Print

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

[EmperorJon]

I seem to remember reading about a utility that allowed several people to integrate in to DF to build a fort via the interwebz, and as I'm teaching someone how to play at the moment this would be very useful.

If I'm not totally making this up, which I probably am, is it still useable and where would I get it? Searches yeilded nothing.


EDIT: Nvm found it.

[Girlinhat]

Do share the name of this utility?  I'm in the process of recruiting some fresh blood.

[squeakyReaper]

This sounds like a particularly handy program...  do share?

[rampaging-poet]

I think the utility the OP mentioned is Dfterm, which lets one person host a game that other people can play over the internet using a Telnet client.  I haven't used it myself, but it sounds like it could be a lot of fun.

[Deon]

It's extremely fun to play adventure mode this way, or run a fortress as a few advisors (where each one gets his "turn" during a set amount of time).

I really liked it .

It's called "dfterm" and you play through Putty terminal.

P.S. Ninjad by Rampaging-poet .

[Rumrusher]

It's extremely fun to play adventure mode this way, or run a fortress as a few advisors (where each one gets his "turn" during a set amount of time).

I really liked it .

It's called "dfterm" and you play through Putty terminal.

P.S. Ninjad by Rampaging-poet .

hmm I wonder if Dfterm can be mixed with Dfusion adventure swap for added Fun? now while I'm thinking of it if someone could make one computer act as the host while the any one who joins takes control of a companion one could have a coop Adventure mode. Though having a multiplayer online turn base RL might be slight slow experience.

[Deon]

The problem is that it's still the same game instance, so you cannot play two creatures at once. It's like a "hotseat" game where you share controls.

[Girlinhat]

DF just isn't designed to support multiplayer, sadly.  Adventure mode would easier than fort mode, but it still has differences in timing and pace.  If one adventurer has more agility than another, things get wonky.  Granted, you could null down agility or average it, but that's sub-par solution.

[Deon]

We are not talking about changing the game code, Girlinhat (Toady would not allow it anyway), we are talking about existing solutions.

By the way, here's my old thread if someone is interested. There are some short instructions how to make it running.
http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=67086.msg1603104#msg1603104

[Rumrusher]

We are not talking about changing the game code, Girlinhat (Toady would not allow it anyway), we are talking about existing solutions.

By the way, here's my old thread if someone is interested. There are some short instructions how to make it running.
http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=67086.msg1603104#msg1603104

seeing how it's hotseat one could have it where each player is a companion of the host and that once night time rolls in the host swap bodies to the companion of the next player(should be a list of who gets to play) and the player will get a turn with their character leading the group. I could research into getting all companions of the previous player to auto join the new adventurer/ess so that people don't have to spend a good amount of time asking others to join(because this is only way to keep everyone in a group from disparting).

[Girlinhat]

Oh I know that, I'm just saying that for all the people who would enjoy multiplayer (myself included) DF would need some massive changes to allow it to happen, so conventional multiplayer isn't really possible in the conceivable future.  Hotseat type certainly is, but that's totally different.

[Deon]

We know it isn't, with the current state it wouldn't be possible to sync two clients (with all the amount of items and pathfinding calculations) if they didn't run the same instance of the game, which is obvious .

[Girlinhat]

Adventure mode would be easier, it'd just take some time between every action.  It turns more into DND style slow combat instead of progressing along.

Fort mode, I'm rather in favor of one method, the yearly exchange.  Both (or multiple) sides each play a fort.  At the start of each spring, it synchronizes them.  To this end, one fort could send resources or trade to another, or send soldiers to attack (which would follow default AI and therefore suck) to loot and plunder, or to defend and maintain.  It means all players have to be online for the next year to occur, but, that's the way it is!  Eh, anyways, this thread isn't about that.

[Rumrusher]

Adventure mode would be easier, it'd just take some time between every action.  It turns more into DND style slow combat instead of progressing along.

Fort mode, I'm rather in favor of one method, the yearly exchange.  Both (or multiple) sides each play a fort.  At the start of each spring, it synchronizes them.  To this end, one fort could send resources or trade to another, or send soldiers to attack (which would follow default AI and therefore suck) to loot and plunder, or to defend and maintain.  It means all players have to be online for the next year to occur, but, that's the way it is!  Eh, anyways, this thread isn't about that.

Thought that too but then you have to control the speed of every one so that each person take a turn which is really out of my Coding ability(I only got ). that's why I suggested a hot seat take turns being the leader for an ingame day. That way people can play as their characters with out waiting for the guy to kick the bucket or retire.