Print

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

[monk12]

I honestly don't really feel like it's that much feature creep. Activating the sites means having armies and stuff move around, and it's pretty terrible for goblin armies to be wandering around when goblin cities don't exist. Jumping, climbing, and trees are all in because elven sites don't make much sense without it. The extent to which HFS sites are creepy depends a lot on what HFS sites turn out to actually be. Tracking and blood-sense are a little creepy, but as EmeraldWind said they're in to make the core things actually fun to the average player. Compared to .34, which had all the night creature shenanigans, and this is basically nothing.

Then again, I don't consider "feature creep" to be a slander when it comes to DF, since basically everything that goes in was planned to make it anyway. I'm crossing my fingers for a Valentine's release, myself.

[CaptainArchmage]

The thing about non-dwarf sites is they are supposed to make up a part of the world that runs alongside your dwarf fortress, which is why its really important to have them back in. Especially when players want to send out their dwarven armies to sack the Castle of Balls.

[Putnam]

The thing about non-dwarf sites is they are supposed to make up a part of the world that runs alongside your dwarf fortress, which is why its really important to have them back in. Especially when players want to send out their dwarven armies to sack the Castle of Balls.

That's for even later.

[monk12]

The thing about non-dwarf sites is they are supposed to make up a part of the world that runs alongside your dwarf fortress, which is why its really important to have them back in. Especially when players want to send out their dwarven armies to sack the Castle of Nuts.

Spoiler:  FTFY (click to show/hide)

[thvaz]

I wasn't offending Toady, but just pointing out a characteristic of his works. The current developments aren't feature creep. The last big release was an enormous feature creep, as it was supposed to bring the human towns, but instead what we saw was toady working on the towns for 2 months and on night creatures (to make the release fun) for the other six months.

[MrWiggles]

The only goal stated for this next release, was to 'Activate' the world more. It was extremely nebulous. And ToadyOne hasn't (could he?) go beyond that stated goal. Ergo, nothing has been feature creep this release.

[CaptainArchmage]

We have retirement!

We have reclamation!

We even have potential reclamation of old retired forts.

Oh, and the possibility of multi-racial forts as well.

[Saraias]

I feel enthusiastic about this coming release. Continuing history, succession, and so on will surely enhance one of my favorite things about DF: the ability to play out the epic story of a civilization, as well as the stories of individual dwarfs and forts. I can see myself playing a given world for a long time. My questions relate to details of this lengthened history and continued evolution of these simulated societies.

Do you have any plans to allow civilizations to progress exotic animal training to fully "Domesticated" now that their history will extend?

Once a fort is successfully retired, will its local resources (minerals, wood, animal products, etc.) become available for trade to future forts of its civilization?

In Fort Mode, will succession be governed entirely by AI, or will the player have some sort of influence over the process?

Currently, when a noble or administrator dies, they lose association with their former status. This can lead to things like the duke getting unhappy thoughts about a dead monarch's royal tomb ("a lesser's pretentious burial arrangements"). Art featuring these deceased nobles/administrators references "Mafol So-n-so, mason," rather than "dead baron" unless the subject matter is their ascension. Etc. Will succession include any features that "remember" nobles' status post-mortem?

And one more off that theme:
Now that you're implementing the scripts for generating different types of sites, will these interact when it comes to conquered sites? Say elves conquer a hill dwarf settlement, or dwarfs conquer a dark fortress. Will its ongoing development follow the original site type or is there a chance of hybridized settlements?

[CaptainArchmage]

Now that we're on the way to having multi-racial forts, are there plans to also make traders behave differently depending on the species of the dealer? For example, if your broker is a human, you might get better deals from human caravans than with a dwarven broker.

[Knight Otu]

I'm actually a bit surprised that Toady already seems to be well into fortress retirement, if not past that already. Apparently the deep site work paid of very well for the fortresses?

As for whether the sites should be considered feature creep, I'll gladly take living sites as part of living worlds.

[MrWiggles]

Do you have any plans to allow civilizations to progress exotic animal training to fully "Domesticated" now that their history will extend?

This should already be happening in World Gen. And I think we can safely assume that anything that happens in World Gen is meant to happen during regular play, eventually.

Once a fort is successfully retired, will its local resources (minerals, wood, animal products, etc.) become available for trade to future forts of its civilization?

From the Dev Posts and FotF a retired fort becomes an NPC in the interim, so it should function more or less like an NPC Fort, including being part of on going trade.

In Fort Mode, will succession be governed entirely by AI, or will the player have some sort of influence over the process?

What do you mean by succession?

[Putnam]

Wiggles, succession refers to your empress's daughter becoming empress when your empress dies etc. So the answer to the question should be "no, unless appointed or heirless".

[misko27]

Do you have any plans to allow civilizations to progress exotic animal training to fully "Domesticated" now that their history will extend?

This should already be happening in World Gen. And I think we can safely assume that anything that happens in World Gen is meant to happen during regular play, eventually.

Once a fort is successfully retired, will its local resources (minerals, wood, animal products, etc.) become available for trade to future forts of its civilization?

From the Dev Posts and FotF a retired fort becomes an NPC in the interim, so it should function more or less like an NPC Fort, including being part of on going trade.

In Fort Mode, will succession be governed entirely by AI, or will the player have some sort of influence over the process?

What do you mean by succession?

If he's refering to the king, we really don't even have any control now. I mean we can kill people off as we like, but it's not the same as appointing a sucessor.
 
If you're referring to the Overseer, you aren't technically a thing, so there is no sucession. You are the hive-mind.

[MrWiggles]

Wiggles, succession refers to your empress's daughter becoming empress when your empress dies etc. So the answer to the question should be "no, unless appointed or heirless".

There is position succession, and site succession. I think one more. ToadyOne likes using similar works for lots of stuff. Like Entity.

[Putnam]

Pretty sure there's just position succession. And entity means only one thing.