Print

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

[Knight Otu]

In the first map in the upper 1/3rd of the right side there is a darkgrey "Block". What does it mean?

There's a much more noticeable one in the glacier in the second map. Also, on the trade screens, they are connected to a neighboring civ by a dark green line.

On the holdings map for that world, it seems to be a tiny 4-pixel speck. I'm going to guess that it's one of those demon sites. There's another one further down between a cluster of seven goblin sites and three dwarf sites on the same world, and in the south-south-east of the third world, by the goblin sites with a tomb (I'm guessing those are conquered sites, then).

I only see yellow squares. Where are the other nobles?

They don't seem to be associated with any one specific site. There's an itty bitty little square at the center of web of colored lines which represents a noble, though.

To be more clear, each itty bitty square is a fortress, where a noble (plus potentially the monarch) resides. In the third world, for example, the purple monarch lines come from a monarch/baron fortress, and connect to three duke fortresses, several baron fortresses, and hill dwarf settlements (the big yellow sites). Each of the duke fortresses in that world also connects to two count fortresses and a number of hill dwarf sites. The count fortresses are only connected to hill dwarf sites.

[slink]

Ohhh, I get it now.  I was coming here with the same questions, because the squares I saw were not of the colors described.  What he meant was that there are individual pixels marking the locations of the nobles, overlayed on squares marking the locations of cities.  I wonder what the color coding is for the civilizations.  It looks like spruce green for Dwarves.  Pink/magenta for goblins?  Yellow/olive for someone else, and white/grey for some other someones.

[Torchy]

In the first map in the upper 1/3rd of the right side there is a darkgrey "Block". What does it mean?

There's a much more noticeable one in the glacier in the second map. Also, on the trade screens, they are connected to a neighboring civ by a dark green line.

On the holdings map for that world, it seems to be a tiny 4-pixel speck. I'm going to guess that it's one of those demon sites.

I was thinking that was what it had to be, too, but the trade screen makes this very peculiar - what use would the Demons have for trade? When Toady added "Demon Sites" I imagined they would be something more like the old Adamantine hollows from 40d - torture chambers, gore, filth, chained slaves, and so forth, populated by perhaps one major ("humanoid-twisted") demon and some minor cohorts, similar to the single greater Demon and the 30-40 typed Demons that would come out of the pits before. If the trade screen is connecting them, though, does that mean they're civilized enough to actually conduct trade? Maybe the system that makes the map just isn't refined enough, yet, and it's just using "any marked site populated by intelligent/[CANSPEAK] beings" to construct the trade webs?

[BinaryBeast1010011010]

finally, the moutain home will find buyers for their barrels of fly ichor and one humped camel bloodI picture some kind of aristocratic freak with horns and lizard like scales bathing every day in a pool of imported badger blood sold to her with a "fair dwarf maid blood" label on it

[Knight Otu]

I was thinking that was what it had to be, too, but the trade screen makes this very peculiar - what use would the Demons have for trade? ... Maybe the system that makes the map just isn't refined enough, yet, and it's just using "any marked site populated by intelligent/[CANSPEAK] beings" to construct the trade webs?

That's what it could be. It could also be a "just in case" function as it is with goblin sites - connected to the trade network in case the goblin site gets conquered.

[darklord92]

I was thinking that was what it had to be, too, but the trade screen makes this very peculiar - what use would the Demons have for trade? ... Maybe the system that makes the map just isn't refined enough, yet, and it's just using "any marked site populated by intelligent/[CANSPEAK] beings" to construct the trade webs?

That's what it could be. It could also be a "just in case" function as it is with goblin sites - connected to the trade network in case the goblin site gets conquered.

i don't see why goblins should be exempt from trade, there can always be the rare situation where goblins are neutral with a civ meaning dwarf goods could potentially end up at a goblin site

item from dwarf site> traded to humans> traded to elfs> traded to goblin loving humans > traded to gobs

or even through theft

item from dwarf site> stolen by kobold > stolen by gobs > traded to humans > traded to same dwarf site

[AutomataKittay]

I was thinking that was what it had to be, too, but the trade screen makes this very peculiar - what use would the Demons have for trade? ... Maybe the system that makes the map just isn't refined enough, yet, and it's just using "any marked site populated by intelligent/[CANSPEAK] beings" to construct the trade webs?

That's what it could be. It could also be a "just in case" function as it is with goblin sites - connected to the trade network in case the goblin site gets conquered.

i don't see why goblins should be exempt from trade, there can always be the rare situation where goblins are neutral with a civ meaning dwarf goods could potentially end up at a goblin site

item from dwarf site> traded to humans> traded to elfs> traded to goblin loving humans > traded to gobs

or even through theft

item from dwarf site> stolen by kobold > stolen by gobs > traded to humans > traded to same dwarf site

Back in 31. I used to get occasional peaceful goblins trading. I'd enjoy seeing that happen again!

[Knight Otu]

i don't see why goblins should be exempt from trade, there can always be the rare situation where goblins are neutral with a civ meaning dwarf goods could potentially end up at a goblin site

item from dwarf site> traded to humans> traded to elfs> traded to goblin loving humans > traded to gobs

or even through theft

item from dwarf site> stolen by kobold > stolen by gobs > traded to humans > traded to same dwarf site

I was only paraphrasing something Toady said back when the trade maps were first implemented, where he also shared the idea that goblins might get to trade:

Are the purple cities dark fortresses? Does that mean the goblins actually trade this time?

These are potential routes -- I marked them at this point just in case places end up getting conquered.  On the other hand, I think trade might end up being possible, especially with those human civs that are led by demon-gods, but maybe more generally.

[CaptainArchmage]

Actually, I don't think the many of the black squares are demon sites. There are ruins over those areas in the maps, and some grey'd out goblin sites (what are the goblin sites surrounding dark fortresses called again?).

In older versions, dwarf fortresses had a color relevant to the population, so darker grey fortresses had smaller populations and the largest fortresses showed up as white. Now, white settlements indicate fortresses, light grey settlements indicate hill dwarves, and dark grey settlements indicate deep dwarves. The symbols for the sites of other entities still change depending on the population on the world map, so will we still have such an on-map indicator for fortress size or not?

[Tov01]

Speaking of Nobles:

Will you changed anything about how succession works in this release or the ones immediately after it? For example, if a monarch dies with no heir, will the game try to find a more distant relation to take their place (siblings, spouse, ext), instead of picking someone at random, as the game seems to do now? Or, if the heir is still a child, will the child take the throne (perhaps, in a later release, with a steward ruling in the meantime), instead of ignoring the child heir completely?

There are more complex things that could happen, such as wars of succession, and contested succession in general, but I don't expect those type of things to be in for a long while.

[FearfulJesuit]

Are we going to get to interact with successions or hierarchies this go-around? I don't know what that would entail, exactly- perhaps trying to promote your baron to monarch or starting a coup?

[Mesa]

Ever since now fortresses and other sites will appear and (hopefully) dynamically expand, does it mean we can expend addition of Dwarf Fortress skills (Miner, Stone Crafter, Broker etc.) in Adventurer mode?
Because NPCs also need skills to expand their homes, and I doubt that once generated sites would stay in their original state forever.


I know, I'm stubborn, but it only makes sense to at least consider it being coded in.
I don't demand, like, designations and burrows, just the possibility of building a house, digging a mine or just breaching a keep's wall for good reasons. (also, tactical sieges)

[rex mortis]

I would prefer expanded adventurer skills got their very own release cycle, or several.

[Mesa]

I would prefer expanded adventurer skills got their very own release cycle, or several.

We could just get basics now (but first things first, so let the Toady finish the dorfs sites and whatnot) and the rest later.
Btw, are the social skills also considered fortress mode and not yet in the Adv. mode?

Because they seem like those we could leave out for a while...

[MrWiggles]

Ever since now fortresses and other sites will appear and (hopefully) dynamically expand, does it mean we can expend addition of Dwarf Fortress skills (Miner, Stone Crafter, Broker etc.) in Adventurer mode?
Because NPCs also need skills to expand their homes, and I doubt that once generated sites would stay in their original state forever.


I know, I'm stubborn, but it only makes sense to at least consider it being coded in.
I don't demand, like, designations and burrows, just the possibility of building a house, digging a mine or just breaching a keep's wall for good reasons. (also, tactical sieges)

Adventurers being able to exercise those skills arent really necessary to have the world be 'Alive' after world gen.