Print

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

[Aquillion]

Will regular creatures with the building destroyer tag be cursed from toppling statues?

Will temple defilers be cursed 100% of the time?

Yeah, I think a strategic temple might be bad for an invasion force.  This mechanic will certainly need to be updated as we go along, at least in terms of consecrating the temple so it can't be placed instantly through the interface as if that somehow communicates with the gods directly.

Of course, players exploiting strategically placed temples run the risk of attackers being "cursed" with undeath or vampiric status, which would just mean they're now even harder to deal with.

[Lightman]

Cheers Toady.

Oh and some repetition of information in the DF Talk episodes is not unwelcome. It's nice to hear people talk about their projects and it can give a differently nuanced sense of things.

I agree. If it came to one-or-the-other, I'd rather have Toady and ThreeToe read their Future of the Fortress, instead of posting on this thread (and call it a 'DF talk').  I find it much more cumbersome digging through this giant thread, if I want to view something I missed in the past.  Of course, if they prefer doing a post to a recording, that's understandable.

[monk12]

Cheers Toady.

Oh and some repetition of information in the DF Talk episodes is not unwelcome. It's nice to hear people talk about their projects and it can give a differently nuanced sense of things.

Indeed; very often enough time has passed since the first Talk to make even a reiteration a welcome confirmation that the game (or a given aspect of it) is on the same path. And more often than not, rephrasing old information allows for better inference of intent, which is valuable to consider when dealing with a project this size.

I agree. If it came to one-or-the-other, I'd rather have Toady and ThreeToe read their Future of the Fortress, instead of posting on this thread (and call it a 'DF talk').  I find it much more cumbersome digging through this giant thread, if I want to view something I missed in the past.  Of course, if they prefer doing a post to a recording, that's understandable.

Or both. Both is good (if perhaps more work than Toady wants to do.)

[Random_Dragon]

Ah, excellent to see all this progress, will be glad to see all the Fun that will ensue in .40.25.

I'm wondering though, as anyone looked into the "gauntlet bug" (http://www.bay12games.com/dwarves/mantisbt/view.php?id=6273) along the way?

[MrWiggles]

I think improving memory/cache performance would be easier to do than multithreading.

Anything would be really nice. The features are great but I can't get over the worsening FPS issue, even on a 4690k. It's just...I don't get it. Why ignore it and continue adding features? My forts are getting less and less old before I just get tired of waiting for dwarf to get from point A to point B and retire it.

EDIT: perhaps I am just not experiencing enough !FUN!

Well, there are FPS changes through out development. Its remaining about the same.  Even when dramatically large things like the extra z levels were added. ToadyOne is just not making ground on that sluggishness. And to my understanding what really causes slow down, wouldnt really be solved by multithreading anyhow.

Every reveal tile takes more system resources and every item in the game takes more system resources. And these are two things that grow a lot during gameplay.

[Max™]

Ah, excellent to see all this progress, will be glad to see all the Fun that will ensue in .40.25.

I'm betting on .48.00 myself.

Every reveal tile takes more system resources and every item in the game takes more system resources. And these are two things that grow a lot during gameplay.

Hmmm, this might explain why adventurer mode runs so fast, the only times it really slows down is when I've got 5 or 6 thousand (or more) creatures to load within my sight/sound range.

[Amperzand]

Two questions;

With this wonderful temperature system in place, is there any intention to make it matter for individual units outside of spontaneous combustion or flash-freeze, e.g, hypothermia, heat-stroke?

And;

How likely is more complete structural simulation within the near future, e.g, needing structural columns in especially wide rooms, ETC?

[Inarius]

Two questions;

With this wonderful temperature system in place, is there any intention to make it matter for individual units outside of spontaneous combustion or flash-freeze, e.g, hypothermia, heat-stroke?

And;

How likely is more complete structural simulation within the near future, e.g, needing structural columns in especially wide rooms, ETC?

All of this are more like suggestions than questions. You should post them in the appropriate topic, or, you will probably hear the same reply than everybody who does the same (not for now, why not,  i don't know when)

[Putnam]

Ah, excellent to see all this progress, will be glad to see all the Fun that will ensue in .40.25.

I'm betting on .48.00 myself.

i give it like 98% confidence that it's not above 0.42.01

and like 98% confidence that it's not below 0.41.01

[MrWiggles]

Two questions;


How likely is more complete structural simulation within the near future, e.g, needing structural columns in especially wide rooms, ETC?

This has been discuss a few times. There isn't a simulation limit that preventing that from happening. Its a UI and display issue. So far, ToadyOne and ThreeToes havent found a way to present things like load and tension on constructions, that they like. And from whats been discussed this is the barrier to removing the simple cave in rules.

[Dirst]

Two questions;


How likely is more complete structural simulation within the near future, e.g, needing structural columns in especially wide rooms, ETC?

This has been discuss a few times. There isn't a simulation limit that preventing that from happening. Its a UI and display issue. So far, ToadyOne and ThreeToes havent found a way to present things like load and tension on constructions, that they like. And from whats been discussed this is the barrier to removing the simple cave in rules.

Sudden cave-ins communicates that there was a problem, but a system "that they like" would give some advance notice in time for the player to do something about it.

[Vattic]

With this wonderful temperature system in place, is there any intention to make it matter for individual units outside of spontaneous combustion or flash-freeze, e.g, hypothermia, heat-stroke?

Back in 40d creatures caught outside in extreme cold would slowly die from exposure. We had BURN, HEAT, and COLD damage / attack types; The COLD damage type would cause frostbite when critical. These were removed with the new combat system from what I understand with a desire to use the temperature system instead. I haven't embarked on a glacier in many versions to see if the cold upsets the dwarves.

[Witty]

Back in 40d creatures caught outside in extreme cold would slowly die from exposure. We had BURN, HEAT, and COLD damage / attack types; The COLD damage type would cause frostbite when critical. These were removed with the new combat system from what I understand with a desire to use the temperature system instead. I haven't embarked on a glacier in many versions to see if the cold upsets the dwarves.

I've actually done a little bit of science on this.

From what I've seen, it's basically impossible for any creature to suffer any sort of cold damage naturally. In the arena, even when setting the temperature to absolute zero, a dwarf will take quite a while to start suffering cold damage. The current material templates for skin and such leave a lot to be desired on this front, but there's probably screwy numbers across all relevant boards here.

[expwnent]

I've actually done a little bit of science on this.

From what I've seen, it's basically impossible for any creature to suffer any sort of cold damage naturally. In the arena, even when setting the temperature to absolute zero, a dwarf will take quite a while to start suffering cold damage. The current material templates for skin and such leave a lot to be desired on this front, but there's probably screwy numbers across all relevant boards here.

Do you really mean absolute zero, or zero dwarf-degrees, which corresponds to far below absolute zero?

[crazyabe]

i had a stone at 0 Urists was useless for killing