more use out of the bowyer, such as making blowpipes, self bows, and compound bows.

Merge "Dyer's Shop" and "Loom" to "Textile Workshop".  The Loom and Dyer's Shop are closely related and could be merged without changing the game much.  As with the Tanner's shop merge, you can set aside a Textile Workshop to handle automated tasks that the Loom does.  This also reduces the amount of stuff needing to be hauled around between different shops.

No. Dyeing, like soapmaking, is a messy process. You don't want to dye anywhere near your loom, where aerosolized dyes can migrate to the work currently on the loom and stain it.

I love Dwarf Fortress, but it has some SERIOUS numeric, fodder, item, skill and process glut.

Most of the glut is taken up by pathfinding. Your improvements will not be significant. Further, you are eliminating only a few of the many tasks/items that the game offers.

Complicated is good, but you have to be complicated with decent enough reasons or it just gets annoying.  From the experiences of designing my own pen and paper RPG with tweaking mechanics, defining skill lists, and reducing the system to key components and getting rid of extraneous parts...  You need to know when to prune.  It seems like DF was pretty front heavy early on and it might be time to cut back a few things to allow the rest of the game room to grow correctly.  And anyway, anything removed can ALWAYS be added later when it is needed again.

The Dwarf Fortress part of DF is not an RPG — it's a realtime strategy game. RPGs and RTSes are quite different beasts, with different dynamics and draws. In RTSes, resource and task management is part of the fun, and the Fun.

We know that several of your suggestions for pruning, such as animal dissection (which is not nearly the same skill as butchery), are slated for improvements by Toady that will hopefully pay for their inclusion with enriched gameplay. Until their full form and utility emerges, we cannot evaluate whether or not they need to be axed, and until then, they are completely ignorable.

What DF needs is not reduction, but streamlining. The manager has a more substantial task to do than merely okaying a bunch of busywork. A proper manager will be able to manage entire production chains, making sure things get done in the right order, and that sufficient resources are availible and reserved for the tasks.

[catsplosion]

Even dwarves are not stupid enough to prepare a toxic, caustic chemical in the same place they prepare stuff they actually eat.

Do you really want to deprive your Dwarves of delicious bagels and various Chinese noodles?

http://www.thefreshloaf.com/node/10877/lye-bagels.