Print

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

Afro

1 (0.7%)

Duerer

8 (5.4%)

GemSet

14 (9.5%)

Ironhand

29 (19.6%)

Jolly Bastion

5 (3.4%)

Mayday

15 (10.1%)

Obsidian

17 (11.5%)

Spacefox

35 (23.6%)

Wanderlust

11 (7.4%)

Other (please specify)

13 (8.8%)

Total Members Voted: 148

[DAOWAce]

Okay, I just tested things.

It seems to display the tooltips regardless of graphic set, including the one I was using (which was 24x24 too).

It does not work in an already created world.  Explains why a new fortress didn't work.

There's also a dependency the tooltips need to display, since just using the two base reaction files did not get it working. It only started working when I copied everything over.  I'm too dumb to know what it depends on, unfortunately.

Could you tell me what the dependencies are to get tooltips working, and if it's even possible to update my old fortress/world with the tooltips? It's honestly the only thing I really want, as I expect to have to start a brand new game for the other changes to work since it affects the core game.

Edit: Just have to copy them over to the save folder for the region, derp.  I tested wrong too and it made me think there were dependencies, but it really just works as expected.

Thank you!  Sorry for my derpiness.

[TheHossofMoss]

Okay, I just tested things.

It seems to display the tooltips regardless of graphic set, including the one I was using (which was 24x24 too).

It does not work in an already created world.  Explains why a new fortress didn't work.

There's also a dependency the tooltips need to display, since just using the two base reaction files did not get it working. It only started working when I copied everything over.  I'm too dumb to know what it depends on, unfortunately.

Could you tell me what the dependencies are to get tooltips working, and if it's even possible to update my old fortress/world with the tooltips? It's honestly the only thing I really want, as I expect to have to start a brand new game for the other changes to work since it affects the core game.

Edit: Just have to copy them over to the save folder for the region, derp.  I tested wrong too and it made me think there were dependencies, but it really just works as expected.

Thank you!  Sorry for my derpiness.

Hey, are you using the newest DF upload or the older one?

[Codyo]

So right now, accelerated doesn't work? Where will I go for my FPS boost?

For an FPS boost, you could check out the wiki page on Maximizing framerate. The page is very detailed, with dozens of excellent tips. And DFHack has some great tools for that, such as to remove contaminants and destroy excess stone and/or items.

If standardizing stone actually has a significant impact on FPS, I'd like to know about it. But can anyone point me to convincing proof, such as actual tests? Because, a couple years ago I read some convincing posts and evidence which suggested otherwise.

It's seems clear that it's pathfinding that's the main culprit of FPS Death (as mentioned here). In my mind, the final proof was how effective Undump Engines seem to be. (See here, , or here. Undump Engines are a way to circumvent constant pathfinding for stored items.)

That's not very helpful. Because I'm here after messing with init settings.
Those settings can only go far without severely limiting your own experience of the game. Accelerated is why I'm here and in my experience it has really helped, and with the recent background running history update, FPS has gone into the toilet.

I like the idea of toadyone updating his compiler and working on a 64 bit version of the game.

[Thundercraft]

I like the idea of toadyone updating his compiler and working on a 64 bit version of the game.

A lot of players are glad he decided to do that, myself included.

That's not very helpful. Because I'm here after messing with init settings.
Those settings can only go far without severely limiting your own experience of the game.

Granted. Turning off things like temperature and/or invasions would make things boring. But there's much more on that wiki page than init settings. There's also fortress design tips, world gen parameters, mods, and utilities. And I only mentioned Undump Engines because I get the feeling that some players have never even heard of it.

To each their own, though. And on hearing that Accelerated does have a significant FPS impact, I may have to reevaluate my opinion on it or perform my own tests.

[Meph]

Turning temperature off helps a ton with FPS though. And it only affects frostbite, fires and magma. First one is rare, second one is unrealistically overpowered, and magma can still be deadly even without temperature by giving the creature a self-targetted interaction that can only be triggered with the location hint IN_MAGMA; killing them.

[TheHossofMoss]

Turning temperature off helps a ton with FPS though. And it only affects frostbite, fires and magma.

Whoa, I had no idea there was frostbite in this game. I'll have to check that out.

[Taffer]

I'm not sure if there's much interest in my improved creature descriptions still, as things have been fairly quiet. I'm still chugging along  when I find the time, and things have progressed quite well.

I'd like some input on size, if possible. One of my goals was to give myself an idea of how big giant creatures and animal men are, as it wasn't clear. I'm no longer certain this is helpful. As discussed earlier, the sizes in game are often problematic and the conversion formula for animal people and giants results in similar sizes for most fantasy creatures. This leads to repetitive comparisons--I'm currently using a grizzly bear--and I'm not certain even that is always helpful, given my inability to compare a grizzly bear and a polar bear in size in my head without resorting to Wikipedia.

While I'm sure the sizes could be fixed by the Modest Mod, I'd rather not base the descriptions textually on the modest mod. I still hope that mod authors integrate my work, particularly as Toady isn't interested. So I'm thinking of removing all size comparisons in the giant variations while leaving the "small, medium-sized, large" size indicators for the animal people.

[TheHossofMoss]

I'm not sure if there's much interest in my improved creature descriptions still, as things have been fairly quiet. I'm still chugging along  when I find the time, and things have progressed quite well.

I'd like some input on size, if possible. One of my goals was to give myself an idea of how big giant creatures and animal men are, as it wasn't clear. I'm no longer certain this is helpful. As discussed earlier, the sizes in game are often problematic and the conversion formula for animal people and giants results in similar sizes for most fantasy creatures. This leads to repetitive comparisons--I'm currently using a grizzly bear--and I'm not certain even that is always helpful, given my inability to compare a grizzly bear and a polar bear in size in my head without resorting to Wikipedia.

While I'm sure the sizes could be fixed by the Modest Mod, I'd rather not base the descriptions textually on the modest mod. I still hope that mod authors integrate my work, particularly as Toady isn't interested. So I'm thinking of removing all size comparisons in the giant variations while leaving the "small, medium-sized, large" size indicators for the animal people.

I don't think I can offer any input, as I'm not computer savvy enough to give anything helpful. But I do see the need for this. The giant critter being able to go through the same kind of entrance a dwarf can go through is kinda screwy. I like especially what you say at the end. Small, medium-sized, and large. That would be a really good place to start for all animals, in my book.

Also, Button, are you still alive? I miss you friend.

[Button]

I'm not sure if there's much interest in my improved creature descriptions still, as things have been fairly quiet.

Well I'm still interested.

I'd like some input on size, if possible. One of my goals was to give myself an idea of how big giant creatures and animal men are, as it wasn't clear. I'm no longer certain this is helpful. As discussed earlier, the sizes in game are often problematic and the conversion formula for animal people and giants results in similar sizes for most fantasy creatures. This leads to repetitive comparisons--I'm currently using a grizzly bear--and I'm not certain even that is always helpful, given my inability to compare a grizzly bear and a polar bear in size in my head without resorting to Wikipedia.

I think the sizes are the best part of the descriptions. While the sizes don't matter for a lot of things, they definitely matter for combat, and can give you an idea of what you're getting into. Even if a whole bunch of giant critters are the size of a grizzly bear, that's useful information to anyone encountering them in the wild. And remember - in-game, you're not going to be seeing a bunch of different giant creatures all lined up in a row (except maybe if the elves are invading). You'll see a couple giant dragonflies and be like, "OK, are we talking 2 feet long, or...?", without reference to all the other giant creatures which are the same size as those giant dragonflies.

While I'm sure the sizes could be fixed by the Modest Mod, I'd rather not base the descriptions textually on the modest mod.

I'm not 100% sure what you mean by "fix" here. If you just mean add more variety to giant critter sizes, I don't think that's necessary. However, if you're talking about bringing real-life creatures with unrealistic size values in vanilla into line with their real-life counterparts, that is something I'd like to get around to.

Also, Button, are you still alive? I miss you friend.

Friend!

I'm alive and well, just scrambling at work. My team maintains a webapp which collates and displays the work of a bunch of other teams, which means that whenever any of the teams providing us data are under time pressure, so are we. (On top of that, my role is understaffed on my team). I do most of my DF modding on weekends, so having to do work work on weekends means no time for DF at all. (I haven't even gotten the chance to play 43.x yet!)

It should slow down to a more comfortable pace around the end of July, so I anticipate getting a lot more DF-modding done during the second half of the year. Especially when I start taking 4-day weekends just to burn vacation days down to the max rollover.

[KillzEmAllGod]

I just don't really want to get into 43 yet without this great mod, mainly love it for how my dwarfs got killed by hippos and other creatures the other changes and fixes were great too.

[Taverius]

Edit2: I'm in the progress of adding the Modest Mod into MasterworkDF, at least parts of it. I really like most of the under-the-hood changes, but clutch sizes strike me as a bit odd, especially when it comes to scoprions, spiders and insects. While being realistic to have 100-170 scorpion babies, I'm not sure if a freshly hatched group of 134 giant desert scorpions wouldnt make the game near trivial; while simultaniously killing FPS.

Since I actually did some work on this way back when; many of those clutch sizes were basically straight import from 'irl'.

While they're accurate (mostly) for things like chickens, turkeys and other dinosauria, they need adjusting for creatures with large infant mortality rates like arthopods and quasi-vermin in general - they're 'right' in the sense that those many are born irl, but they're 'wrong' in the sense that it'll lead to many orders of magnitude more getting to adulthood compared to real life.

Since the latter consideration is more important in terms of gameplay/framerate, it is absolutely correct to adjust the clutch sizes to be similar to other creatures of similar size and role (predator/prey), after taking into account yearly clutch counts and lifespan/maturation.

Generally speaking, for any creature where the young are abandoned at birth or soon after - most of arthropoda, most of reptilia - we have to bake infant mortality into the raws.

[Thundercraft]

While they're accurate (mostly) for things like chickens, turkeys and other dinosauria, they need adjusting for creatures with large infant mortality rates like arthopods and quasi-vermin in general...

Since the latter consideration is more important in terms of gameplay/framerate, it is absolutely correct to adjust the clutch sizes to be similar to other creatures of similar size and role (predator/prey), after taking into account yearly clutch counts and lifespan/maturation.

Back in the original Modest Mod thread, I begged Igfig to make changes to clutch size an optional module. The original premise behind Modest Mod was to be, and I quote, "...a collection of vital bugfixes and tweaks that everyone should be able to use comfortably and without reservation." Well, I think clutch size is controversial and I am in no way comfortable with drastically altering it. (Sadly, my plea was ignored...  )

A major factor in clutch size for egg-laying animals is the fact that eggs are, potentially, a huge source of food for dwarves. Indeed, eggs are more important than meat (if any) or other products (if any) obtained from butchering.

I just worry that, even if there is a need to adjust for infant mortality to make it "more real", that could impact the animal's usefulness to the point that most players would find it makes certain animals no longer worth raising - making them decide to raise other livestock instead.

Also, for such a discussion, I wanted to remind that there is a distinction between normal animals and Giant versions. For instance, there are Bluejays, which are so small as to be vermin, and then there's Giant Bluejays, which are large enough to serve as a Mount. But, as far as I know, egg size still does not impact the food value of the egg. (See Wiki's page on Egg Production)

[Meph]

My main point was that 150-ish scorpion or fly or slug eggs would feed as many dwarves as 150 elephant steaks. 1 meal is 1 meal ingame, regardless of size.

[Thundercraft]

My main point was that 150-ish scorpion or fly or slug eggs would feed as many dwarves as 150 elephant steaks. 1 meal is 1 meal ingame, regardless of size.

Okay, that does sound extremely game unbalancing. I don't have any problem with reducing those absurd amounts to something reasonable (in terms of clutch size vs. egg food value).

However, if this discussion leads to reducing the clutch size of domestic poultry in the base Modest Mod (like in the old Legacy versions) - even by a little bit - I would have a problem with it. That is, unless it was made an optional module. (Also, see the Wiki page for the Poultry industry for a comparison of egg layers and clutch sizes.)

Actually, I would be unhappy about reducing the clutch size of most non-domestic animals - like Alligators - even by half. Maybe something like 5-20, but a reduction to 5-15 is too few. (The Alligator is a big animal with big eggs and I think their egg production should feed a Fort better than mere Chickens!)

That said, I'd agree that Saltwater or Cave Crocodiles do need be reduced. A maximum clutch of 70 and 60, respectively, is way too much! Though, I guess one could counter-argue that, while Alligators become adult at just 1 year, both Crocodiles take 3 years to become adult. So it is slightly more investment in getting the latter industry going.

[Button]

The worst offenders are giant versions of certain insects, which have no default egg behavior & which I filled in values for with real-life clutch sizes. These are definitely up for reduction, though I'm inclined to leave giant thrips in the game-breakingly high range (because their prefstring is "prolific breeding").

I finally got over the hump at work, and am getting to work on v43.04-1 now.