Print

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

[JoeJoe]

Of course I know how brooks look like, but I'm interested in how you guys and gals interpret brook tiles in df in the context of the 3-dimensional environment. Say, if one tile covers an area of 2x2 meters, how deep would the water be? And considering units don't get wet when walking over brook tiles: Would you say that this is because there are stones in the stream that allow a dry crossing (and if yes, how large and how far apart are they approximately) or would you rather say that the game mechanics simply fail to model the fact that creatures are actually wading through the water and getting wet?

Super extra bonus points if you can provide pictures.

[locustgate]

Of course I know how brooks look like, but I'm interested in how you guys and gals interpret brook tiles in df in the context of the 3-dimensional environment. Say, if one tile covers an area of 2x2 meters, how deep would the water be? And considering units don't get wet when walking over brook tiles: Would you say that this is because there are stones in the stream that allow a dry crossing (and if yes, how large and how far apart are they approximately) or would you rather say that the game mechanics simply fail to model the fact that creatures are actually wading through the water and getting wet?

Super extra bonus points if you can provide pictures.

A steam with water usually about ankle height very stoney, either with pebbles or solid rock bed.

[Col_Jessep]

I imagine them like this:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/2e/WymingBrook.jpg

[Badger Storm]

Shallow streams, about knee height.  I'm not sure anything shallower would allow food-sized fish to survive in it.

[Orange Wizard]

A regular river with a sheet of solid (i.e., not liquid) water over the top.

[Salmeuk]

I definitely didn't like the brook mechanics when I first played, but it makes more sense after spending some time with it. In order to get a depth that required swimming, you would have to channel out all the stones and silt. Most brooks aren't more than waist-deep, and even then they are usually shallower and only deep in spots.

[MDFification]

Shallow streams, about knee height.  I'm not sure anything shallower would allow food-sized fish to survive in it.

Some parts can be anke-height, provided other parts range from knee to waist height. There's a brook near my house with randomly seeded areas deep enough to swim in.

[Miuramir]

Of course I know how brooks look like, but I'm interested in how you guys and gals interpret brook tiles in df in the context of the 3-dimensional environment.

In the Appalachians, creeks or brooks with enough large rocks (and occasional fallen trees) in them to cross dry-footed are common enough; and you still get deeper spots to fish in.  Little Stony Creek leading to Cascade Falls in Jefferson National Forest, VA is a popular example, or White Clay Creek in DE for a flatter creek. 

However, the more interesting bit is that (at least in earlier versions, I haven't tested this in 0.40.xx) the creek is a valid wagon path.  After doing some image searching, I'm thinking that means it's more like these shots of West Stony Creek in the Adirondacks, especially this photo.  One could easily imagine fishing in it, crossing it dry-footed, and taking a wagon down it if necessary.