Print

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

[guessingo]

is there any value in DF to send some of your dwarves off and create a second fort? in some simulation type games you have multiple bases/forts to increase growth. not sure if its useful here.

if its not, what is the point of generating a large world? Doesn't that just slow down FPS? how would you ever explore it?

[ObiWorm]

I don't think you can send anyone to create a second fortress, as you can only play with one fortress until it dies or you abandon it (and everybody runs away).

The point of generating a large world is getting more interesting embark sites. Or at least I think that's the point.

[Deepblade]

Large worlds tend to have more interesting history for the most part. In the next release you'll be able to retire your fortress, instead of abandoning it. It'll make large worlds a little bit better than before.
Eventually I suspect it'll get to a point of succession worlds being really fun. Where people pass around a world so there can be multiple fortresses from other people, and then a dwarven civil war mwahaha.

But, no, we can't make an offsite fort right now. You can certainly build a 2nd self contained fort that doesn't interact with the main fort if you want though. World goes to hell on 1 side the other side is happier than a dwarf drowning in booze. I think it's eventually planned where we can select dwarves from the fort, as well as supplies, to go found a new site.

[wierd]

The combination of retire and reclaim will permit a whole new kind of gameplay.

Rather than play pass the fortress, a year in each of the different player's fortresses can come and go with each "retire/reclaim" cycle.  This means that several dwarven enclaves can make war on each other on the off turns.

(Nearest neighbor situations, where the dwarves that come in the caravan are from the other players' fortresses.  This means the choices of trade goods, and the diplomatic statuses will have actual teeth.  Until toady comes up with all the war arc code, this combination of gameplay mechanics would allow for AI controlled invasion forces, with the resulting losses of resources and personel when the next turn happens.)

Retired fortresses will open up enormous new gameplay options. It is the single most interesting feature for me at the moment. I can barely stand the wait.

[Mr. Palau]

The combination of retire and reclaim will permit a whole new kind of gameplay.

Rather than play pass the fortress, a year in each of the different player's fortresses can come and go with each "retire/reclaim" cycle.  This means that several dwarven enclaves can make war on each other on the off turns.

(Nearest neighbor situations, where the dwarves that come in the caravan are from the other players' fortresses.  This means the choices of trade goods, and the diplomatic statuses will have actual teeth.  Until toady comes up with all the war arc code, this combination of gameplay mechanics would allow for AI controlled invasion forces, with the resulting losses of resources and personel when the next turn happens.)

Retired fortresses will open up enormous new gameplay options. It is the single most interesting feature for me at the moment. I can barely stand the wait.

Like what?

[Oaktree]

Abandoning and starting a new fortress with the same civilization can be pretty fun.

You get to see familiar names emigrate again.  And if you broadly trained in your previous fortress you can get some very skilled immigrant dwarves early on who are skilled/master in multiple skills or military training that are immediate effectiveness multipliers for a young fort.

[wierd]

[Like what?]

Rather than cooperative gameplay on a single fortress, you "retire" your fortress at the end of your yearly tenure. The other player either starts a fortress nearby, or reclaims their old fortress for their tenure, then likewise retires.

This means that there are several years between overseer tenure periods, during which time the AI is in control of the site.  This means trade goods moving in and out, residents emmigrating away, important members of your fortress joining assault forces after the trade liason gets snuffed, etc.

The fortress you pick back up at the resumption of your tenure will not be the same fortress you left behind. Likewise, because the civs you are picking fights with are (sometimes) controlled by humans, the invasion forces may come wearing candy, or other interesting weapons, like lightsabers.

It would be the best you could get without dedicated war arc code, which isn't slated for inclusion until waaaaaaaaaaay down the road. 

[Thuellai]

[Like what?]

Rather than cooperative gameplay on a single fortress, you "retire" your fortress at the end of your yearly tenure. The other player either starts a fortress nearby, or reclaims their old fortress for their tenure, then likewise retires.

This means that there are several years between overseer tenure periods, during which time the AI is in control of the site.  This means trade goods moving in and out, residents emmigrating away, important members of your fortress joining assault forces after the trade liason gets snuffed, etc.

The fortress you pick back up at the resumption of your tenure will not be the same fortress you left behind. Likewise, because the civs you are picking fights with are (sometimes) controlled by humans, the invasion forces may come wearing candy, or other interesting weapons, like lightsabers.

It would be the best you could get without dedicated war arc code, which isn't slated for inclusion until waaaaaaaaaaay down the road.

Then we do it with multiple playable races, some of which have ethics that encourage war with others.

Overseers pick a race to back and the world becomes a race for each race to claim good sites, build up interesting or powerful militaries, and generally improve the standing of their race in the world.

[Deepblade]

That would probably go super nice with Masterwork.

[Drazinononda]

[Like what?]

Rather than cooperative gameplay on a single fortress, you "retire" your fortress at the end of your yearly tenure. The other player either starts a fortress nearby, or reclaims their old fortress for their tenure, then likewise retires.

This means that there are several years between overseer tenure periods, during which time the AI is in control of the site.  This means trade goods moving in and out, residents emmigrating away, important members of your fortress joining assault forces after the trade liason gets snuffed, etc.

The fortress you pick back up at the resumption of your tenure will not be the same fortress you left behind. Likewise, because the civs you are picking fights with are (sometimes) controlled by humans, the invasion forces may come wearing candy, or other interesting weapons, like lightsabers.

It would be the best you could get without dedicated war arc code, which isn't slated for inclusion until waaaaaaaaaaay down the road.

Then we do it with multiple playable races, some of which have ethics that encourage war with others.

Overseers pick a race to back and the world becomes a race for each race to claim good sites, build up interesting or powerful militaries, and generally improve the standing of their race in the world.

You are striding through the portion of the Gaming Venn Diagram in which Dwarf Fortress overlaps with Risk.

[wierd]

But RISK doesn't have forgotten beasts, dragons, giant keas, bronze collosi, or demon invaders!

And, lest I forget, NO MAGMA.

Enemies from Uristville? Dressed in full candycane armor? Carrying silver hammers, and steel axes? Well Urists, say hello to the magma squirtgun!

Risk will never have such options!

[Thuellai]

The joke's on you, when I have my armies mass-produce candycane lightsabers and design a repeating whale-gun (see 'Domesticating Sharks')

[wierd]

Candycane lightsaber wouldn't work so good, because whips are blunt, IIRC. The low density (seriously, its nerf styrofoam!) Of candycane would make the candy lightsabers into harmless featherdusters.  For lightsaber, you want slade.

[Thuellai]

But then you have to mod slade to be workable.

No, what I need is an artifact platinum lightsaber.

Separates limbs and looks stylish doing it.

[wierd]

Slade is theoretically harvestable, using some abuses of the channeling command. Once harvested as a boulder, a stone worker can mood with it. Artifact slade lightsaber is highly improbable, but theoretically possible.

(Basically, you drop a minable floor on top of the slade floor. It is then channelable. The channel has a probability of droping a slade boulder when it digs into the slade wall below!)

To improve the chances of this happening, look for a dwarf that just LOVES whips, and has not mooded. Put him to work making stone crafts, so his default mood will be stone. Then pen him up in a room with a craftsdwarf workshop, and a stockpile of harvested slade boulders. With luck, he will make the legendary slade lightsaber.