Print

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

[PlumpHelmetMan]

As an eventuality I figured it was inevitable. I was just curious whether we could expect it in the shorter or longer term, seeing as NPCs are currently incapable of many things players can do.

[Untrustedlife]

I was going over the development page and got extremely excited when I read "Bringing back lost deities/titans". I then realized that this specific item is under the section for Creation Myths. Still a really neat thing I look forward to but it got me wondering;

  Are there plans or thoughts on "Bringing back lost deities/titans" as something achievable in fortress mode? I've done a little digging and cant find if there are plans (or not) for major 'ritual'-type goals for fortress mode.

Yes, the myth and magic system isn't just for legends mode, the idea is that the myths actually effect gameplay and play a huge part in gameplay, so the player can bring back the lost titan in-game, they are not fluff they are meant to actively effect the game and allow the player (and presumably NPC's aswell (like how NPCs can currently go on quests to retrieve artifacts and even compete with player adventurers while on these quests just like adventurers can, while you are playing)) to instigate change.


That brings me to a question actually
Cults currently exist in the form of vampire cults, is it planned for there to be "cults" formed around titans and such that will use the myth system and actually actively try to bring back their masters, there was a threetoe story about this

http://bay12games.com/dwarves/story/tt_wedding.html
"Wedding of Doom"

Is this something we can be pretty sure we will be seeing in the magic update
Will vampire cults try to bring back their masters?
Or will these things be kept at an individual rather then collective level. (eg the cult wont work together towards this common goal but instead individuals will try to do it on their own)
 

One more question (yes i know ive been on a bit of a question spree )

After seeing a weird screenshot on the adventure mode subforum I have a observation: Bogeymen no longer make any sense now that individual AI adventurers are wandering around taking on quests for artifacts and killing things and not being attacked by bogeymen (it also means if say you and an AI both had a quest for an artifact that was hidden in an old swamp the AI has a better chance (unfair advantage)  at finding it since they dont need to stop in a town). Any plans to rework that mechanic for it to make more sense and so that human players are no longer the only adventurers actually effected by this. (also for those who dont know, yes AI adventurers now take on artifact quests just like players while you are playing)

[thvaz]

As for the next version we will be able to send dwarves to settle in occupied sites, how far away are we from dwarves leaving the fortress on their own, for discontentment, fear, etc?

[PatrikLundell]

As for the next version we will be able to send dwarves to settle in occupied sites, how far away are we from dwarves leaving the fortress on their own, for discontentment, fear, etc?

Emigration is likely to be a completely new mechanism without any ties to what's currently implemented when it eventually gets implemented (as I assume it will, at some time). After all, if they're leaving because of your ruthless rule, they're not going to want to move to a hillock under your thumb. Also, if it was implemented, a lot of overseers would be rather unhappy when the weapon smith they FINALLY managed to train to mastery decides to move elsewhere, in particular if there's no (sort of dependable) immigration process that can provide replacements (such as highly skilled visitor seeking citizenship), and ideally means to request such visitors.
Starting scenarios is the closest place I see where that kind of mechanism might be implemented.

[Eric Blank]

We're finally getting hill dwarves and interactions with them, but what sort of interactions did you have in mind? Will hillocks be able to provide laborers and soldiers, can we send laborers to them, or like tributes of food and plant/animal products? Do we run all the defence for them, or do they use their own militias when possible?
Do we get a liaison or messenger role to communicate with them?

What prerequisites will they have? Like is a land holder position always necessary, or were you introducing a new tag to control their formation?

If your civ builds cities or forest retreats, will hamlets and such form around your fort instead? What if my civ lives in caves?

[Egan_BW]

If hill dwarf sites are in for next release, will you consider rebalancing farming so that you'll need to rely on those sites to feed your fortress also for next release?

[Bumber]

If hill dwarf sites are in for next release, will you consider rebalancing farming so that you'll need to rely on those sites to feed your fortress also for next release?

I kind of think it's going to wait until soil quality is tracked. Rebalancing right now could be difficult, potentially making the start of the game very hard.

So maybe during Map rewrite? Economy arc?

[PatrikLundell]

:
If your civ builds cities or forest retreats, will hamlets and such form around your fort instead? What if my civ lives in caves?

I would expect DF to continue to be dwarf centric until the Myth&Magic support for other civs. If so, a possible outcome is that you'd end up with hillocks regardless, although there are other possible outcomes.

If hill dwarf sites are in for next release, will you consider rebalancing farming so that you'll need to rely on those sites to feed your fortress also for next release?

I kind of think it's going to wait until soil quality is tracked. Rebalancing right now could be difficult, potentially making the start of the game very hard.

So maybe during Map rewrite? Economy arc?

It should also be noted that required reliance on hillocks would cut out the viability of sealed fortresses and would make little sense in locations where hillocks would have significant trouble (such as a reanimating glacier). I agree with Bumber that any non trivial agriculture overhaul would probably wait until agriculture is overhauled (soil quality, nutrients, growth seasons and durations, etc.).
When it comes to a difficult start, it might be countered with a larger food allotment on embark, and/or the first caravan bringing free supplies (assuming you get a first caravan...).

[Shonai_Dweller]

Sealed fortresses would rely on deep dwarves and their crops. Hill dwarves are only one half of the equation. But since deep dwarves aren't coming until after the underground rewrite, yeah, probably best not to introduce reliance on outside food sources just yet.

[FantasticDorf]

Development plan changes to how crops operate and function may also provide a reliable solution to making self sufficient underground crops less feasable in a long term scenario without taking particular steps (regularly fertilizing, crop rotation, re-flushing the irrigation regularly etc.) and imports more of a nessecity.

[PatrikLundell]

I certainly don't have any objection to steps that makes agriculture more demanding in setup and dorf power, but I'm not enthusiastic about an increased overseer administrative burden. More plots, crop rotation, fertilization, and irrigation makes sense and is fine, for instance, but I'd like to set up the rotation scheme rather than manually go from plot to plot to change crops (although I've already got a DFHack script to turn farming on and off, so I guess that could be expanded for me personally, but those not using DFHack shouldn't be burdened with rather mundane administration).

[DG]

Will having hillocks around your site give advance warning of a sieges arrival? Will hostile armies drive people in these hillocks to the (assumed) greater safety of your fort site, like people in a town running to a citadel, or is it not that sort of relationship?

[Untrustedlife]

:
If your civ builds cities or forest retreats, will hamlets and such form around your fort instead? What if my civ lives in caves?

I would expect DF to continue to be dwarf centric until the Myth&Magic support for other civs. If so, a possible outcome is that you'd end up with hillocks regardless, although there are other possible outcomes.

I personally would hardly call dwarf fortress dwarf centric as toady tends to worry about all civs not just dwarves or player civs (other civs could already do all the things he’s enabling in dwarf mode now. He will probably generalize it Eg hamlets will pop up around cities (human) pits will show up around dark fortresses etc. he tends to generalize things.

[FantasticDorf]

Exciting devlog, i guess some people haven't been this excited since the worldmap opened up for the scope of features, before the magic arc nontheless!

If the primary method of founding the new government if from the handful of soldiers you send, outside the defined next release (as the devlog explains, thin for good measure) would you be able to manually "claim" empty settlements using civilian populations as a peaceful option given that the player can already send missions out to destroyed settlements to scavenge?

May or may not be worth fighting a resident dragon angrily guarding its clutch and loot who razed it in the first place, who knows? Im aware it sounds a tinge suggestiony but i guess its virtually similar to the reclaimation methods we have currently and what is already proposed so i may as well ask for the sake of picking your brains and what intention you might have going forward with the remaining hill dwarf goals. And i guess finally..

Will there be any inssurection interactions with your imposed group on the existing population?

Sort of excluding the logic that a entity transition change for fealty can be pretty much instant without piling on some dwarven propaganda books to bring them round to our way of thinking for something aspriationally less flexible. And beat up some rebellion sieges along the way.

Edit - (Oh i just re-read the devlog, there will be but in a theoretical sense, coolio, ill leave the question up in the hopes of a teeny bit more elaboration)

I personally would hardly call dwarf fortress dwarf centric as toady tends to worry about all civs not just dwarves or player civs (other civs could already do all the things he’s enabling in dwarf mode now. He will probably generalize it Eg hamlets will pop up around cities (human) pits will show up around dark fortresses etc. he tends to generalize things.

They already do remotely (roam around and ask who's the local trading partner to point out the local city they're symbiotic to in adventure mode), but the ability for the AI to switch around and swap out trading partner hamlets for better army distribution by picking out soldiers when the main city gets low after a few wars with lots of surrounding towns would be really smart on the simulator's side.

[Untrustedlife]

Exciting devlog, i guess some people haven't been this excited since the worldmap opened up for the scope of features, before the magic arc nontheless!

If the primary method of founding the new government if from the handful of soldiers you send, outside the defined next release (as the devlog explains, thin for good measure) would you be able to manually "claim" empty settlements using civilian populations as a peaceful option given that the player can already send missions out to destroyed settlements to scavenge?

May or may not be worth fighting a resident dragon angrily guarding its clutch and loot who razed it in the first place, who knows? Im aware it sounds a tinge suggestiony but i guess its virtually similar to the reclaimation methods we have currently and what is already proposed so i may as well ask for the sake of picking your brains and what intention you might have going forward with the remaining hill dwarf goals. And i guess finally..

Will there be any inssurection interactions with your imposed group on the existing population?

Sort of excluding the logic that a entity transition change for fealty can be pretty much instant without piling on some dwarven propaganda books to bring them round to our way of thinking for something aspriationally less flexible. And beat up some rebellion sieges along the way.

Edit - (Oh i just re-read the devlog, there will be but in a theoretical sense, coolio, ill leave the question up in the hopes of a teeny bit more elaboration)

I personally would hardly call dwarf fortress dwarf centric as toady tends to worry about all civs not just dwarves or player civs (other civs could already do all the things he’s enabling in dwarf mode now. He will probably generalize it Eg hamlets will pop up around cities (human) pits will show up around dark fortresses etc. he tends to generalize things.

They already do remotely (roam around and ask who's the local trading partner to point out the local city they're symbiotic to in adventure mode), but the ability for the AI to switch around and swap out trading partner hamlets for better army distribution by picking out soldiers when the main city gets low after a few wars with lots of surrounding towns would be really smart on the simulator's side.

insurrections happen as a consequence of world activation (they happen all over the place, what toady is saying is that your site should be treated no differently), i dont expect there to be a notification either, personally.