Print

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

[WillowLuman]

(So about that storm...)

[Zanzetkuken The Great]

(So about that storm...)

(Which I honestly don't understand why so many are getting worked up about it.  Signs appear quite awhile before a storm itself.)

((First: Well, two considerations. First: These conversations are the kind we can get done in a few minutes, tops. Second: Fun trumps realism, every time. If we're putting on plays in these conversations, there's a problem, but just conversations shouldn't be problematic. No reason to worry about the time it takes, really.))

(I really don't like those excuses.  They are a cheap way out for the most part.  Conversations take time.  Since this is based off of DF 1.0, they would take time.  Heck, even in the next version, talking does take up time.  DF 1.0 is supposed to be an accurate simulation of a reality, and because of that, 'Rules of' don't really work.)

((Second: My point wasn't that they didn't make things interesting, it's that they're a cheaper way to characterize something or whatever. It's the difference between outright stating that Bob is swift to anger, and having Bob be swift to anger when he talks about a sensitive subject. Show, don't tell.))

(Well, that is just it.  People form a great deal of ideas about themselves, most of which are highly skewed.  Specifically stating something about a person in a thought, would prove not to be true.  Actions speak more than words, but in my opinion, thought speaks more than words as well, because of the masks that people display when speaking to others are, for the most part, ripped clear off.)

((Third: Keeping the thread bumped is hardly the most important part of conversations. Besides, these discussions come up once, get settled, and then get forgotten. Unless we actively try to use them to bump the thread, it won't work too often. Conversations, on the other hand, are constantly seeded by--and sometimes without--external action.))

(You're missing the point I was making.  I was just pointing out that discussion can be very potent, and the poster I was responding to seemed to place it as an unimportant 'third option'.)

[GreatWyrmGold]

((First: Well, two considerations. First: These conversations are the kind we can get done in a few minutes, tops. Second: Fun trumps realism, every time. If we're putting on plays in these conversations, there's a problem, but just conversations shouldn't be problematic. No reason to worry about the time it takes, really.))

(I really don't like those excuses.  They are a cheap way out for the most part.  Conversations take time.  Since this is based off of DF 1.0, they would take time.  Heck, even in the next version, talking does take up time.  DF 1.0 is supposed to be an accurate simulation of a reality, and because of that, 'Rules of' don't really work.)

((Since when did we rather decide to play an accurate simulation of an accurate simulation of reality?
Besides, if we actually did that, we wouldn't be able to take breaks to chat with each other at all. I can guarantee that if dwarves took chatting breaks halfway through mining each tile or building any building, or any/every other task, there would be a lot of ragequits...and due to that same rule, applied to a different game, they wouldn't. So, either you have to stop us from having any conversations during working periods, or you need to stop using "DF 1.0 rules" in this argument, because you aren't actually following them.
I'd like to point out that you didn't actually address either of those arguments--you just said that they didn't count.))

((Second: My point wasn't that they didn't make things interesting, it's that they're a cheaper way to characterize something or whatever. It's the difference between outright stating that Bob is swift to anger, and having Bob be swift to anger when he talks about a sensitive subject. Show, don't tell.))

(Well, that is just it.  People form a great deal of ideas about themselves, most of which are highly skewed.  Specifically stating something about a person in a thought, would prove not to be true.  Actions speak more than words, but in my opinion, thought speaks more than words as well, because of the masks that people display when speaking to others are, for the most part, ripped clear off.)

((Thoughts are words. And, for that matter, conversations are actions.
Think, for instance, of the snippet we had about religion. How would we "communicate" those differences through thought? Have you think:
I'm sure glad I went on those church camp-outs. This canteen is great!
and then I think:
Wow, religious people are really kinda dumb. I wish they would just keep their thoughts to themselves.
Or what? I promise you, I have never spontaneously thought that thought in my life.
That's just one example. Thoughts aren't the worst thing to communicate things with, but a lot of things are better conveyed through conversations...especially things the person himself is not aware of.))

((Third: Keeping the thread bumped is hardly the most important part of conversations. Besides, these discussions come up once, get settled, and then get forgotten. Unless we actively try to use them to bump the thread, it won't work too often. Conversations, on the other hand, are constantly seeded by--and sometimes without--external action.))

(You're missing the point I was making.  I was just pointing out that discussion can be very potent, and the poster I was responding to seemed to place it as an unimportant 'third option'.)

((Ah.
Well, he has a point. Discussions like this are more frustrating and slower to come up than IC conversations and ideas.))

[kahn1234]

((Can we please stop arguing and get back to the game please?))

((And we are getting anxious about the storm because this is DWARF FORTRESS we are in. For all we know it could be a giant flying godzilla monster that spits blood and farts fire)).

[WillowLuman]

(Or rain syndrome blood. Or flood your puny cave. Or even just give you all pneumonia. The possibilities are endless!)

[Zanzetkuken The Great]

((Can we please stop arguing and get back to the game please?))

((And we are getting anxious about the storm because this is DWARF FORTRESS we are in. For all we know it could be a giant flying godzilla monster that spits blood and farts fire)).

(Sorry.  I have a major tendency of not being able to give up an idea when I get it.  Ironically, that is one of the traits assigned to my zodiac sign, Taurus.  All I have remaining to say is two minor requests for those entering a conversation: could you give a short description of deciding to go over to it?  Anywhere from a short description of going on break and seeing the conversation, to a long description of various situations stacking up that you need to go over to the conversation.  Second is to not enter every conversation that is happening.  I really don't think anyone is that extroverted.)

(Don't forget it's version 1.0, so it is a near exact simulation of reality if we are in a regular biome.)

(Final word: it's going to be getting a lot harder for my character to get in a conversation.  I'm going to post a more detailed RP post later on (little busy right now), but suffice to say for now, he's basically awakening from a stupor, and introversion is going to bite down hard.)

[RadtheCad]

(Except for DORF FYSICS when we meet bears?)

[GreatWyrmGold]

(Except for DORF FYSICS when we meet bears?)

((And being allowed to pause jobs for conversations. And untrained guys being able to mine through rock fairly quickly. And super-fast learning. And soil being mined with picks. And...))

[Zanzetkuken The Great]

(Except for DORF FYSICS when we meet bears?)

(As Hugo said, that was only something that was lingering from memories of the game.  Now the 1.0 programming is taking control, and that isn't ever going to happen again.)

((And being allowed to pause jobs for conversations. And untrained guys being able to mine through rock fairly quickly. And super-fast learning. And soil being mined with picks. And...))

1) Okay, I'll concede that point.
2) 10 hours is not really that fast.
3) If you multiply the times required to perform a task by the time required for the task, it's not that fast.
4) Picks loosen the dirt, so it is easier to use the shovels.

[GreatWyrmGold]

((2. 10 hours, for a chunk of rock at least a couple meters to a side, when I've never picked up a pick in my life and frankly haven't exercised those muscles much? And when I don't have any idea how to mine?
3. One time to double my speed. 10 hours. 20 hours for the next level--30 total, for a tripling in speed. That's not even a full work week.
4. But we don't have shovels, now do we?))

[Zanzetkuken The Great]

((2. 10 hours, for a chunk of rock at least a couple meters to a side, when I've never picked up a pick in my life and frankly haven't exercised those muscles much? And when I don't have any idea how to mine?
3. One time to double my speed. 10 hours. 20 hours for the next level--30 total, for a tripling in speed. That's not even a full work week.
4. But we don't have shovels, now do we?))

(2: I get the point, but do you really want me to increase it.
3: Well, that's the early side of a limit to zero graph.  It's primarily the later stuff that takes a long time.
4: Check the supply list I had made.  We do have shovels.)

[GreatWyrmGold]

((2. That's the point. And if you let us mine, build, and craft fast, why can't you use that same rule to stop impeding our fun in other areas?
3. Judging from experience, it would take a lot more than three 10-hour days to triple my efficiency with anything. I believe I mentioned I spent the good part of one summer splitting wood? Yeah, I didn't get much better after a couple months of that.
4. Oh.))

[ICBM pilot]

((10 hours per cubic meter seems pretty reasonable to me if the stone isn't to hard.))

[WillowLuman]

((Let me tell you as someone who has some (meager) experience with digging. Dirt is often dug with picks as well as shovels, since it tends to get packed below a few inches and you need to break clumps of gravel/clay. Dirt does NOT take horribly long for an inexperienced person to dig through, when you have the proper tools, which you do.

10 hours to get through a cubic meter of stone seems reasonable, and after the first time you would improve on that time, since you'd have some idea as to what you're doing. You'd be REALLY sore and tired after those long hours work, being unused to it, but trust me, picks are effective enough to get through in a matter of hours. Why do you think we use them?

As long as you've got iron picks, that is. If you're using copper, the stone will blunt them quickly.))

[ExKirby]

Alex wiped the sweat off his brow, then collapsed against the mouth of the cave listening to the echo of the distant thunderstorm. He looked up, smiling at the sky, remembering a time long ago, on a thundery night like the one at hand at a different time. Feeling better about himself, he got up, dusted off his trousers and tried butchering the bear carcass, whistling away as he worked.