Print

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

[mifki]

Not because it's a huge file, but because it is a DFHack plugin, and DFHack seems like a poor fit for Hypothetical Pack.

What's the point then? I was talking about a pack with minimal set of DFHack plugins, for people who are afraid of DFHack because it and LNPs have too much game-changing plugins enabled by default and who because of this are also missing "safe" plugins that just improve UI, for example.

[jecowa]

I was thinking it'd be good to have one that updates when Dwarf Therapist does, and another that updates when DFHack and TWBT update. The one without DFHack is for users who don't want to wait for DFHack to update. Should a pack ship with an alpha version of DFHack, or is it better to have it wait for a stable version? I'm thinking it might be better to wait for a stable version. Or maybe as long as it's disabled by default, then an alpha version is okay to include?

[Dirst]

Not because it's a huge file, but because it is a DFHack plugin, and DFHack seems like a poor fit for Hypothetical Pack.

What's the point then? I was talking about a pack with minimal set of DFHack plugins, for people who are afraid of DFHack because it and LNPs have too much game-changing plugins enabled by default and who because of this are also missing "safe" plugins that just improve UI, for example.

43.04 notwithstanding, most DF crashes seem attributable to DFHack, so if the point of this pack is to be stable and using the latest DF version, then it probably should not wait for DFHack.  Even when DFHack becomes available, the pack's default behavior should not change (the player just gets more options).

[mifki]

43.04 notwithstanding, most DF crashes seem attributable to DFHack, so if the point of this pack is to be stable and using the latest DF version, then it probably should not wait for DFHack.  Even when DFHack becomes available, the pack's default behavior should not change (the player just gets more options).

Well, you're just talking about different thing (pack idea) then.

[Dirst]

43.04 notwithstanding, most DF crashes seem attributable to DFHack, so if the point of this pack is to be stable and using the latest DF version, then it probably should not wait for DFHack.  Even when DFHack becomes available, the pack's default behavior should not change (the player just gets more options).

Well, you're just talking about different thing (pack idea) then.

Yeah I got that feeling, too.  There is probably room for a Stable Pack (something that could be linked from bay12games.com) and a Lightweight Pack (for not-quite-vanilla players).  Nice thing is that the Stable Pack would end up feature-identical on all three platforms, and the Lightweight Pack might be as well, which cuts down considerably on documentation and support.

[daagar]

Yeah I got that feeling, too.  There is probably room for a Stable Pack (something that could be linked from bay12games.com) and a Lightweight Pack (for not-quite-vanilla players).  Nice thing is that the Stable Pack would end up feature-identical on all three platforms, and the Lightweight Pack might be as well, which cuts down considerably on documentation and support.

Except for the fact that now "you" are maintaining both a stable and lite pack. Of course, "your" idea for a lightweight pack isn't quite the same as someone else's idea. So either the lightweight pack adds a feature or two, or someone makes a Lightweight+ pack (possibly the creator of the stable and lightweight packs - oh dear, now they have 3 to maintain).

I'm not saying it is a necessarily bad idea if someone wants to make the effort. However, I'm saying that the current LNP authors spend a lot of time doing what they do _and they maintain it consistently_. If people worry that a newbie is going to be overwhelmed by the LNP, we already have vanilla!

What I think would be more valuable is expending effort into documenting a good (and varied) selection of options _within_ the existing LNPs. Want your graphics to look like <this>? Select TWBT. Maybe <that>? Set it to a non-square ASCII tileset, and truetype. Want an easy embark? Use <this> profile (the Windows LNP already has a decent selection of these... many for a much older DF. Why is no one submitting updated ones? THIS is what helps newbies!). This is something the whole community can do, without splintering the userbase across a million different LNPs that all work just a bit differently.

[Dirst]

If PyLNP could accept a configuration string to configure all the options in a reliable way (see mifki's font tool for a working example), then the existing LNP's could have a "safe mode" for newbies and a "lightweight mode" (or at least a lightweight starting point) for purists.  The download size issue can really only be addressed with downloadable content from DFFD.

The configuration string needs to be platform-independent and copy-pasteable, but it doesn't need to be human-readable per se.  Something similar to the ?parameters of a URL would work.  Configuration strings can then be right in forum posts and readme files... and it'd be pretty easy to save profiles for later use.

[Niddhoger]

I don't use starter packs. Too many changes I don't know about. Too many utilities I don't use. I can play equally well on graphic or ASCII, though I'm stuck on ASCII until I learn how to setup the raws without a pack.

That's why I stopped using Lazy Newb Pack - I saw it had a bunch of mods enabled by default. I thought I was just playing vanilla with a graphics pack. I was amazed when I played vanilla and saw the awesome intro that the Lazy Newb Pack had kept hidden from me. (The intro is disabled by default in the MacNewbie Pack.) So I downloaded a copy of Spacefox's graphics pack straight from the OP of his forum page (to ensure that I had the latest version), installed it, and I proceeded to unknowingly play with a corrupt version of Dwarf Fortress and couldn't figure out why I couldn't brew plump helmets into alcohol.

This is the main reason why I've always said the LNP really isn't for actual newbs.  It's like downloading Skyrim for the first time and just installing the top 100 "must have!" mods all at the same time.  You don't even know how the base game works and what -you- want to change or why you want to change it... and you go stirring everything up.  Especially DFHack.  You have this massive tool here with 80+ commands to use.  So you don't even know why your dwarves all just died of thirst standing next to the river... and you want to tempt them into learning all the commands on top of everything else in DF? This also leads people to become dependent on the LNP.  Over on the reddit forums, if I had had a dollar for everytime someone said "I'll just wait for the LNP to update/I can't play without it." or "Well, I'd rather just play through the crashes and all the lost time this unstable DFHack steals from me than revert to vanilla".... well, I'd never run out of beer money, that's for sure.  I just feel people need to actually learn vanilla first, then they can add DFHack (as well as therapist and whatever else) on top of that foundation.  You may find you don't even want to change things, or that you can enjoy the game just fine waiting for DFHack to actually stabilize. 

While I have never used the actual LNP (I find graphic packs LESS legible and find soundsense annoying, for starters), its DFHack that is the real behemoth behind it.  If that were removed I wouldn't mind so much pointing newbs to the LNP.  Not only are the "stable" versions still unstable, but it changes too much for someone who doesn't know what a farm is.  I actually do like to use it- getting to filter for exact matches in stockpiles alone is worth it for me.  However, I find it crashing my game completely unacceptable and will happily play vanilla until the rapid release cycle ends (and the utility can actually stabilize). 

[Salmeuk]

I like DFhack, though I'm mostly too lazy to install it and do without. I use it mainly for the labor management screen and for auto-material. It's a pain in the ass to make above-ground castles otherwise.

I have never used the LNP.

I use a custom tileset but no graphics. I have also been playing since 2d and before a lot of these utilities existed. Had I not been forced to come to terms with ASCII I might play differently. However, I now think ASCII is more legible and encourages creative thinking. I play DF for the stories, it's a bit like an ad-lib generator in that regard, so I can't help but recommend the "vanilla" lifestyle to anyone else who writes and/or imagines while they play. You've heard this before, but the pixel art image of a goblin is one goblin and ONLY one goblin, whereas a 'g' can represent any number of imaginative characterizations of your most common invader.

[Sanctume]

I too like playing DF for the story it generates.  But I can't get into playing just ASCII, nor plain vanilla. 

I tried last night with 43.04 and it was just a pain to build above ground without it remembering the last block material I need for walls. 

Black background with multiple 16 color text is ok occasionally, but not so much for multi-hour gaming sessions.  When trying to find the dwarf who will most likely be a good candidate for armorsmith is a pain in vanilla.

DTherapist can use some custom color settings, but I find it far easier to read the deeper info for each dwarf, and micro managing them.

I don't like TWBT multilevel, and it's given me more crashes when I use it so I stick with 2D with True Type font.

I also look at this from a developer's point of view.  Sure a 'g' in ascii is enough because time to make it pretty is not part of the game function, so it can wait. 
But at the same time, there are ways to change what that 'g' looks like outside of Toady One's time, and it is available.  So that option is available to the users at large, it enhances the game for others and the purist can also choose to not partake with it. 

Any user can use the starter pack and set it back to ascii and do not need to set it back in subsequent use.

I find it peculiar that some players worry about bloat or extra bytes from the LNP.  With how cheap hdd today, I have like 7 versions of DF installed and I'm nowhere near running out of drive space.

[ORCACommander]

its not the MB that i care about in the bloat, its that every little thing is turned ON and the keys are remapped. dear god was soundsense traumatizing when i first encountered it in a newb pack


like i said, for what a LNMP adds i spend more time disabling, if it even lets me, than i would a fresh installation, ironhand gfx, dfhack a few custom mods and therapist usually works out of the box

[Iamblichos]

I learned to play without it and I agree with the consensus, I love the LNP but I fear that it's just too much and too many changes for the true 'n00b'.

I am playing .43.04 with just a graphics pack (because I'm older than most of you and ASCII makes these old eyes surly).  I still use SoundSense, mainly because I like to know when things are fighting - much better to hear about the giant polar bear that's wrecking your herds on its first victim than to come outside to bloody goresplats.    I am even finding that I don't need Therapist, which I would have sworn a year ago was a "must have/can't play without".

[jecowa]

I find it peculiar that some players worry about bloat or extra bytes from the LNP.  With how cheap hdd today, I have like 7 versions of DF installed and I'm nowhere near running out of drive space.

An uncompressed copy of the Lazy Newb Pack can take up 300+ MB of hard drive space. That seems like a lot to me.

Also, many people in the world don't have the best internet ("third-world" internet) and have slow download speeds or low bandwidth caps. I think it's good to have a lite Newb Pack as an option for users. I think most users who look in the /LNP/utilities/ folder will find that they rarely use most of the apps included there. I think the plan is for PyLNP to eventually be able to install utilities and graphics packs only when the user double-clicks on them, which should solve the bandwidth/hard-drive-space issue.

[vjek]

Have to test-play with vanilla so worldgen is predictable and consistent when I post worldgen seeds.

But that aside, I play with DFHack as well, but no other starter packs or anything like that.  I've had bad experiences in the past whereby certain non-vanilla packages will overwrite saved game raws, and I'm not keen on that behavior.  Even if all they do is make the saved game raws match the default raws, I still don't like that.
I can totally see the value in non-ascii tilesets, and in the past, i've even played with tilesets that are the same size as ascii, but icons/pictures.  That's pretty cool, but those tilesets tend to lag behind official releases so.. I eventually stopped using them.
I've become accustomed to the non-square aspect of ascii DF though, to the point where square tiles seem unusual.

For new players, I point them at the LNP.  It holds their hand enough that things seem 'easier' for them.

[Salmeuk]

I've become accustomed to the non-square aspect of ascii DF though, to the point where square tiles seem unusual.

This is one aspect of vanilla I just can't stand. How do you manage to create fortress layouts without always counting out the wall lengths and all of that? I NEED a square tileset  in order to correctly "eye" my room sizes and mirror patterns across larger spaces. I suppose you might not be as much of a perfectionist aha.