Print

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

[My Name is Immaterial]

Communism itself is fine. Human greed fucked it up.

Subject dropped.

Subject picked.

Subject dropped.

Human greed taints the altruistic mentality.

That is all highly inappropriate for this sector of the forums. The Wrath of the Toad may descend upon us all if it does not end!

Take it here, here, or here.

Taking this in a more on-topic direction, I can't wait till the game's advanced enough for impoverished, malnourished peasants to have an insurrection.

That would be awesome.

[zwei]

Taking this in a more on-topic direction, I can't wait till the game's advanced enough for impoverished, malnourished peasants to have an insurrection.

We call it tantrum spirals

[flabort]

To rephrase better:
[WE] can't wait until the game's advanced enough for impoverished, malnourished peasants to have an [ORGANIZED] insurrection [WHERE PARTICIPANTS SURVIVE] [AND THE OTHERS DON'T].

And before anyone says we call that a Loyalty Cascade, that is still unorganized.

[laularukyrumo]

Loyalty cascades also have the side effect of, if you succeed in guiding the rebels to victory and exterminating all loyalists, causing the cascade to resume every time you get new migrants, as I'm pretty sure they come as loyalists by default since the new faction doesn't actually have establishments in existence yet.

So yes. Make this a new Feature.

[WillowLuman]

Taking this in a more on-topic direction, I can't wait till the game's advanced enough for impoverished, malnourished peasants to have an insurrection.

We call it tantrum spirals

That's not an insurrection, that's a everyone kills everyone else, maybe 1 survivor free-for-all. It's not a mutiny. An insurrection requires sides, of which there are none in a tantrum spiral.

Loyalty cascades are closer, but are an unintended bug that doesn't have lasting effects on loyalty, or result in new mayors/counts/governors/whatever emplaced by victorious rebels, and don't result spontaneously from unhappy living conditions.

[thistleknot]

1st FotF post.

can we ever have vanilla workshops removed (for modding)?  i started a discussion on it here.


http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=125204.msg4183251#msg4183251

2nd question
could trader pathfinding ever be used to circumvent walls by building ramps into red areas?

started discussion here
http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=121451.msg4174411;topicseen#msg4174411

[My Name is Immaterial]

1st FotF post.

can we ever have vanilla workshops removed (for modding)?  i started a discussion on it here.


http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=125204.msg4183251#msg4183251

2nd question
could trader pathfinding ever be used to circumvent walls by building ramps into red areas?

started discussion here
http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=121451.msg4174411;topicseen#msg4174411

Toady is particular about his questions being in green. Its just easier for him.

[Areyar]

1st FotF post.

can we ever have vanilla workshops removed (for modding)?  i started a discussion on it here.


http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=125204.msg4183251#msg4183251

Also, this and many other interesting ideas can be found in the eternal suggestions list. here

I think it is. "Workshops to room designation system"
edit: No it is "Workshops to raws"

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

I recently tried to add stonehammers, which would require above and "modable weapon crafting". My votes currently are on are on workshop raws, labour-tools to be modded and taverns.
edit: numbers change with # votes

[Cruxador]

1st FotF post.

can we ever have vanilla workshops removed (for modding)?  i started a discussion on it here.


http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=125204.msg4183251#msg4183251

2nd question
could trader pathfinding ever be used to circumvent walls by building ramps into red areas?

started discussion here
http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=121451.msg4174411;topicseen#msg4174411

The first is a suggestion, not a proper question and thus not appropriate to this thread. Do check it out in ESV as has been mentioned. As for ramps circumventing walls, I think that's supposed to happen? If wagons won't go up constructed ramps that's a bug. If you mean that ramps should allow a wagon to be on multiple z-levels, thereby fitting through narrow gullies, then that's another suggestion and one that doesn't really make much sense.

[thistleknot]

well the trader pathfinder system could be used for invaders (so they can build ramps).  the post I linked to goes into more detail on it

[Knight Otu]

Improved invader behavior is planned. From the dev page:

Improved sieges

    Eliminate remaining edge-of-map exploits
    More highly trained attacking soldiers when approprate
    Many trap exploits are handled above by requiring more to produce a trap, things like cage traps should make more sense vs. large creatures etc. (respect strength/ability vs. material, large cages might be separate object)
    Coming up with a plan to overcome pathing obstacles to reach fortress innards
        Ability to dig (optionally, default on)
        Ability to build bridges/ramps
        Ability to use grappling hooks/ladders/climb
    Learning from mistakes if first attempted assault plan fails badly
        For instance, if many siegers are killed, caged, etc. in a given hallway, they shouldn't generally go that way again, even if that means building/climbing/digging
    Siege engine improvements depend on state of boats, lifts/moving fortress sections, since these should all use the same framework

I do not really see where the more constrained trader pathfinding (if you're talking about wagons, otherwise I'm pretty sure they're using the same system already) would help invader pathing, in any case.

[WillowLuman]

I hope there will be a limit on how much invaders can act like fort mode dwarves to get in. Digging through bedrock to get into a fort would realistically take months, unimpeded. Generally, sappers could only get in through soil. It wasn't until the advent of gunpowder that castle walls often got breached, as opposed to the occupants slowly weathered.

[MrWiggles]

I hope there will be a limit on how much invaders can act like fort mode dwarves to get in. Digging through bedrock to get into a fort would realistically take months, unimpeded. Generally, sappers could only get in through soil. It wasn't until the advent of gunpowder that castle walls often got breached, as opposed to the occupants slowly weathered.

But Fort Mode is 72x faster then Adventure Mode. So it can take multiple months, but it'll be couple tens of minuets, like it alway is.

[Whatsifsowhatsit]

I hope there will be a limit on how much invaders can act like fort mode dwarves to get in. Digging through bedrock to get into a fort would realistically take months, unimpeded. Generally, sappers could only get in through soil. It wasn't until the advent of gunpowder that castle walls often got breached, as opposed to the occupants slowly weathered.

But Fort Mode is 72x faster then Adventure Mode. So it can take multiple months, but it'll be couple tens of minuets, like it alway is.

Yes, but that also means they take several weeks (or something like that) to just walk from the edge of the map to your fortress. In other words, you can't always go by that exactly. And then the question becomes, will it be calibrated by how fast the in-game days pass, or by how fast the rest of the siege's simulation goes? I think it might look silly in the former case, as they might perhaps pretty much walk through rock as quickly as they walk across the map. (Or maybe not, I haven't done the math, but you see my point.)

[MrWiggles]

Yea, but thats been a long standing issue with Fort Mode time acceleration forevers.