when you suggest that maxxing out the myth slider might eventually result in worlds that dont use the raws at all, do you imply that absolutely all game content is replaced by procedurally generated equivalents? much is said about playing as procedural races, but does this even mean that their livestock will be procedural, the trees they cut down are procedural trees, the grass is procedural, the minerals they dig, the liquids in the lakes, it is all fantastical down to the smallest unit because the raws are primarily there to serve as being static and therefore typically real-world content?
although, some of the raw-defined content is definitely magical, but is there an inherent link between that which is magical and that which is procedural? for example, dragons are a product of the raws but it has been suggested that they might become procedural, and so does this imply anything about the potential procedural-ness of unicorns, trolls, sea monsters, gnomes etc
and im also wondering if since the magical-ness of worlds might correlate with the procedural-ness of worlds, could this even mean that some of the existing magical raw defined content gets removed entirely in favor of generated equivalents? for example, in magical worlds with good-aligned biomes, will we always see downy grass, or are there simply pieces of content such as that which are living on borrowed time in light of the Lua-ification Of All Things
Egan_BW:
http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=169696.msg8565824#msg8565824Yeah, that's correct. Everything. Water and magma are harder because we haven't done fluids yet, and some other elements like rain/snow/moon/sun are still hardcoded. But the goal is to allow more and more things to be changed, and then when you max the slider, those things will be changed.
Egan_BW is right that magical/procedural are linked but not the same. Our future human society generator for instance doesn't need to be related to magic at all, and our grass generator could make magical or non-magical grasses. And yeah, dragons generated in a restrained procedural way means that'll be possible for anything else, since dragons are in the raws, though for vanilla there would be the time constraint of actually doing it.
And yeah, evil/good biomes etc. would all be potentially something else entirely. I don't think lua-ification necessarily puts things on the chopping block per se - there's a place in slider land for the traditional vanilla content, just because people are fond of it. I don't think gorlaks will ever not be a part of a mid-slider DF world, for example. But sliding away from fantasy/magic toward reality would potentially remove them, and sliding far toward procedural would potentially remove them.
I remember quite a long time ago you spoke (or wrote ?) about something like a procedural "tech progress" tree, which would involve researching pondering about things that would make real progress, on the one hand, and on the other hand knowledge travelling from places to places, with travelers, and thinkers; leaving isolated places backward, etc...
And I remember, too, you speaking/writing about "false" progress leading to nothing, false philosophy, heresy, spreading the same way
Am I inventing, or badly remembering, or is this still something on the table ?
FantasticDorf:
http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=169696.msg8565877#msg8565877Yeah, the idea of a procedural tech/knowledge tree/web with practical effects has come up in various forms over the years, and that's all still on the table. I think some games have these now, but we'll still have some fun with it.
Q1: When the adventure beta is integrated into the main branch, would it be helpful to describe adventure mode inside the game as still a work in progress, similar to the Steam blog posts introducing the mode, with regards to:
Q2: Is it possible to allow players to quickly transition to adventure mode and back during fortress mode with no delay?
DPh Kraken:
http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=169696.msg8566448#msg8566448Q1: We decided against labeling it in this way. It's never going to be an RPG as people consider them, since we've intentionally avoided certain genre conventions. Fortress mode is still a work in progress as well. Same as with Early Access vs the game. If we can't ever draw the line, it feels best to just let it grow at its pace. But I do understand that the adventure mode doesn't have as tight a loop as fort mode, and overall hasn't had as much work done, so it's not clearcut and we're continuing to mess with tooltips and descriptions.
Q2: There are various issues with this. At the heart of them is the time difference, and the overall effects that has on everything else. Adventure mode is 144x more granular time-wise, and as things stand, the fort mode action would stop while you are playing an adventurer, and vice versa, more or less. There will be more and more connections between the modes, but I'm not sure we'll ever go for a infinite any-time switch as a base default-on option.
Q1 Given that there is so much fun waiting deep below the earth, are there any tools or features planned to make navigating it more accessible, in Adventure Mode?
Q2 As the myths development hits it stride will there be some predictability in the magicalness of the remnants?
Q3 On that note, will there be more magical artifacts beyond remnants and those that are dwarf made?
DPh Kraken:
http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=169696.msg8566448#msg8566448Q1 I think this will probably be guided by how the changes to the map unfold. It'll surely be necessary by the time the fully underground dwarven mountain halls become more interesting, or some proper adventure sites go in down there.
Q2 The main idea here was for this to be guided by the creation myth, and whatever else contextualizes them. But the base type clearly has some impact on it (and could in fact be decided by the original mythical connections.) Also, this is already true to some extent - the power list for magical items made of certain remnants is restricted by the sphere (which also determines the material type.)
Q3 There are a few magic items already, and yeah we're just going to continue expanding.
Many supernatural creatures are created in interesting ways within the game. E.g., vampires and were-creatures result from deity curses. Do you think you might expand on mummies? Imagine allowing the player to create adventure mode mummies by introducing an embalming feature to tombs in fortress mode (complete with canopic organ jars). Your mummy might even awaken during fortress mode if the tomb you've prepared for them is disturbed by thieves sent by villains.
Yeah, as with a lot of the supernatural stuff, there are basically a zillion ways to go. It would be amusing to have a popup that lets you change modes in the middle of a fort game. Mostly we'd been thinking of controlling squads and that sort of thing, but controlling a monster would be entertaining.
1: Are there any plans or ideas regarding material properties? To be specific, I was thinking of things like how pig tail fabric feels to the touch vs silk. Admittedly, this doesn't strike me as especially applicable to gameplay, but I could see it being attached to or communicated via the dwarves' preferences. Subthought of this is how woolens in real life can be helpful in cold weather, but that seems like a more involved kind of thing to implement.
2: Is audio mimicry a consideration? In Adventure Mode, players can sometimes see the sounds something is making before they see the something itself, and if that something is a talking person, the player knows who is talking and what they are saying. Something that I think could be an interesting and potentially ‼fun‼ is if people-type creatures, parrots, and perhaps less innocuous things could imitate the voices of particular individuals, perhaps as a skill would could be practiced. I'm not sure how well the disjointed way of talking that birds display when they're just repeating things would stand out, given the nature of Adventure Mode's dialogue systems, but I could see that potentially adding tension to such an encounter.
1. We've have some throwaway lines here and there, but they don't actually mean anything. And like you say, it's harder to give them meaning. Dwarf prefs is one way, though it'd be a bit tricky to get that usably to the player - it's more indirect than color to go find. We have lots of underutilized magical material descriptions, first through the divine materials and now with the remnants as well, and the next changes will probably come in that direction.
2. It would be fun/Fun. I feel like the basic creature sounds are so under-entered into the raw files that I'd want to get to a bit of that first though, even if they aren't precisely dependent on each other.
Given that adventure mode is ~ready and you are going back to focusing on the game as a wholistic item. Do you see yourself going back to the work before the Steam release that was focused on villains and related topics?
I know there has been a lot of talk about myth and magic, but are there any large topics that you still want to tackle before diving into myth/magic?
How has the collaboration with another developer changed your style or perspective on how you write code?
What new coding tricks have you learned from Putnam? Or vise-versa?
DPh Kraken:
http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=169696.msg8567614#msg8567614The dedicated work on villains that was set to last another year or so isn't tenable in the current model. It'll have to be cut up into pieces like the map rewrite and everything else.
In the same vein, there won't really be diving in the old sense. Or large topics tackled in isolation. Everything in pieces.
I've picked up a few new bits of more modern syntax and am using version control now. I haven't had a chance to learn the multithreading that's been going in, but it's all sitting there now in case I want to attempt it for any new addition.
Now that the adventure mode update is (almost) out, do you have anything in mind for what you're planning to work on next? Do you still intend on finishing up the villain/army arcs like the roadmap says, or have your plans changed? If so, then what's next?
What are your goals for the future army/villain stuff? What remains to be added or improved?
Do you plan on further developing the new mythical elements in the near(ish) future or would you rather set that aside in order to focus on other, more pressing matters for now?
Does the way the game currently handles magical items allow them to do anything aside from allowing their wielder to use an interaction? Like can they passively give a syndrome to their wielder?
Do you plan on adding more spheres in the future?
Are you planning to eventually make Dwarf Fortress mode more challenging and its late game more complete? I feel like it's much easier than before, and once you've set up all of your industries and infrastructure there isn't really anything left to do other than trying out a megaproject or digging for !!FUN!!
Is there any particular reason as to why you decided to make adamantine blue?
DPh Kraken:
http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=169696.msg8567614#msg8567614See above for villains. In general, we're planning to get the dev pages updated soon, now that regular work is about to resume. Specifics will wait for that - we have to coordinate it everybody (artists, Kitfox, etc.) and those calls are happening in the coming days.
We only added the bit we needed for items. It'll be interesting to see how the upcoming lua stuff interacts with the existing raw format, and items will be one place that's going to be happening early perhaps, as the lua beta unfolds.
I feel like the existing spheres should be fleshed out quite a bit before we add any more. Though there's also the idea of softening the concept in general and it's hard to say when and how that will occur until I try it. As DPh Kraken says, it's not feasible to entirely rawify sphere concepts, since they have some basic reality to them, but there's still a lot that can be done. The same goes for procedural attributes and skills, etc.
The various directions we've announced in the nearish term (armies/magic/villains/start setups/etc.) are all ways of adding challenges and extra options and play for later forts. Anything that causes more interaction with a broader world which is also becoming more interesting should help a lot.
Ha ha, it has been a long time. I don't recall why bright cyan in particular. It feels metallic but still magical. Green and yellow and magenta and red and blue all have different vibes.
It's been quite some time since the Dungeon Keeper job lost its function (previously that of training beasts I believe?). I'm wondering why it's been left in the game for so long? Do you have plans for it in the future, or do you intend to take it out of the game? In the current version, do you think there's any function to the position to make it worth assigning?
DPh Kraken:
http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=169696.msg8567740#msg8567740Rumrusher:
http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=169696.msg8568169#msg8568169We were in the middle of the villain release, which was at least going to add more meaning to the ESPIONAGE function. +++ code check espionage
1. I apologize if this has been asked, its been a year or so since I last was paying close attention to the FOTF etc. I was wondering if, when cabin building returns, it will be implemented in a way that feels more interactive—like directly placing walls yourself as if you were a dwarf instead of the current *just wait awhile on blank screen* approach. Being able to build without jumping to the map screen would be a great improvement. I recall you mentioning something about this being due to limitations, so I’m wondering if those limitations are still in place. If they are, do you plan or care about changing them?
2. I also wanted to ask if there are any plans to change how animals are acquired, making it so they need to be purchased in human cities rather than simply declared as mine by just walking up to them and pressing h. I noticed this particular thing wasn’t mentioned on the development page: https://www.bay12games.com/dwarves/dev.html and right now you can get alot of coin from selling your bone crafts etc, but you dont have much of anything to spend them on. No big purchases.
3. I was playing the new adventure mode release (which is fantastic, by the way), and I came across a city in my thousand-year-old world where half of it used one currency, while the other half used a different one. This made the coins I acquired in one shop worthless in another.
Are there any plans to add some sort of bank or other feature where I can exchange coins for other currencies? Since we already have counting houses and the game tracks their value, it doesn’t seem like too much of a stretch or too much like a suggestion, right? (And also, it seems like a very useful trader arc thing)
4. Fourthly, I really miss the old DF Talks where we could just listen to you ramble about all your ideas for over na hour. Any plans to bring those back? I think I listened to them so much that I even started talking like you when discussing my own projects, heh.
(5.) Is it planned that adventurers can be the wizard building the tower? Rather than just an apprentice?
(6.) Any chance we will ever be able to sleep in friendly monsteries (And friendly of the other 'new' sites?), i started playing as a chosen and the God Ecod so he is my dad right and I went to a monestary that worships my dad Ecod and they said i could rest there but when i tried it blocked me.
Broke my immersion heh they should at least say no
1. So it's supposed to take more time, since adv mode is 144 less compressed in time than fort mode. This makes it a bit more complicated - we don't want walls to just be plopped up super quickly as they'd be in other games that have an emphasis on quick building. On the other hand, I don't have a problem at all with that being moddable or an option or something. It just wouldn't be the default setting. I agree that popping to the map for it is sort of annoying regardless.
2. This is up on dev - buying livestock is under Basic Adventure Mode Skills, and then Trader has a few things. Elsewhere we also had an item about collectors and artifacts and such. So we'd like to get there at some point. The ability to snatch up random animals (without it being a crime in many cases) is a placeholder/first step/whatever we call them.
3. Huh, that's interesting. I wonder how they got split like that. But yeah, in the spirit of all the items making sense, we'd need some sort of minting location, and then the other stuff would flow from that most likely. Hard to say when it'd come up, obviously very economy related.
4. It's hard since there's only so much time. I do tend to ramble in interviews and these still happen from time to time.
(5.) Yep! Back in the notes, which are pretty old but still basically current, the first step was being an agent of the wizard/coven/remnant-people/etc/etc, and then to expand that out. Return of cabin building related of course, and then whatever it also means in fort mode. It will slowly become an exciting time ha ha.
(6.) Yeah, monasteries and mercenary order forts etc. are all underdeveloped, partially due to the breaking off of the villain arc where they were going to be useful subgroups for plots etc. Lots of things need to be done with them.
While I think I understand the reasons why, I have noticed that the ASCII UI of the game has lagged behind development of the graphical version, with things like ASCII adventure mode's lack of an overworld map present even past the mode's official post-beta release (as of the 23rd). Is this indicative of a future trend to move away from ASCII graphics entirely or otherwise relegate them to a less-developed legacy feature or will they still continue to be supported in perpetuity in tandem with the graphical version, with the current disparity something that will be fixed?
ZM5:
http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=169696.msg8568148#msg8568148That one surprised me, since it used to work in pre-Classic, but something obviously got screwed up. But yeah, it's all oversight. We're sticking with it. Putnam already fixed the map for next time, so it should be incorporated.
I'm not sure if you know about this, but there's a (imo) pretty major issue with the targeting system of kill quests/troubles.
Kill quests can target any historical figure of a species with the LARGE_PREDATOR token or which comes from underground.
The issue is that this includes creatures that have joined a civilization. This means that kill quests will often tell you to kill random innocent gorlaks, plump helmet men, dingo men, wolf men, bear men, experiments, etc.
If the quest giver is one of these species, they can even tell you to kill themself or their relatives.
It's both sad to see, and annoying, as if your lord orders you to kill one, you basically either have to become a murderer or end your agreement with that lord.
I hope you fix this soon.
Ha ha, geez. Def worth fixing soon.
1. Have you considered doing a Quality of Life update ? Where you would take a few weeks/months not developing any new content or systems, but focusing entirely on adding QOL requests, small requested features, and fixing minor bugs ? It would give the game a nice bump in quality with one update instead of tackling the qol/bugs matter little by little.
2. I'm new to the game so this might have been talked about and answered a while ago already. Did you ever think about making other races playable in fort mode ? One of my favorite things in fantasy games is all the different playable races, adventure mode is awesome for that and as much as I like dwarves, it's still a shame to see the other races with their own uniqueness in the game not available to play in fort mode. I know there is mods for that but I'm curious to hear if you were to make other races playable officially, what gameplay ideas you might have in mind for them ?
Shonai_Dweller:
http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=169696.msg8568380#msg8568380Untrustedlife:
http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=169696.msg8568394#msg8568394DPh Kraken:
http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=169696.msg8568411#msg8568411Cheng (op):
http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=169696.msg8568437#msg85684371. Yeah, like the responses say, this was that, for some years.
2. There've been various ponderings about human mode and elf mode and so forth. The way the game works now is dwarf-oriented, because of their ability to alter maps in 3D. But the others would probably work to some extent at this point (though the game is currently geared toward human villages having a much larger horizontal space, which requires elements of the map rewrite to support.) But some sort of human fortress or monastery thing might work.
1. Will we see more key art, splash screens, and soundtracks added with future content updates?
2. As Bay 12 shifts to new development strategies, are you concerned at all with coordinating the theme of what you add with promotional art? For example, the Adventure release was very focused, but as we move beyond arcs, it feels like it'd be harder to come up with a single motif you'd want the art to show.
3. Is there any timeframe for getting the new sound effects into the fortress and the menus? Anything that you'd want to take care of first beforehand?
1. I think so. I like the few splashy big things we have, and of course the music is wonderful.
2. Yeah, this is definitely a challenge we are working on, since it matters with Steam sales and that sort of thing, and at the same time we'd also like to have more regular releases. We haven't had to grapple with this yet since we've had the two giant clearly defined releases so far. I'm not sure what we'll get, but it will relate back to how key art and etc. is used going forward.
3. It's the next big audio challenge. There were some hiccups with e.g. the scroll sounds and so forth, so we might do a bit more tuning of the adv mode engine before we move it over, but that's the basic idea. Using the more powerful adv mode sound engine over in fort mode, so we can have lots of sound effects in the UI and etc., and also more procedural music.
1) A given world has a variety of healing fluids. Some of them can even be solids, like wax and dough. Are there differences between their effects(healing potency, proc timer, effect duration), or are they all the same?
2) What made you decide that a given world should have only one mythical remnant type? I can't help but think that having one remnant per deity a small handful of remnant types (4-5 at most) would give the gameplay within a single world more variety. Having a ring on your index finger that blinds targets and another on your thumb that propels them away sounds fun. Is this a sort of a balancing decision, or maybe you are just testing the waters with this feature?
3) This is more of a feature request than a question, but have you ever considered making container (backpack, pouch) contents collapsible? After raiding a goblin camp, I ended up having a lot of coin stacks in my pouches, meaning that when I needed to scroll a long way down to interact with a newly picked up item in my inventory, like meat or equipment. But not too far, since the bottom of the inventory is taken up by whatever fluid(s) my character is coated in, like rain water or blood. I know that you are sick of making UI elements, but it would be very convenient to be able to hide/show the contents of a backpack or a pouch with a button.
4) And speaking of coins, are there plans to add item stacking in the near future? This feature feels too basic and quintessential to be absent in a game(mode) which involves a lot of item collecting. Hell, if stacking was a thing, the problem mentioned in "question" 3 would mostly go away.
Untrustedlife:
http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=169696.msg8569123#msg8569123SamBucher (op):
http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=169696.msg8569142#msg8569142Untrustedlife:
http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=169696.msg8569159#msg85691591) Right now they are all the same since we need to set up more infrastructure to properly distinguish them and we didn't have much time. We thought it would be too annoying for now to have healing items that just don't fix your specific ailment and no real way to get further ones or keep track of them. So they all heal most everything. As the adventure environments and magics become more complex, these will also go that way.
2) This is really just starting out, toying with the idea of a primordial chaos of one kind or another that left appropriate things behind. There will be various expansions now as we go, and a single remnant material won't be the basis of most magic most of the time.
3) It has been a topic for years, yeah, variously. It'd be reasonable for the lists to be more usable, but it's just been tied up with data-losing stacking or other troubles. Perhaps things are stable enough now in the new incarnation for the UI element version of it to be considered again.
4) Regarding stacking, it's an issue of handling data loss of various sorts, and whether the necessary comparisons can be done rapidly or should be done at all. Temperature, engravings/improvements, spatter, etc.
After reading old changelogs for some info, I found that line in 0.47.05 one:
Stopped corpse raising, shapeshifting and non-living non-vampire visitors
So necromancers and intelligent undead not suppose to visit the fort? But it is one of the most interesting and fun things that can happen to the visitor oriented or undead themed fortress! I know the fix is not working right now and it good in my opinion, because they good source of stories. Maybe instead of removing it as a bug it should be a setting similar to vampire migrants fraction or werebeast attacks in steam version?
One of the big things we want to do is have people respond in general more to magical/mythical things as they might, whatever that could mean. We'd like to get to the point where people could get used to an intelligent undead that isn't murdering everybody. But it's odd when it's just a bug. Probably not rushing to fix it unless the necros are ruining too many forts.
Adventure mode camera movement makes me physically ill.
Any plans to introduce fixed screen view option similar to what CoQud has?
SamBucher:
http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=169696.msg8568930#msg8568930jecowa:
http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=169696.msg8568934#msg8568934Yeah as jecowa says it's not possible to go over to strictly split screens, as there are too many stranges situations that would happen at the edges. At one point we had a mode where the view recentered when you approached the edges, but that is a bit less useful with the larger tiles. But I can't think of another solution besides adding that back in, or a mode where there's no automatic recentering.
I very much want to try out the very first version of Dwarf Fortress.
Alas, dear T-dog, a pre-release version is nowhere to be found.
Forsooth, does nary a glimmer of hope yet remain?
Are these versions lost media?
I'm pretty sure I have some old backups around, but they likely aren't playable as games, when they even compile. Some probably work better than others, but since I was working toward a release years down the line, they were in various states of disrepair as the process went along, and a lot of the cleanup (such as it was) happened near the end. It would be cool to have the very earliest digging and crafting prototypes, but it might be hard to find and certainly isn't in the UK with me at present.
1. Re: myth and magic, do you ever envision physical gods manifesting themselves as actual units (with all sorts of fun consequences if they are somehow slain)? Or adventurers ascending as gods?
2. You are making it clear that Adv and Fort mode are intended to be intertwined. Right now it's possible to do shenanigans with retiring/unretiring forts and adventurers at forts, etc. Do you have plans to integrate this process even further, so that, say, retiring an adventurer at a fortress immediately gives you the possibility to continue the game in fort mode at that exact time point - or sending out squads in fort mode gives you the possibility to control the actual squad units as a party in adventure mode? These are just examples not suggestions - if you don't have this in mind, what plans do you have for mode integration/transition?
3. Armok right now exists only as a meme. Re myth/magic, do you have plans to make the creator actively take place in wordly affairs, as opposed to 'lesser' deities?
4. Is the knowledge system planned to be linked to a 'tech tree' of sorts (unlocking stuff, etc), eventually moddable?
5. Did you ever revisit the 'boat problem' (multi-tile creatures, etc) in light of recent dev changes?
6. Will the moon play a role in myth and magic beyond a notional presence in the calendar? Generally speaking, what are your plans re: astrology/astral bodies (e.g. the sun, ominous comets, the sun, mysterious-material meteorites, etc) if anything?
7. Myths often include cataclysmic events of sorts. Deluge, apocalypse, wrath-induced seastorms or earthquakes, etc. Do you plan to incorporate these in some way or are they too annoying to implement in a gameplay-friendly way?
Depending on the nature of the world and its creation mythos, the concept of a moon(s?) and stars might not be applicable at all. Would there be a possibility of a world without as much as a day/night cycle? How would time be tracked in that or in a similar case?
jecowa:
http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=169696.msg8569138#msg85691381. Yeah.
2. Yeah, various configurations have come up. As mentioned in an answer above, there's a cost in switching between the modes freely, as information is lost due to mechanical differences that come from the time differences. But yeah, the control of squads, the founding of sites and the embark wagon, abstracting time passage in adventure mode, etc., there are as many ideas as there are things to do pretty much. It's not clear which we'll attempt first - squad control on raids has issues of the fort being offloaded and reloaded, which is a bit disruptive to what's going on there (or freezing time in the fort while away, which has different problems), but that was on the table.
3. It has come up from the beginning, because of the Armok predecessor and etc. This feels like the kind of thing that should come out of editors/constraints/configurations as an example or default option - it's certainly puts the thumb on the scale in the violence direction, so it wouldn't be there every time if we go that way.
4. That's a long-term goal. There's a lot of work to get that done, and there are difficulties to overcome in terms of things that are missing, since it just makes the game less in many circumstances.
5. The situations haven't changed, since they weren't graphical in nature so much as related to the square tiles of the map.
6. We'd love to generate them all of course. If we don't get a chance to do a space game DF should be the space game.
7. It's important for us to do these. There have to be some controls for fort mode, since people get upset by randomly dying (as with the old demon event, and this could be even more random if not controlled.) But it would be great fun to start if the world map underwent great changes as world gen progressed, and then we eventually got these to come up during play.
SB. Yeah, that's one of the test cases. I have no idea how we'll replace the calendar (altering and replacing and having more than one calendar being important.) Things like hourglasses and such would still work I guess, though I haven't thought about the overall situation much.
At the moment, do you have any concrete plans on siege improvements?
There's the Improved Sieges section of the old dev page, and we've got a lot written down now beyond that. In this case, it'll be a source of some amusement to not share them, and we're finally free to start looking at them again.
Author
Topic: Future of the Fortress (Read 3226881 times)