Print

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

[Arcvasti]

I have kind of a related question:
Can I breed animals for strength, like war dogs? When I have 20 and kill the weaker ones every year, will I get super war dogs eventually? =3

Yes, although the effects won't be especially pronounced. Super might be a bit of an exaggeration, but you WILL eventually improve war dog quality if you do that for both male AND female dogs. DF genetics systems does allow for this sort of thing, although hopefully it'll get more nuanced in the future.

[Col_Jessep]

Sweet, thank you both!
Anybody want some stew? Really fresh! =P

[Spectre Incarnate]

I know homosexuality has been observed in multiple species of animals, but, let's be honest, it's a very rare occurrence and mostly manifests in the form of males shagging everything in sight regardless of gender.

Let's be honest? No, it is not just males shagging everything in sight. Many female cats, for instance, both domestic and wild, have lesbian and bisexual tendencies and they are very sensual and passionate with each other. And actually my dog did not have any interest in females, even when we tried to breed him. The female who was in heat did not trigger any instinct and while she tried again and again to get him to follow her lead, he pointedly ignored her. I do not feel it is a rare occurrence at all. People are just blind to it, thinking that humans invented it all and if an animal does express those feelings, it must just be confused. I believe it is simply a part of our planet.

Very few animals display this kind of loyalty to their significant other.

That I will agree with. Loyal gay relationships between animals *are* rare occurrences, but I don't think that should be the deciding factor that makes an animal gay. That is more a human notion of social acceptance.

Also, Chipperbane, I sent you a PM about earlier.

[tahujdt]

I've though of a test for my gay dwarves to see if they will be contributive to the fort. All gay couples will be sent off into a satellite colony. If they can produce offspring without outside help or violating monogamy, then they will be deemed worthy of citizenship, because they can make every contribution a straight dwarf can. If not, then they have to stay there.

I believe it is simply a part of our planet.

Something being "part of our planet" does not make it a good thing.

[Chevaleresse]

And something being difficult to understand for some does not make it a bad thing.

You should be happy you have gay dwarves, given the general opinion of children in this community.

[Orange Wizard]

You should be happy you have gay dwarves, given the general opinion of children in this community.

At first I thought you were referring to Bay12ers who act like children, and I lol'd.

Anyway, I agree with Tahu. Natural does not necessarily imply Good. However, I don't want a flamewar. Please don't make flamewar.

[GenericOverusedName]

Part of the thing is a lot of animals (particularly the ones we tend to be most interested in killing goblins with) don't do the whole exclusive monogamy thing, while the ORIENTATION tags are more focused on that sort of thing. Reproduction won't occur unless the two individuals match up in the 'Would Like to Marry' category, which doesn't really translate to most animals. Certainly some, like albatrosses and other animals that practice lifelong monogamy, but most don't.

As for selectively breeding, it can work, but it's annoying because you can't explicitly choose or even know which animal is the father unless you make it literally the only available stud. You'll need to cage/butcher all the other males of that species and hope for the best, and you won't be able to try and produce two different lines or anything more complex like that.

[slothen]

I think the problem is that with the default [5:20:75] ratios for the opposite sex, if the game only allows offspring when in the commitment category, then we're talking 25% of not breeding.  For animals, it would make much more sense for the 20% that are in the hetero-lover category to also possibly breed, dropping the non-breeding ratio down to 5%.  Homosexual behavior in animals is well documented, but for 25% of all animals to never breed kind of flies in the face of reality.

[Quietust]

You'll need to cage/butcher all the other males of that species and hope for the best, and you won't be able to try and produce two different lines or anything more complex like that.

Caging males won't actually help - caging females works because caged units do not run the "try to become pregnant" code, but when they search for males on the map they don't check where they're located.

[GenericOverusedName]

Ah, I didn't think caged males could engage in spore-based reproduction.

So I guess it's tons of delicious animal meat and one very lucky stud. Or one very unlucky one if it happens to be a gay one. And you can't just lock the other ones up and use trial-and-error to see which critters lean which way for you, oh dear.

[Spectre Incarnate]

I've though of a test for my gay dwarves to see if they will be contributive to the fort. All gay couples will be sent off into a satellite colony. If they can produce offspring without outside help or violating monogamy, then they will be deemed worthy of citizenship, because they can make every contribution a straight dwarf can. If not, then they have to stay there.

At first I thought you were referring to Bay12ers who act like children, and I lol'd.
Anyway, I agree with Tahu. Natural does not necessarily imply Good.

This isn't even remotely about the game for you two, anymore, is it?

[Orange Wizard]

To be fair, I haven't actually played DF lately.

[tahujdt]

For me, I'm working on a dwarven arcology project, so I need as many breeding dwarves as possible. I don't want to murder (relatively) innocent dwarves, so the gay dwarves are given a chance to prove themselves. If they can contribute to the gene pool as much as straight dwarves, then they will be treated exactly the same.

[Putnam]

Both of you pointed out the fallacious reasoning in away that made it seem like both of you think that gay==bad:

Original statement: "Homosexuality is a natural part of the world."

Rebuttal: "Natural is not necessarily good."

I think you're all communicating on completely different levels here.

[tahujdt]

Irrespective of my beliefs on the issue, I meant to point out that calling something "natural" doesn't make it "good".