Print

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

[FantasticDorf]

I can hear the jovial Toady from here, like a train down a tunnel as the update is seen far on the horizon waiting to pull into the station. Excellent responses as always to our rather sometimes difficult questions.

[PlumpHelmetMan]

Thanks very much for your responses to all my inquiries, Toady. You and ThreeToe keep up the good work!

[Ophanim]

When it comes time to add secondary loaded areas, do you have any plans to multithread them?

Will there be Banach space planes populated by flat chains? Or, more realistically, taxicab metric planes?

[KittyTac]

Will the unfinished stuff you ran out of time to implement fully be implemented in the bugfix mini-releases following this one?

[Shonai_Dweller]

When it comes time to add secondary loaded areas, do you have any plans to multithread them?

Rather than posting here, you should probably add to one of the many threads that discuss the exact complexity of multi-threading dwarf fortress and say why you think specifically this part should be multi-threaded, as opposed to any other, along with the exact benefits, comparitive ease of implementation, etc. And then make a suggestion on the suggestion board.

[thvaz]

Thanks, Toady! Eager to try the upcoming release.

[Fleeting Frames]

Dunno if there's named food, unless that's a bug.

There's an old story about hauler getting interrupted and fighting/killing so much with a cheese they name it.

[FantasticDorf]

Will we ever be able to run two fortresses at once?

PatrikLundell mentioned portals, and that might be the first feeling of it.  And yeah, as for other instances of it, I'm not sure if there'll be something specific there, or a looser civ mode, out in the distant future of the future.

Something about this gives me 'Stargate' esque vibes of two immediate places being immediately or short term connected over long distance, also ambiguity for what might be on the other side at any given time without someone poking their head around to scout.


- I don't mean to press for details about something that at the given time is a twinkle in your eyes, but are portals static constructions or wizard dependant temporary arcane constructs?

- Besides from nasties that might arise from going outside your existing plane, will there be any immediate danger in regards to world armies coming through the portals if they own the immediate site on the other side? (Goblin occupation for instance, see you're on the other side of the portal and instead decide to send a army right on through to you rather than walk the long distance to the overworld because you're nearer than everywhere else)

And finally

- Are portals likely to become secret generation features to be found after being placed in worldgen?

I thought i would get my portal related questions out of my system while you got me thinking about the subject.

[Putnam]

Will we ever be able to run two fortresses at once?

PatrikLundell mentioned portals, and that might be the first feeling of it.  And yeah, as for other instances of it, I'm not sure if there'll be something specific there, or a looser civ mode, out in the distant future of the future.

Something about this gives me 'Stargate' esque vibes of two immediate places being immediately or short term connected over long distance, also ambiguity for what might be on the other side at any given time without someone poking their head around to scout.


- I don't mean to press for details about something that at the given time is a twinkle in your eyes, but are portals static constructions or wizard dependant temporary arcane constructs?

Why would it be limited to one?

[FantasticDorf]

Why would it be limited to one?

I mean without stargate esque dialing, which is why i drew out that example also it probably wouldn't be clean (but very dwarvenish) if you were all bundled into the same portal system.

I suppose we'll get a answer from toady, but i mean there's any sort of thing to speculate on it. Moving units across the XYZ presentably isnt a hard task with co-ordinates (obtaining & execution in dfhack) so really determining what portal goes where and if stepping in the radius of a portal tile deliberately or accidentally would return consistent results is what i meant versus static fixed into place or temporal portals opened by people with the power to do so (with magic rules).

Really saying any more of it treks into suggestion territory.

"Ever" is a long time. When two way portals come along it ought to eventually be possible to have activities on both sides at the same time, which might be called "two fortresses" or "one fortress with activities split over several locations". Two actual fortresses (i.e. two embarks, etc) is unlikely, but would rather end up as a new civ level game mode where fortresses aren't controlled in detail (however that would work, if it gets implemented). I doubt sufficiently many people would want to control multiple embarks in parallel at the current level of detail for Toady to find it worth the trouble to implement it.

Ah here's the quote.

> Click on portal, loads other sitemap is what i think Toady was alluding to in that regard if the player's UI perspective can follow through from a fortress mode perspective to another site under your control in a wider scheme. Again just speculation.

(*I edited and restructured after i found the quote i needed)

[KittyTac]

WHen the graphic overhaul comes (I'm aware that's a long time from now), will there be an option to switch back to ASCII? Not a graphics fan here.

[JesterHell696]

In some sense, "gameplay", whatever that means, must always win.  But it becomes a blurry concept with realism when you think of different moods you could be going for, and we vaguely slant realistic most of the time.

Well I was wrong, which is not that surprising really, but I know that if personal quantum computers where available I'd want the individual grains of sand to be simulated, that would be detailed and awesome.

Adv mode is easier for me, since realistic times are easier to default to.  The fortress feels like it needs to remain a world participant, even if that involves fudging.

This is partly why I want to play fortress mode at the adventure mode timescale, significantly less fudging.


NOTE: Thanks for the answer to my question Toady.

[PlumpHelmetMan]

WHen the graphic overhaul comes (I'm aware that's a long time from now), will there be an option to switch back to ASCII? Not a graphics fan here.

Same. I like using my imagination to decide what things really look like (same reason I find reading more fun than watching movies).

[Scoops Novel]

WHen the graphic overhaul comes (I'm aware that's a long time from now), will there be an option to switch back to ASCII? Not a graphics fan here.

Pretty certain. Next!

[PatrikLundell]

@JesterHell696: I think you've got the wrong impression of what quantum computers are. They're not insanely powerful versions of the current von Neumann computers, but more akin to array processors or graphics processors, i.e. devices very good at a limited set of tasks (such as rendering the current financial network's encryption almost totally useless as protection against an attack against any selected individual transactions, but not all at once, for instance, assuming the attacker has access to such computers, of course). The analogy isn't quite accurate, as the domain in which quantum computers shine is one where current computers curl up in a ball and cry, rather than just one or two orders of magnitude faster (NP complete problems, in math terminology). A quantum co-processor would e.g. be handy for path finding (but you'd still have to write a special program for the co-processor), as it should be possible to compute the actual cheapest path for dorfs according to the penalties applied in little time. Alas, quantum co-processors for private use are probably a very long way off.