Print

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

[Shonai_Dweller]

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.

Vanilla comes with a square tileset. Amazing how many people don't realise this.

Besides, the question is about using starter packs. That's nothing to do with tilesets.

[Putnam]

It's amazing how many people are willing to learn Dwarf Fortress but consider editing text files to change settings too far.

[Shonai_Dweller]

It's amazing how many people are willing to learn Dwarf Fortress but consider editing text files to change settings too far.

Yeah, I've never understood that one.

Maybe it's a legitimate issue with language though? We assume people are just being lazy when they say editing text files is hard despite all the instructions being written in plain English right there in the file, but perhaps that's an issue if English isn't your first language?

Anybody with experience care to comment?

(And please don't comment that other 'real' games don't use text files, Crusader Kings II does and I guess others do too).

[Putnam]

You are required to edit a text file to mod Fallout 4 at all on PC, and there's a good deal of settings in that game that require it, and that game is mainstream as hell.

[ORCACommander]

Perhaps its because init, and d_init for file names do not scream here in lies options and settings to those without a programming background.

[Shonai_Dweller]

Perhaps its because init, and d_init for file names do not scream here in lies options and settings to those without a programming background.

No but there's a Wiki. And a Readme. And Forums full of helpful people saying init and df_init are the options files. And still people refuse to edit a text file and "can't live without" the Starter Pack.

[Putnam]

Perhaps its because init, and d_init for file names do not scream here in lies options and settings to those without a programming background.

the fallout 4 file i refer to is "Fallout4.ini". .ini files and files named things like "init" are traditionally options files. Not sure exactly when that practice apparently dropped from the mainstream.

[jecowa]

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.

I kind of like the non-square tiles. I count out every tile anyway even with a square tileset. I don't think the rectangle graphics are too distracting.

Spoiler: "GemSet/Shizzle 16x20 - main game screen" (click to show/hide)

The good thing about rectangular tilesets is that text is a bit easier to read.

Spoiler: "GemSet/Shizzle 16x20 - feelings screen" (click to show/hide)

[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.

Vanilla comes with a square tileset. Amazing how many people don't realise this.

Besides, the question is about using starter packs. That's nothing to do with tilesets.

Sure, it comes with one, yet the init defaults to a non-square, and I think most new players won't necessarily understand the concept of a tileset right off the bat. I would say vanilla DF presents a non-square tileset to anyone who isn't learning from a tutorial, which is surely rare these days.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

also I wasn't replying to the OP because I already have, I was asking my OWN question of vjek - let's stop fascism in it's tracks, starting with nit-picky forum posts. tilesets are perfectly relevant to the topic at hand!

The good thing about rectangular tilesets is that text is a bit easier to read.

This I can agree with, but I so so need to visually identify mirrored designs, and a non-square tileset messes with the visual comparisons I do between rooms and floors. Arbitrary aestheticism sure, but I really need things to look balanced. If you make a central hallway surrounded by four circles of equal size, the pattern will look a bit mis-proportioned with a non-square tileset. I might know it's correctly measured, but it still looks wrong to me.

[Starver]

Having grown up with editing configuration files (I'm still far more comfortable with .INIs than editing the registry, which is just one big mess, really) I find it hard to see the problem (beyond discovering which file contains which setting(s) of interest, which can be daunting), but these days people are seem to be used to UI-style configuration (radio buttons, checkboxes, value-spinners, drop-down lists, textboxes where necessary), hence why perhaps an in-game UI to change appearance would be useful (even if rendered in 'text' form, like the advanced worldgen configuration).

Wizards (whether orange or magenta!) are probably the thing about the LNP that dulls the sharp edge of the (perceived!) awkwardness of reconfiguring.


As to square/non-square tilesets: a) I lazily started and never really changed from the default,  but also b) I like the biggest overview that I can get (within my configured 50% wider, 100% taller window, on comparatively low-res screens,  bigger yet on higher ones) and going non-square just uses more space without adding anything. A 'square' room is in proportion to the cursor, and one rather gets used to it, I suppose.

[Shonai_Dweller]

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.

Vanilla comes with a square tileset. Amazing how many people don't realise this.

Besides, the question is about using starter packs. That's nothing to do with tilesets.

Sure, it comes with one, yet the init defaults to a non-square, and I think most new players won't necessarily understand the concept of a tileset right off the bat. I would say vanilla DF presents a non-square tileset to anyone who isn't learning from a tutorial, which is surely rare these days.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

also I wasn't replying to the OP because I already have, I was asking my OWN question of vjek - let's stop fascism in it's tracks, starting with nit-picky forum posts. tilesets are perfectly relevant to the topic at hand!

The good thing about rectangular tilesets is that text is a bit easier to read.

This I can agree with, but I so so need to visually identify mirrored designs, and a non-square tileset messes with the visual comparisons I do between rooms and floors. Arbitrary aestheticism sure, but I really need things to look balanced. If you make a central hallway surrounded by four circles of equal size, the pattern will look a bit mis-proportioned with a non-square tileset. I might know it's correctly measured, but it still looks wrong to me.

Vanilla comes with square tiles and a big set of options. To argue that "vanilla" involves never touching the options is absolutely ridiculous. There's an options file, there are friendly instructions on what everything does.

Argue all you like that starter packs are good for console playing newbies because an init file is daunting, no problem there, but "vanilla=windowed screen, music on by default, tiny tileset, pet graveyards off, engravings on" Um..no, Vanilla DF comes with options, the starter pack didn't invent them. It's a flexible system with instructions on how to set up.

[Max™]

Square sets make everything look so... fat.

Incidentally, last page someone said that the zoom speed changes how many tiles you get when you shift+move, this isn't the case, it changes how fast the game zooms in/out, setting it lower makes it take forever to go from my superior 24x36 down to the vanilla 8x12, setting it to 10 makes it take a few steps.

[Salmeuk]

Argue all you like that starter packs are good for console playing newbies because an init file is daunting, no problem there, but "vanilla=windowed screen, music on by default, tiny tileset, pet graveyards off, engravings on" Um..no, Vanilla DF comes with options, the starter pack didn't invent them. It's a flexible system with instructions on how to set up.

I mean, I think you're just looking for an argument here lol (really? "console playing newbies"? I suppose there really is a reason for that reputation of an insular, elitist community here) - if you were to read my earlier post you might infer more about my position, and therefore avoid trying to fight non-existent opponents.

Now, if I could only teach my dwarfs the same concept (No, Cog, chasing after that horrified bonobo really doesn't do you any good. Or me, for that matter . . . nice effort, though! two weeks later and you've ALMOST caught him) my jungle-city might get somewhere.

The most vanilla way to play the game, since options are usually defined as, well, OPTIONAL, shows the player a non-square tileset, and that's pretty much inarguable. You can argue that anyone approaching this game nowadays would certainly be taught about the init beforehand, and I would agree. And then ask why we were arguing in the first place.

My own experience was playing a long time before learning about tilesets, and if someone was to magically decide to teach themselves how to play during this age of countless DF tutorials they might experience the same thing I did. Though, I don't know how far I would have made it teaching myself if, back then, z-levels had existed as they do now. . .

[Sanctume]

In my observation, bay12 is far less friendlier or approachable for newer players than reddit subforum. 
I often see "I've played this since 20xx", back in non-existent feature in the current release. 
Ok, that does mean you did not look into new devs, new mods, new tools and are content with vanilla that mods & starter packs are "too much to learn" and not worth your time? 

Probably.  Because I felt similar to other games with user/community modding.  RimWorld and XCOM2 for example.

For DF, I mean, sure it's a valid reason to choose pure vanilla than other display options.  But then, looking at the LNP, there is an option to play with vanilla display sets. It does the same task as using notepad to edit the right file.

Other than that, there is the "dfhack enabled automatically in LNP" some time ago.  In the past, maybe.  The recent versions did have the option to not run dfhack at all--it was even set to OFF.  And even turning it on, I still have to check which options I want to run at the start.  The tweaks the save FPS seems helpful.

Anyway, it's a nice tool to have, and not everyone will want such tools.  I just want to point out that it's nice to have such tools.

As far as bloat size, it's a non-issue for me having access to decent download speed. 

DTherapist is convenient to use.  Having a 2nd monitor is handy--saves an alt-tab.  Likewise, I've seen the labor plug in, but I find having another window with other useful info docked that is available in DT more helpful in micro-managing dorfs.

[vjek]

Also I will add that now that we can embark normally on a 1x1, the larger tilesets do have a stronger appeal.  Trying to use a large square tileset on a 4x4 embark, for example, leads to a TON of scrolling around, for me.  Sure, you can use the F1,F2 keys and set zoom points, but I typically use those for vertical locations, rather than surface.

As far as sizing, pretty much everything I do now is based on a shift-arrow for sizing things.  As in, if I am going to create either a room, or a stockpile, or whatever, it's always shift-diagonal.  It saves time, but as you've surmised, I'm not really picky about aesthetics.