Print

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

[Random_Dragon]

@Random_Dragon: "The unrequited love" scenario is quite legitimate, but both parties should act accordingly (where completely ignoring an advance might be considered suitable, but the game should then know how to handle that if so). However, I basically asked the question to avoid it resulting in a bug, as it's typically easier to address issues while they're fresh in the mind.

Ah right, makes sense. I'd hope that a "advance left in stasis" issue will be avoided, I recall how diplomats and outpost liaisons are prone to waiting on the mayor being busy, asleep, or locked up in werebeast containment for months on end...

[Death Dragon]

Thanks for the answers, Toady!

The goal eventually is to trash the distinction between the surface and the underground, since the underground layer structures as well as the surface river structures are likely toast as they stand with the map rewrite.  I'm not sure if that ends up being cubes with traits, or what, but hopefully it'll be a unit that we can act on in text.  Right now, the human/elf vs. dwarf/kob site distinction is too hard-coded and messy (with gobs in between, with their fort-like tower and the rest otherwise using more human structures, though trenches are their own thing -- but the reason we can sometimes do goblin towers in conquered human sites is because they basically work with the same framework for their typical structures.)

Huh, I didn't know goblin towers can be errected in human cities, that's pretty awesome. That sounds like the map rewrite could make NPC sites a whole lot more dynamically mixed. It also sounds like the rewrite will be a hella lot of work, looking at how much code will need to be reworked.

I have the general sense that different aquifer speeds might be in order.  Right now they are (kind of, not really) like these artesian aquifer pictures where the water is like SPLOOSH, but there's the other notion of just, like, a somewhat drippy cavern that might need some occasional helping and some pumps down below.  The latter would be pretty easy to set up, probably, with little 1/7s of water just popping out every so often, piling up if they aren't dealt with.  I've forgotten what's correct now, having not studied aquifers for many many years; I'm not sure that ground water speed illustration in the reply there encapsulates the positive pressure situation once the water is given a route out into open air, since that water literally spouts from sandstone into the air like a constant geyser.  That suggests that all possibilities in the range are permitted depending on the other layers of rock (which we could just fudge, pretty much), but I'd defer to a hydrogeologist, or related professional, or anybody.

It's great to hear that you're considering a tweak of aquifer water production speed. Just a short while ago while getting through an aquifer via cave in I was thinking to myself how aquifers would be waaaay less of a pain if only they dripped their water at a slower pace.

[Thundercraft]

...The age limit was modified in fact -- when I was looking through legends at some point, I found a 176 year old unmarried elf, and it turned out there was simply nobody available in the +/-10 age range (and of course, no elves in that age band could ever be produced again, so that was it.)  So now it uses +/-max(10,agediff/2), with extra fudging over time if match-making fails.

Age range answered above -- currently running with +/-max(10,age/2) instead of +/-10, with some tweaks.

Could someone please explain the notation Toady used to tell us how the age limit for marriage/relationships is currently determined? Is that written in C# programming code or a code shorthand? I don't recall...

Also, which is it? +/-max(10,agediff/2) -OR- +/-max(10,age/2)
I believe those two equations are quite different. Though, I'm tempted to assume that the "age" in the 2nd equation is just a typo for "agediff" or age difference because it does not specify the current age of a specific partner.

[Dorsidwarf]

Perhaps my math is faulty but if it was the former then the age/2 thing would be worthless wouldn’t it? People 30 years apart would have an agediff/2 of 15, so the condition doesn’t trigger

People 12 years apart have an agediff/2 Of 6, so they’re too seperate also, and this is the case for every number

[Death Dragon]

Could someone please explain the notation Toady used to tell us how the age limit for marriage/relationships is currently determined? Is that written in C# programming code or a code shorthand? I don't recall...

Also, which is it? +/-max(10,agediff/2) -OR- +/-max(10,age/2)
I believe those two equations are quite different. Though, I'm tempted to assume that the "age" in the 2nd equation is just a typo for "agediff" or age difference because it does not specify the current age of a specific partner.

I might be wrong, but I'm assuming it means people can initiate relationships with people who are at least half their age, but there's also a minimum of 10 years.

[Whatsifsowhatsit]

He he, yeah, certainly if dwarves still exist by the time you start playing, they were doing something right, even if it was just laying low while the surface world was being scoured by magical forces.  Presumably resistance/counters/etc. will enter into it.

This reminded me of something.

Dwarves in various tropes/myths are actually taken to be naturally resistant to many forms of magic. (Just some examples: Majesty: The Fantasy Kingdom Sim, D&D.) Will this be the case for the 'default' dwarven race (I get this notion might become more fluid, but putting that aside for the moment) from the myth release onward, relative to other races?

[PatrikLundell]

:
Could someone please explain the notation Toady used to tell us how the age limit for marriage/relationships is currently determined? Is that written in C# programming code or a code shorthand? I don't recall...

Also, which is it? +/-max(10,agediff/2) -OR- +/-max(10,age/2)
I believe those two equations are quite different. Though, I'm tempted to assume that the "age" in the 2nd equation is just a typo for "agediff" or age difference because it does not specify the current age of a specific partner.

I assume the "agediff/2" in the answer to me was incorrect (and the later answer correct), because half the difference in age would mean they would always be out of range unless the 10 year rule kicks in.

If they're at most 20 years old it would be within 10 years of age (and those below 12 are kids and thus not eligible, but those who are 30 are OK, so the span would be 12-30). If they're older than 20 the limit becomes +/- half their age as that's a larger span than +/10, which means a 50 year old would be compatible with the age span 25 - 75. However, the reason I asked my further question is that a 30 year old's range would be 15 - 45, so the old geezer would be out of their range.

@Death Dragon
There's a C(++) math function "max" that behaves like this. C# has likely nothing to do with it as it's not used for DF, although the same functionality tends to be made available in more every reasonably normal programming or scripting language because it's useful (Prolog and APL are examples of programming languages that are not normal, and LISP is close to that category as well).

[Putnam]

APL does have max, in fact; A⌈B returns the larger of A and B.

[Immortal-D]

When was the last time you took vacation?  Are you planning an extended holiday before starting on Myth & Magic (The Big Wait)?  Just want to make sure you properly decompress every once in a while.

[Toady One]

(Sorry, agediff is the typo -- their ages need to be within max(10,min(age_1,age_2)/2) of each other.  This does mean, as PatrikLundell pointed out, that the 176 year old elf doesn't match with a 88 year old elf, since the second elf reduces the distance to 44 years, but it does mean that the 176 year old elf's band is significantly wider than 166-186, solving the problem.  It's just a single comparison without a focus on one party or another, so it isn't used for unrequited love etc.  That's handled elsewhere.  This is more like the family check -- an early stop to the process.  Whether that's the right way to do it or not is another issue.)

[feelotraveller]

So in practice - aka for those of mathematically faint of heart - an older dwarf will potentially marry younger dwarfs at least 2/3 as old (and those who are less than 10 years younger). 

[PatrikLundell]

Thanks for the clarification, Toady.
I'd also like to say that I like this change as the old range is rather restrictive for long lived races in particular.

To follow up on feelotraveller's post: It uses half of the younger potential partner's age in the comparison (that's what the "min(age_1,age_2)/2" part does), so if the older one is at most half the younger one's age older (or less than 10 years older if the younger one is younger than 20 [which is the age at which half the age is exactly 10 years]), they're age compatible. This works out as feelotraveller described if you focus on the older one instead.

[Wigglepuff]

Will the deities made in world gen ever demand an amount of worship, and if that amount is not met, will they send catastrophic events to the fortress?

[KittyTac]

Will the deities made in world gen ever demand an amount of worship, and if that amount is not met, will they send catastrophic events to the fortress?

Probably? Common in fantasy stories, so depending on the world.

[George_Chickens]

I have a question about general development, if that's appropriate. Once a feature fails to meet a deadline, is it permanently abandoned, or simply put on the backburner? What is the plan to deal with features that could not be implemented due to deadlines?