Print

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

[Frogwarrior]

Hi,
Has anybody experimented around with building fortresses that span adjacent embarks?
Like, embark on a zone, build a fort, retire, embark on an adjacent zone, build a fort, connect the edges, then send in an adventurer?
It seems like the sort of thing that could produce some seriously impressive megalopolises, depending on how much time people put into them - since you don't have to have the entire map loaded at once. You could build a fort over an entire map tile if you took the time.

-Connecting the edges of above-ground structures would be annoying because of the no-walls-within-five-tiles-of-the-edge rule - but this does not apply to floors and raisable drawbridges! So if you're willing to tolerate 10 tiles of drawbridge when exploring in Adventure Mode, you can make structures of any size and shape you like, as long as you count tiles to get everything to line up right.
-This does not apply to underground walls in the cave layer! So you can go as crazy as you like with constructions underground; you just can't dig out that 2xN shell between embarks.
-Minecart tracks connecting between embarks? Maybe build forts over a whole map tile, and use a minecart subway system to allow your adventurer to fast travel, not to mention rad travel?
-I have no idea how powered systems work in systems like this. Might be good to ensure, if you use power for anything, that everything powered gets its power from within the same "chunk?" Are "chunks" of land a thing that get loaded and unloaded in adventure mode?
-Can YOU say, "create a massive dwarven megalopolis with roller coasters and controllable magma fountains, and also mine out all of the safely-obtainable candy on the entire map over all the embarks in the entire megalopolis, then use an adventurer to haul all of the candy to one of the sections, then use it to outfit every single dwarf in a max-population fort with high-quality candy, then breach the clown hut?"

[Dunamisdeos]

fast travel, not to mention rad travel?

This is what I took away from this.

Also, this is the most rad idea I've seen yet on 40.01. I think this belongs either in Megaprojects or Stupid Dwarf Tricks. I'm going to try this

[Frogwarrior]

Bonus points for the fast-travel roller coasters having leaps and stuff. Maybe a part where it accelerates you up fast enough to skip over lava, then makes you do that? That'd rock.

But you should have enough space to come with WHATEVER you want, really.

[LarsGerhard]

This has actually been attempted before in earlier versions. Now that the world has been activated more impressive results should be possible. You probably want to start by doing your best to subdue anything that can siege fortresses since if you are not currently looking at a fortress sieges seem to be overly effective.

[GavJ]

You still can't build on edge tiles, though. So the only way to actually connect walls and stuff is still annoying methods like obsidian casting.

[LarsGerhard]

You still can't build on edge tiles, though. So the only way to actually connect walls and stuff is still annoying methods like obsidian casting.

The OP did mention that and solutions. Plus obsidian casting is better than mere construction. If doing something like this why not use it?

[GavJ]

Plus obsidian casting is better than mere construction.

Why? Raw obsidian casting is WORSE, because rough stone is climbable and less secure. However, since you can then go in and smooth it (even up to the edge), it is in fact equally as good as constructions when smoothed (or equally versatile, more precisely. You might want rough sometimes). The only functional difference I know of at all is that the obsidian will cave-in, and constructions will deconstruct on cave-in. I don't think they're different in any other way to an adventurer. And cave-ins are pretty esoteric, since they can only happen for an adventurer with a support and a lever, and even then, caving in a random edge wall would be odd.

And the reason not to want to do them is that they are INCREDIBLY time consuming - have fun building a 95 z level magma pump on every. single. embark of your mega fort, and huge double aqueduct systems, which themselves have to be built with extremely tedious obsidian casting for the last 5 tiles, or bridge networks, etc. etc.  Have you ever tried this? It takes like 100x longer than constructions would.

Bridges are easy but ugly/unsatisfying IMO.



Honestly there's not much reason I can think of why you aren't simply allowed to build out to the map edge. Why is that a thing in the first place? Because of invaders needing a place? People can already prevent this with bridges, and it hasn't been the end of dwarf fortress as we know it... the world didn't melt/explode. Just let us do it / remove the restriction. is the obvious solution. Which belongs in suggestions not here, but whatever.

[Dunamisdeos]

Plus obsidian casting is better than mere construction.

Why? Raw obsidian casting is WORSE, because rough stone is climbable and less secure. However, since you can then go in and smooth it (even up to the edge), it is in fact equally as good as constructions when smoothed (or equally versatile, more precisely. You might want rough sometimes). The only functional difference I know of at all is that the obsidian will cave-in, and constructions will deconstruct on cave-in. I don't think they're different in any other way to an adventurer. And cave-ins are pretty esoteric, since they can only happen for an adventurer with a support and a lever, and even then, caving in a random edge wall would be odd.

And the reason not to want to do them is that they are INCREDIBLY time consuming - have fun building a 95 z level magma pump on every. single. embark of your mega fort, and huge double aqueduct systems, which themselves have to be built with extremely tedious obsidian casting for the last 5 tiles, or bridge networks, etc. etc.  Have you ever tried this? It takes like 100x longer than constructions would.

Bridges are easy but ugly/unsatisfying IMO.



Honestly there's not much reason I can think of why you aren't simply allowed to build out to the map edge. Why is that a thing in the first place? Because of invaders needing a place? People can already prevent this with bridges, and it hasn't been the end of dwarf fortress as we know it... the world didn't melt/explode. Just let us do it / remove the restriction. is the obvious solution. Which belongs in suggestions not here, but whatever.

There is probably a reason outside of restricting play. I assume it has something to do with the way the game functions beneath the surface, rather than any intent to prevent exploits.

It would be really nice to be able to do that, though.

[LarsGerhard]

Plus obsidian casting is better than mere construction.

Why? Raw obsidian casting is WORSE, because rough stone is climbable and less secure. However, since you can then go in and smooth it (even up to the edge), it is in fact equally as good as constructions when smoothed (or equally versatile, more precisely. You might want rough sometimes). The only functional difference I know of at all is that the obsidian will cave-in, and constructions will deconstruct on cave-in. I don't think they're different in any other way to an adventurer. And cave-ins are pretty esoteric, since they can only happen for an adventurer with a support and a lever, and even then, caving in a random edge wall would be odd.

Obsidian is highly valuable and can be engraved. The increased difficulty and time required merely adds to the prestige. And if you are relying on constructed wall's greater difficulty in climb for your defense you're doing it wrong.

Honestly there's not much reason I can think of why you aren't simply allowed to build out to the map edge. Why is that a thing in the first place? Because of invaders needing a place? People can already prevent this with bridges, and it hasn't been the end of dwarf fortress as we know it... the world didn't melt/explode. Just let us do it / remove the restriction. is the obvious solution. Which belongs in suggestions not here, but whatever.

"We can already do it with bridges" is not really an argument against the no build zone since it's almost certainly not intended behavioiur. Personally I'm not fond of it, but I think the best way to view is to think of the no build zone as being outside of the fortress but displayed anyway for convenience purposes. There's gonna be some point at which the game steps in and says "here's where you can stop building" but it's helpful to show on the map the tiles just outside the fortress for invaders and outsiders.

There is probably a reason outside of restricting play. I assume it has something to do with the way the game functions beneath the surface, rather than any intent to prevent exploits.

It would be really nice to be able to do that, though.

That seems unlikely. It's not like the game flips out if you use obsidian casting or bridges to make walls. It not being able to handle constructions in a five tile zone for technical reasons feels odd to me.

[GavJ]

Obsidian is highly valuable and can be engraved. The increased difficulty and time required merely adds to the prestige. If you are relying on constructed wall's greater difficulty in climb for your defense you're doing it wrong.

So it would be good game design then to require a person to win a nobel prize before being allowed to play the game with carpenters enabled, because then making a wooden building would be that much more prestigious?    Random obstacles for no good reason = bad.

There's gonna be some point at which the game steps in and says "here's where you can stop building"

why?

[LarsGerhard]

Obsidian is highly valuable and can be engraved. The increased difficulty and time required merely adds to the prestige. If you are relying on constructed wall's greater difficulty in climb for your defense you're doing it wrong.

So it would be good game design then to require a person to win a nobel prize before being allowed to play the game with carpenters enabled, because then making a wooden building would be that much more prestigious?    Random obstacles for no good reason = bad.

Don't be absurd. You don't need to interact with the obstacle (even for dubious values of need associated with multitile fortresses.) since you can always use stuff like bridges or just accept gaps in the fortress. Obsidian casting is simple the best choice for megaconstructions like this absent an aesthetic desire for a specific material.

There's gonna be some point at which the game steps in and says "here's where you can stop building"

why?

You really can't think of any technical reasons why not doing that would be a bad idea?

[GavJ]

(Your day job is customer service for a cable company, isn't it? I have a hunch)

since you can always use stuff like bridges or just accept gaps in the fortress.

I could. OR I could just be allowed to play the game according to one simple and consistent set of rules across all game tiles, without compromising anything or putting up with random band-aid, non-realistic, immersion-breaking, tedious magical force fields.

You really can't think of any technical reasons why not doing that would be a bad idea?

Nope!

[LarsGerhard]

(Your day job is customer service for a cable company, isn't it? I have a hunch)

Um, no.

since you can always use stuff like bridges or just accept gaps in the fortress.

I could. OR I could just be allowed to play the game according to one simple and consistent set of rules across all game tiles, without compromising anything or putting up with random band-aid, non-realistic, immersion-breaking, tedious magical force fields.

Discussing the merits of obsidian casting in megaconstructions and discussing the no build zone aren't really related which is why I broke up my replies in the first place. "require a person to win a nobel prize before being allowed to play the game with carpenters enabled" is a bizarre non-sequitur to "The increased difficulty and time required merely adds to the prestige." Increased prestige means it's a better choice than easier options not the only option.

You really can't think of any technical reasons why not doing that would be a bad idea?

Nope!

So obviously absolutely no limit on building is ridiculous without alien ultra-tech computers. Just one 16x16 embark is straight impossible on a lot of people's computers. It's also not even clear if that's a coherent thing for the game to do as currently written.  So why not let it load additional areas in addition to your main fortress? I'd love to be able to tell my dwarves to "go 20 tiles past the edge of the map and build a wall". It inflates the site count, basically won't be able to actually respect any construction when you aren't looking, conflicts with the concept of hill dwarves, still runs into possible issues when crossing region borders and would require entirely new code for displaying unconnected but simultaneously loaded maps.

The game pretty much needs to stop you and say "you can't build any further". That can be the same point at which it stops displaying map. I'm not sure why you objected to this part of my post, it seemed like the least objectionable part to me, but hopefully I've explained myself adequately.

[Frogwarrior]

The game pretty much needs to stop you and say "you can't build any further". That can be the same point at which it stops displaying map.

That's the clincher. When you said it the first time, I myself didn't know what you meant - I just sort of took it for granted that, well, obviously you can only build within the map.

Anyway, I'd probably just live with bridges... except, of course, since it's dwarves, I might just build underground instead. Like, do a smoothing on the walls in all the caverns and base the megalopolis on that.

[LarsGerhard]

The game pretty much needs to stop you and say "you can't build any further". That can be the same point at which it stops displaying map.

That's the clincher. When you said it the first time, I myself didn't know what you meant - I just sort of took it for granted that, well, obviously you can only build within the map.

Anyway, I'd probably just live with bridges... except, of course, since it's dwarves, I might just build underground instead. Like, do a smoothing on the walls in all the caverns and base the megalopolis on that.

Ah, apologies for not being clear.

Underground is a fine approach especially since it makes it more convenient to throw spoilers at an adventurer.