Print

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

It makes me sad. So very very sad.

58 (49.6%)

I think it's great!

26 (22.2%)

I'm indifferent.

33 (28.2%)

Total Members Voted: 115

[Sumyunguy]

Alright then. It for sure is a feature.

Thank you Putnam for finding that bit of information from Toady, btw.

[Lielac]

They're relative numbers, so both would work the same way if I'm supposing right.

As for the migrant-independent breeding stuff, that doesn't seem to be much of a problem at all from what I'm seeing, since the defaults settings still favour heterosexuals as the majority (as in real life)

They're not relative numbers, toady said that they were:

<disinterested chance>:<lover-possible chance>:<commitment-possible chance>

... Oh. Well then. -thunks head against wall- Never mind!

[Agent of Avarice]

Fantastic feature IMHO, now I don't have to worry about women in the militia nearly as much. It always disappointed me when Lady Urist McMurderMachine decided it was time to raise a family, and I had to kick her out til the parasite had left its host. Now I'll just have to make sure to select sparring partners carefully. Thanks Toady

[samanato]

I've always thought, my forts in 34.11 had way too many children, so...

Though it is a quite a small effect.

[sal880612m]

This also begs the question of if you're playing with no dwarven civs why you want to lower the difficulty after increasing it greatly?

It isn't necessarily a difficulty thing. It is a RP, scenario, possibility thing. Often when I attempt this I can get a year or two in before my dwarves pair off to lover and up to five years in before they start to marry because I keep them so busy. Ideally I would be able to start a game and have only encampments of the other entities and all dwarfs would have to be outsider adventurers that I would need to gather together and take to stake a claim. So start with little to nothing. No anvils, no pre-domesticated animals. Only what the adventurers had on them at site claim. Seeing as I wouldn't even want the other entities to have proper sites to start what the adventurers could bring would be highly limited.

[Putnam]

Fantastic feature IMHO, now I don't have to worry about women in the militia nearly as much. It always disappointed me when Lady Urist McMurderMachine decided it was time to raise a family, and I had to kick her out til the parasite had left its host. Now I'll just have to make sure to select sparring partners carefully. Thanks Toady

Note that dwarves have only a 25% chance of being interested in the same sex at all, and even then only a 25% chance to get a lover from there and a 5% chance to get married from there. You could increase the chances, of course.

[samanato]

I had a post edited earlier with some calcs of the gay relationship chances, but I've decided to just calculate all of the stats for the nine possibilities. I think, these are based on percentages, but correct me if my maths are wrong. So to elaborate, here are the chances for the potential possibilities (obviously, the lover and spouse stages don't happen at once, since polygamy etc. isn't a thing):

	Opposite-sex disinterested (5%)	Opposite-sex lover (25%)	Opposite-sex marriage (75%)
Same-sex disinterested (75%)	3,75%	18,75%	14,06%
Same-sex lover (25%)	1,25%	6,25%	4,69%
Same-sex marriage (5%)	0,06%	0,31%	0,23%

[Putnam]

Since Toady said that it's a 3x3 grid, that seems about right.

[Lielac]

... I don't understand where all those numbers came from. I mean, I understand the logical mechanics of how maths works, but not why you made the numbers do this particular thing. What was your thought process, samanato?

[Putnam]

... I don't understand where all those numbers came from. I mean, I understand the logical mechanics of how maths works, but not why you made the numbers do this particular thing. What was your thought process, samanato?

Literally multiplying the percentages together gets you those numbers. It's math!

[samanato]

... I don't understand where all those numbers came from. I mean, I understand the logical mechanics of how maths works, but not why you made the numbers do this particular thing. What was your thought process, samanato?

Literally multiplying the percentages together gets you those numbers. It's math!

Basically what I tried to do.  I got those numbers confused at first, though.

[Lielac]

... I don't understand where all those numbers came from. I mean, I understand the logical mechanics of how maths works, but not why you made the numbers do this particular thing. What was your thought process, samanato?

Literally multiplying the percentages together gets you those numbers. It's math!

I understand that, just not how these new percentages are relevant to... anything. What do these new numbers mean?

[MaskedMiner]

Huh, so thats why in adventure mode my female elf swordman had a wife in legends. Cool

[samanato]

I understand that, just not how these new percentages are relevant to... anything. What do these new numbers mean?

I was going for something to the likes of "how likely is a dwarf's sexual orientation, and the outcome from it" (that is, a relationship). So, the column with "opposite-sex disinterested" will only enter gay relationships, and the row with "same-sex disinterested" will only be straight couples (with asexuals being in the upper-left corner), while the other cells take bisexuality in account.  The lower-right corner probably doesn't mean much though, since lovers are eternal and divorce never happens.

Though since I'm working in that 3x3 grid Toady described, it doesn't take into account single dwarves' sexual orientation, only active relationships.

[Lielac]

I understand that, just not how these new percentages are relevant to... anything. What do these new numbers mean?

I was going for something to the likes of "how likely is a dwarf's sexual orientation, and the outcome from it" (that is, a relationship). So, the column with "opposite-sex disinterested" will only enter gay relationships, and the row with "same-sex disinterested" will only be straight couples (with asexuals being in the upper-left corner), while the other cells take bisexuality in account.  The lower-right corner probably doesn't mean much though, since lovers are eternal and divorce never happens.

Though since I'm working in that 3x3 grid Toady described, it doesn't take into account single dwarves' sexual orientation, only active relationships.

A-haaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa. That begins to make sense. Thank you!