Question about advanced worldgen, since I'm struggling with a mod I'm doing - does setting the parameter for bogeyman generation to 0 completely disable bogey attacks, even if custom ones are in the raws folder, or does it only prevent vanilla bogeymen from generating?
The number of bogeyman types parameter just determines how many new raw defs are created which have NIGHT_CREATURE_BOGEYMAN. When generating the regions, it just appears to query for that flag. I don't see immediately why a modded one wouldn't show up even if the parameter is set to zero.
Does the game, in WG fights, tally the dead after a big fight or is there some kind intermediet tally? Like are they fighting for X rounds and count the dead afterwards or do they count them each round?
Could a necro raise the fallen if they were part of one of the sides f.e. if they were under a coveridentity?
The non-historical creatures are broken into squads and there is a process of rounds and so forth, some of which is recounted in the events, when historical figures are involved, but it doesn't yet provide a great picture of the process.
Necros still separate themselves from society in most cases, but if they happen to be around in a regular civ, they don't try anything.
Will it be possible for players to become intelligent undead thralls?
Can "villainous" networks be used for good, either by NPCs or players? In fiction, heroic spy networks are quite common. Not sure how heroic they are irl.
FantasticDorf:
http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=169696.msg7969826#msg7969826With the parties it'll be especially easy, I imagine, if one of you becomes a necromancer and the rest of your party is dead, and then you raise everybody and then flip into them. Otherwise, I'm not really sure how it'll react. The raised undead has the same historical figure id, and so *might* appear in the list of retired adventurers, but they might not, depending on how the flagging works there.
You can do whatever you want with your networks as a player. Maybe stealing an artifact or assassinating a target is good, depending on what/who/why. The 'good' counterintelligence people don't actively plot outward yet, so the other networks generally have selfish goals, but their actions might seem good for a time depending on where they are pointed.
#1: Only diplomats have the [Make Peace Agreements] responsibility etc currently, does this mean we won't be able to push our proposals of alliances if the option is open until in the post king + metropolis lategame when they arrive and become properly settled?
#2: Also sort of tied to the first question (by means of getting to the required noble which in theory should do diplomatic actions), will we be able to attack our allies or break our alliances directly?
The implicits here is that by the use of tags, unless the messenger plays a part, we'll receive alliance offers because our leaders can recieve diplomats or be locked into a pre-existing alliance that might or might not be favorable for us if our ally is doing silly things like starting wars (attacking a civ site with more enemy allies than us) we don't want to partake in or we assume that we're actually strong enough to beat them up too for looting and razing.
PatrikLundell:
http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=169696.msg7969869#msg7969869FantasticDorf:
http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=169696.msg7969966#msg7969966#1: Currently, that would make the most sense, but I'm not sure what we'll end up with for this time. It may be that there are just some additional simple options to play with, but I might not be able to do that if site-based alliances screw everything up.
#2: I assume you'll be able to do whatever you want here, though in some future version you might be cast out of the civ for it.
Have you given any thought to Steam trading cards for the game yet? You could probably do some crayon drawings or a small ASCII scene (like some regional tiles, the intro movie art, or a mayor's office.) Collect the full set and you get a badge of the DF logo dwarf for your Steam profile.
Haven't had a chance to think about them or even achievements much yet. I'm kind of siloed off into villain work until I get that done, so we can bring our full attention over when we switch gears.
Will civs form alliances against anyone threatening to take over the world? (Mostly goblins, but elves get a lucky rng break every so often, and of course all those delightfully OP civs added by modders) or is it solely for zombie threats? Or perhaps "supernatural threats" if that's a defined thing now?
Will "natural enemies" (Babysnatcher civ and non-babysnatcher civ, etc) join alliances together if threatened, or do they stick to their own?
Do distant in far away lands or normally hostile (see shonai's quoted green question on goblin allies) allies trade with your site or alter their behaviour after signing a agreement?
Because beside poking them with a raid or summoning caravans with DFhack (as the masterwork mod does, though thats not applicable here) you'd normally require to embark closer to them. Goblins can't trade but not ruling out peddlers in the future, it could afford us some respite from babysnatchers while the alliance (/truce?) is up.
Right now im pretty sure the only way you can get goblin instruments (cave croc bone drum has pride of place in my tavern) and miscellaneous things is by exorted tribute or looting.
Toady, do enemy civs ally together in response to player aggressiveness trying to scoop up settlements forcefully to eventually reach nobility targets like baron, duke and count? it seems like it'd be either too much of a deterrant going that path or a easy way to incur fun if you are the percieved world ending threat of a conquerer.
Going off of the latest dev log, would it be correct to assume that forming alliances as a response to a particularly evil threat will also occur in response to modded in entities that fit that criteria as well? I do hope it is, it'd immerse modded in entities much more into modded worlds if they can interact just like the vanilla entities can with the new update.
It sounds like folks only form alliances against those who are Kill Neutral Required. Does that mean that goblins will never ally with other races to stop the zombie invasion because goblin civs will not ally with other races to stop another goblin civilization taking over the world? Would two goblin civilizations ally against a zombie invasion?
Hi, just to clarify, by "requires the killing of neutrals", did you mean civs (including zombies) which have the tag "Ethic:Kill_Neutral:Required" or something else?
FantasticDorf:
http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=169696.msg7970270#msg7970270voliol:
http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=169696.msg7973363#msg7973363therahedwig:
http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=169696.msg7973413#msg7973413Shonai_Dweller:
http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=169696.msg7973624#msg7973624Shonai_Dweller:
http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=169696.msg7974023#msg7974023FantasticDorf:
http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=169696.msg7974767#msg7974767Shonai_Dweller:
http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=169696.msg7974891#msg7974891Yeah, it is limited currently, by the ethic setting. That may or may not change before the release, but the current setup accomplishes what we needed. I'm not sure it'll be easy to extend with the time we have left, though simple strength comparisons merged with the love/hate numbers might be enough to make them act vaguely plausibly in broader situations.
You mentioned villains having a chance to follow through or not on their power-sharing promises to their minions -I'm interested to know if the minions will be able to act on thwarted aspirations?
Poor minions waiting forever in blue-balled limbo without acting, while their masters make a continuous stream of new promises they have no intention of fulfilling (we could make a society out of this. No don't). Although this sort of thing is the fulcrum of many a story - the enraged minion who has been denied one too many times and decides to take matters into their own hands. Although on the flip side, I suppose you've then got to take into account every person in fiction (and history) who ever said "Yes, Urist McMinion, you'll be rich/powerful beyond your wildest dreams!" before having the recipient of said promise disappear in one way or another (which I'm assuming is just a whole new tangled sub-branch of code in this very dense canopy...)
It's a note, but we didn't get to writing up the checks/timers for it.
little bit of a callback question to the prophets and religious work of this arc, while i was explaining this to someone else asking about diverse migrants to help them with their suggestion thread It struck me that the current fortress prayer method of using (no-specific-denomination) might end up mass attracting potential migrants already visiting in other areas of your civ if foriegn long term residents are allowed to pray, possibly leading to annoying build up like the adventurer spam a few versions ago.
Its a common thing that cross species migration can happen if enough citizens simply enter the civ to stay (rarely if never normally except in following point), like for example hundreds of 'slaves' made fast citizens after goblins go on a civ conquering rampage and displace them all virtually. Funnily enough quite like your elf vs zombie mountain halls fight in the recent devlog, just a snowball effect, the dead making more undead and goblin raids making more goblin(ish) raiders.
Are varied migrants called by faith actively disabled/enabled in fortress mode; and would these general faith sites vs specific ones break anything later in background w.g hazarding a guess?
Right now, I haven't done anything with organized religion, and it looks like only temples associated to the general practice of worshiping a specific deity will attract believers. If we get to the organized religion stuff in fort mode, which we are hoping to do, then visitors with those religious practices will come to associated temples. But they shouldn't come to generic temples.
Totally unrelated to the most immediate upcoming features, has multiplayer been analysed before as a possible feature to be added? What conclusions were drawn about the requirements/likellyhood/desire to add such feature?
Bumber:
http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=169696.msg7972565#msg7972565PatrikLundell:
http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=169696.msg7972697#msg7972697We just aren't interested, though people can pass their saves around and so forth.
Semi-related to FantasticDorf's question above, but referring to the previously noted lack of pushback by demons and druids on organized religions converting those in their sphere for goblins and elves respectively. Is tackling this in the works for the initial release or has it been pushed to a related release after the main villains release?
FantasticDorf:
http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=169696.msg7972700#msg7972700EternalCaveDragon:
http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=169696.msg7972702#msg7972702There's a note about it, but I'm not sure I'll do anything with it at this point. Going to wait and see how odd the typical worlds are in practice first, since addressing it will take some work. Had the additional interesting case of a compromised elf queen conspiring to replace the existing druid with a goblin... at some point, the other elves should raise their eyebrows, but we don't have anything like that kind of broader awareness yet.
So are these new civs basically goblin civs lead by a released demon? Or actual full-on hell civs packed with demons and a couple of goblins thrown in? Do they create the initial goblins?
They have goblins so that they can behave normally, but they have a pack of 5-20 non-civ-leader underworld demons to make them scarier, and they also have a standard demon leader. All of these creatures are created on the spot, as the underworld is assumed to have unnumbered amounts of such beings currently, though the goblin is faked and indeed it just checks for the EVIL tag on them, the good old EVIL tag. I didn't bother simulating their underworld pops on account of time and the upcoming magic release clarification of these matters.
you mentioned that one of these new intelligent undead was killed defending its tower from an attack by another necromancer. Does that mean that necromacers aren't always on the same side, and undead can be made to attack each other now?
Currently I think raised zombies will ignore anything that's also undead, so vampire adventurers can just stroll right into a tower unimpeded. If they're taking their group affiliation into account now, I imagine this will change.
Shonai_Dweller:
http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=169696.msg7973338#msg7973338They still don't fight in local play. It hasn't been worth it making things consistent, while the nature of undead control is completely unspecified.
1. Is there any difference between the different kinds of intelligent undead, or are the different names just there for procedural flavor and to give the player a hint to who raised them?
2. Does the computer-controlled dwarves breaking into hell mean that they get access to adamantine? If they do, how is this handled, considering fortress mode wagons have a seemingly endless supply of all kinds of metals, and I have a hard time imagining players should get access to adamantine without the risk of mining it themselves?
3. New goblin(?) or at least demon-lead civs being born excites me, as that would indicate a change from the current status quo where civilizations only die out instead of being created. However, how about the other forces of evil? Are big enough undead empires considered full civilizations (showing up like that on the c-screen etc.) or are they still considered only expansions of one necromancer's villainous network?
4. Do elves eat the undead? Or, rather, the dead undead that they have just killed?
With the Dwarves being able to breach the Underworld, will Adamantite finally be used in worldgen?
PatrikLundell:
http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=169696.msg7973348#msg7973348Shonai_Dweller:
http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=169696.msg7973350#msg7973350FantasticDorf:
http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=169696.msg7973354#msg79733541. It's all flavor now. There are enough existing interactions to give them some power differences, and that was on the table during the supernatural additions, but we ran out of time. Still on the table if we decide to play around with it, but we do have to finish sometime, and the magic release will blow it all up.
2. Ha ha, not yet! I suppose we could have been kind to them, but we don't really have a good way of limiting the amount of a material yet, since the w.g. numeric stockpiles aren't linked to the equipment used, so it would end up being too common. Another job for the future economy.
3. It ended up having to be an odd cobbled together solution of sites umbrella'd over each other. I really need to destroy the civ/site entity concepts at some point, as they've been causing various issues over the years, but that's not on the table for a while.
4. They shouldn't, if the checks work.
For the new demons creating new goblin civs, is it planned to have that happen in post worldgen background sim as well. That is, if a player fort fails due breaching hell, will we see the consequences once we have a new fort, or will this be a bit too much for this release?
We are hoping to get to this with fort mode, at least the part where the demons are understood to be out and able to do a bit, though clearly we can't have an unnumbered amount of them running about. I'm not sure if that means goblins will also be introduced. Maybe not, the way everything is up in the sky.
You said the new intelligent zombie can "can retain much of their old identity". What part of their old personality is missing exactly? Their memories and relationships?
Can necromancers revive intelligent beings as a "good" deed? (For example, reuniting old family members or helping with a murder case.) Or is that more of a magic update thing and beyond the scope of the current update?
Can a mummy be appeased by delivering the lost artifact back to it?
I just wasn't sure how much of it is cleaned up by the living left behind; their marriages, for instance, are removed by the other partner while they are still dead. Maybe a few other bits like that, plots that have been patched away from them, etc. But everything else is retained, if they were deemed important enough on the moment of their death for the memory in use to be kept active.
Necromancers don't think particularly good thoughts at this time. I think you might be able to play an adventurer that way.
Nope, the mummy doesn't have a ghost-style trigger to put it to rest, though over time we should be generalizing concepts like that.
Will the mummies' curses be changed now that they can leave their tombs without the player's prompting?
And if not, will they curse other histfigs they come across who survive the encounter?
FantasticDorf:
http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=169696.msg7973826#msg7973826I haven't changed anything about mummies, aside from the ability to raise intelligent undead and to be disturbed in world gen, as far as I remember. The rest comes from the general villain/necro AI being applied to them. The curse is the same. It always had the "DISTURBER_ONLY" tag, so it shouldn't come into broader use.
1. With the new geographical effects necromancers have in the upcoming update if a player necromancer makes a camp and collects enough undead minions can they cause a region to turn into it's evil version?
2. Since the new intelligent undead are technically sentient if a player adventurer gets killed and then raised back to life as an intelligent undead will we be able to play as them again if we select play as a specific creature reentering adventure mode?
3. Will player necromancers be able to create intelligent undead and if so how much of a corpse is required for it? For example could we make an intelligent zombie severed head?
4. Who controls intelligent undead if their necromancer master is slain? Do they become free willed undead?
FantasticDorf:
http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=169696.msg7974720#msg79747201. I haven't done anything in adv mode yet. It's there to consider, though it isn't an insta-raise-in-bulk the same way w.g. works, so we need to quantify it some other way if we do anything.
2. Answered with the Buttery_Mess question above.
3. Yeah, you can raise them. The resurrection fitness function has always required a central part (the upper body in most cases), to avoid the historical figure from ever being attached to two separate creatures (which would crash the game currently, but we'd like to support in some way later, for various weird situations.)
4. They are always free-willed, as much as entity members ever are, as described above, just due to not wanting to try to code up undead control.
In the most recent front page update, you said that a Dwarven Civ can breach the underworld and be overtaken. At this point, a new civilization is formed.
Is this new demon-ruled Dwarven civ playable?
Shonai_Dweller:
http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=169696.msg7976155#msg7976155PlumpHelmetMan:
http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=169696.msg7976288#msg7976288Shonai_Dweller:
http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=169696.msg7976292#msg7976292PatrikLundell:
http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=169696.msg7976338#msg7976338Yeah, it's a goblin-demon civ.
Considering you mentioned alliances in the second most recent devlog, is adding more diplomatic options and interactions to fort mode something planned for this release?
PatrikLundell:
http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=169696.msg7976391#msg7976391FantasticDorf:
http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=169696.msg7976465#msg7976465It's on the table, though as the quoted people say, it's a bit off to have you acting as a proxy for civ-level interactions through most of the life of a typical fort. The embark scenarios later are meant to clarify this situation and give you a requested level of autonomy, often at some reasonable or unreasonable cost. For now, we might still do a bit just because it's there, but if it proves inopportune for whatever technical reason, it'll have to wait.
You noted on usesthis that you listen to music constantly; do you listen to music while programming DF and if so, what kind?
Yeah, I can't program without music. Various sorts... winamp tells me they are blues, folk, metal, electronic, electronica/dance, jazz, pop, reggae, industrial, hip hop/rap, R&B, rock, alternative, alternative & punk, classical, country, world, and other.
Do the new organized religions interact with megabeast worship at all? I'm not sure if it's really that different since it isn't now other than megabeast worship being prompted by a megabeast attack (or two) and deity/force worship exists from the beginning of world generation. The megabeasts are simply listed as another deity when creating a temple to my knowledge. So are megabeasts that become objects of worship treated the same as regular gods and goddesses in this regard?
There still aren't prophets for non-deities, like the forces and megabeasts, which stops organized religions from happening. I'm not sure how long we'll keep this restriction, but since the forces aren't personified, they don't work with the current prophecies. They also aren't in the initial list, so they have a disadvantage in shrine building by the non-historical pops when they start, and they need a powerful state actor to create shrines for them. Then these shrines can turn around and finally affect the pops.
Author
Topic: Future of the Fortress (Read 3137929 times)