Print

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

[PatrikLundell]

I made a support DFHack script to attempt to buy liked stuff from caravans today, and I've seen some dorfs actually eat various kinds of cheese they like after the human caravan provided stuff (including lots of fish). It's tested on exactly one caravan, so there are probably bugs (no animals bought for slaughter, for instance).

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Code: [Select]

[code]
function buy_food_needs ()
  if df.global.gview.view.child.child == nil or
     df.global.gview.view.child.child._type ~= df.viewscreen_tradelistst or
     df.global.gview.view.child.child.child._type ~= df.viewscreen_tradegoodsst then
    dfhack.error ("This script must be run when the trade screen is open")
  end
 
  local preferences = {}
 
  for i, unit in ipairs (df.global.world.units.all) do
    if dfhack.units.isCitizen (unit) and
       dfhack.units.isAlive (unit) and
       unit.status.current_soul then
      for k, preference in ipairs (unit.status.current_soul.preferences) do
        if preference.active then
          if  preference.type == df.unit_preference.T_type.LikeFood then
            local found = false
           
            for l, pref in ipairs (preferences) do
              if pref.mattype == preference.mattype and
                 pref.matindex == preference.matindex and
                 pref.item_type == preference_item_type then
                found = true
                break
              end
            end
           
            if not found then
             table.insert (preferences, preference)
            end
          end
        end
      end
    end
  end
 
  for i, item in ipairs (df.global.gview.view.child.child.child.trader_items) do
    if item._type == df.item_cagest then  --  may contain food item_critterst, but at most one.
      if #item.general_refs == 1 then
        local unit = df.unit_type.find (item.general_refs [0].unit_id)
       
        for k, preference in ipairs (preferences) do
          if preference.matindex == -1 and  --  It's an animal
             unit.race == preference.mattype then
            dfhack.println ("Buying caged " .. df.global.world.raws.creatures.all [preference.mattype].name [0])
            df.global.gview.view.child.child.child.trader_selected [i] = 1
            break
           
          else
            local material = dfhack.matinfo.decode (preference.mattype, preference.matindex)
           
            if material.mode == "creature" and
               unit.race == preference.mattype and
               material.id ~= "CHEESE" and
               material.id ~= "MILK" and
               material.id ~= "EGGSHELL" and  --  Are there any preferences for eggs at all?
               material.id ~= "EGG_WHITE" and
               material.id ~= "EGG_YOLK" then     
            local pref
           
            if material.material.prefix == "" then
              pref = material.material.state_name.Solid
             
            else
              pref = material.material.prefix .. " " .. material.material.state_name.Solid
            end
           
            dfhack.println ("Buying caged " .. df.global.world.raws.creatures.all [preference.mattype].name [0] .. " for " .. pref)               
            df.global.gview.view.child.child.child.trader_selected [i] = 1
            break
            end
          end
        end
      end

    elseif item._type == df.item_liquid or  --  ###
           item._type == df.item_powder or  --  ###
           item._type == df.item_seedst or
           item._type == df.item_meatst or
           item._type == df.item_plantst or
           item._type == df.item_plant_growthst or
           item._type == df.item_cheesest or
           item._type == df.item_globst then
      for k, preference in ipairs (preferences) do
        local material = dfhack.matinfo.decode (preference.mattype, preference.matindex)
         
        if preference.matindex ~= -1 and
           item.mat_type == preference.mattype and
           item.mat_index == preference.matindex then
          local pref
           
          if material.material.prefix == "" then
            pref = material.material.state_name.Solid
           
          else
            pref = material.material.prefix .. " " .. material.material.state_name.Solid
          end
           
          dfhack.println ("Buying " .. pref)               
          df.global.gview.view.child.child.child.trader_selected [i] = 1
          break
        end
      end
           
    elseif item._type == df.item_fishst or
           item._type == df.item_fish_rawst then --  Which one? This or previous one?
      for k, preference in ipairs (preferences) do
        local material = dfhack.matinfo.decode (preference.mattype, preference.matindex)
       
        if preference.item_type == df.item_type.FISH then
          if preference.matindex == -1 then
            dfhack.println ("Buying " .. df.global.world.raws.creatures.all [preference.mattype].name [0])
            df.global.gview.view.child.child.child.trader_selected [i] = 1
           
          elseif material.mode == "creature" and  --  No fish producing milk or eggs, yet...
                 item.race == preference.mattype then
            local pref
           
            if material.material.prefix == "" then
              pref = material.material.state_name.Solid
           
            else
              pref = material.material.prefix .. " " .. material.material.state_name.Solid
            end
           
            dfhack.println ("Buying " .. pref)               
            df.global.gview.view.child.child.child.trader_selected [i] = 1
            break
          end
        end
      end
     
--    elseif --  item._type == item_foodst or  --  Cooked meals aren't sold (yet)
--           item._type == df.item_drinkst or  --  Should always be in a barrel
--           item._type == df.item_eggst then  --  Don't think there can be egg preferences due to eggs being 3 "creature" parts...               
         
    elseif item._type == df.item_barrelst or
           item._type == df.item_boxst then  -- for bags...
      if #item.general_refs == 1 then
        local content = df.unit_type.find (item.general_refs [0].unit_id)
       
        for k, preference in ipairs (preferences) do
          local material = dfhack.matinfo.decode (preference.mattype, preference.matindex)
         
          if preference.matindex ~= -1 and
             (content._type == df.item_liquid or
              content._type == df.item_powder or
              content._type == df.item_seedst or
              content._type == df.item_meatst or
              content._type == df.item_plantst or
              content._type == df.item_plant_growthst or
              content._type == df.item_cheesest or
              content._type == df.item_globst and
              content.mat_type == preference.mattype and
              content.mat_index == preference.matindex) then
            local pref
           
            if material.material.prefix == "" then
              pref = material.material.state_name.Solid
             
            else
              pref = material.material.prefix .. " " .. material.material.state_name.Solid
            end
           
            dfhack.println ("Buying bag/barrel with " .. pref)               
            df.global.gview.view.child.child.child.trader_selected [i] = 1
            break
          end
        end       
      end
    end
  end
end
buy_food_needs ()
[/code]

The script is run from while you're on the trade screen, and it simply goes through the list of items for sale and match them against preferred food of citizens, marking each match for purchase. There is no check against what you have in stock or whether you can afford it, though, so it will happily select everything it finds matching. It might be useful to handle at least some food preference issues, as the dorfs I'm losing essentially are lost to the combination of no friends, no family, and no decent meals.

[Fleeting Frames]

Huh, neat idea; though I was contemplating marking all desired prefs as requested goods (also gets around "want to eat giant lovebird heart in particular"). Should be relatively easy adaptation.

[PatrikLundell]

Huh, neat idea; though I was contemplating marking all desired prefs as requested goods (also gets around "want to eat giant lovebird heart in particular"). Should be relatively easy adaptation.

I won't try requested goods as I can't test it (dead civ), but yes, that's definitely a good complement, but I think it will have to be a separate script, as it targets a different screen. Also, it probably needs a brake, or you can end up with ordering and buying quite a lot more of those hearts than you actually need.
Another variation in a similar vein would be to auto assign farming of desired crops, although I won't do that either (I've got a system for booze, and it would probably interfere).

[Splint]

This is my personal observations regarding some stuff on the OP. Note, I haven't read the whole thread, and these observations are from 44.12.

Equipping shiny new suits of armor count as being extravagant/maybe acquisition -unsure which putting on a [quality] item falls under - but they seem to need quality above standard or be of a more  valuable material or of higher quality than the armor they already have on.

Also, soldiers will wear trinkets, assuming you don't have them replace thier clothing. If set to replace clothing, then anything wearable they've accrued will be stored in thier room's chest(s,) assuming they have one, or otherwise litter thier bedroom floor. They also continue to collect stuff when off duty and likewise wear or store it, depending on equipment settings and what the item is. I've had some soldiers even use figurines and scepters in combat because I forgot to assign them thier weapons (uniform was not set to replace clothing.) Sandstone figurines are terrible weapons, gold scepters however...

Additionally, the need to help someone seems to be filled by jumping in on existing combat - I've seen civilians who rush into fights in progress get that need filled, though the good thought is likely negated by the fear, terror, or what have you stressors. Trouble-making might also be sated by arguments, (which can happen when they talk to the mayor, in libraries, or while generally milling about,) though I haven't kept close enough tabs in any fort to know for sure.

[PatrikLundell]

As expected, the first version of my buy_food_needs script didn't work properly. When the elves came with a caged critter whose liver someone wants it wasn't matched. This updated version gets the critter and some fruit.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Code: [Select]

[code]
function buy_food_needs ()
  if df.global.gview.view.child.child == nil or
     df.global.gview.view.child.child._type ~= df.viewscreen_tradelistst or
     df.global.gview.view.child.child.child._type ~= df.viewscreen_tradegoodsst then
    dfhack.error ("This script must be run when the trade screen is open")
  end
 
  local preferences = {}
 
  for i, unit in ipairs (df.global.world.units.all) do
    if dfhack.units.isCitizen (unit) and
       dfhack.units.isAlive (unit) and
       unit.status.current_soul then
      for k, preference in ipairs (unit.status.current_soul.preferences) do
        if preference.active then
          if  preference.type == df.unit_preference.T_type.LikeFood then
            local found = false
           
            for l, pref in ipairs (preferences) do
              if pref.mattype == preference.mattype and
                 pref.matindex == preference.matindex and
                 pref.item_type == preference_item_type then
                found = true
                break
              end
            end
           
            if not found then
             table.insert (preferences, preference)
            end
          end
        end
      end
    end
  end
 
  for i, item in ipairs (df.global.gview.view.child.child.child.trader_items) do
    if item._type == df.item_cagest then  --  may contain food item_critterst, but at most one.
      local found = false
     
      if #item.general_refs > 2 then
        for k, ref in ipairs (item.general_refs) do
          if ref._type == df.general_ref_contains_unitst then
            local unit = df.unit.find (ref.unit_id)
       
            for l, preference in ipairs (preferences) do
              if preference.matindex == -1 then  --  It's an animal
                if unit.race == preference.mattype then
                  dfhack.println ("Buying caged " .. df.global.world.raws.creatures.all [preference.mattype].name [0])
                  df.global.gview.view.child.child.child.trader_selected [i] = 1
                  found = true
                  break
                end
               
              else
                local material = dfhack.matinfo.decode (preference.mattype, preference.matindex)
               
                if material.mode == "creature" and
                   df.global.world.raws.creatures.all [unit.race].creature_id == material.creature.creature_id and
                   material.material.id ~= "CHEESE" and
                   material.material.id ~= "MILK" and
                   material.material.id ~= "EGGSHELL" and  --  Are there any preferences for eggs at all?
                   material.material.id ~= "EGG_WHITE" and
                   material.material.id ~= "EGG_YOLK" then     
                  local pref
           
                  if material.material.prefix == "" then
                    pref = material.material.state_name.Solid
             
                  else
                    pref = material.material.prefix .. " " .. material.material.state_name.Solid
                  end
           
                  dfhack.println ("Buying caged " .. material.creature.name [0] .. " for " .. pref)               
                  df.global.gview.view.child.child.child.trader_selected [i] = 1
                  found = true
                  break
                end
              end
            end
          end
         
          if found then
            break
          end
        end       
      end

    elseif item._type == df.item_liquid or  --  ###
           item._type == df.item_powder or  --  ###
           item._type == df.item_seedst or
           item._type == df.item_meatst or
           item._type == df.item_plantst or
           item._type == df.item_plant_growthst or
           item._type == df.item_cheesest or
           item._type == df.item_globst then
      for k, preference in ipairs (preferences) do
        local material = dfhack.matinfo.decode (preference.mattype, preference.matindex)
         
        if preference.matindex ~= -1 and
           item.mat_type == preference.mattype and
           item.mat_index == preference.matindex then
          local pref
           
          if material.material.prefix == "" then
            pref = material.material.state_name.Solid
           
          else
            pref = material.material.prefix .. " " .. material.material.state_name.Solid
          end
           
          dfhack.println ("Buying " .. pref)               
          df.global.gview.view.child.child.child.trader_selected [i] = 1
          break
        end
      end
           
    elseif item._type == df.item_fishst or
           item._type == df.item_fish_rawst then --  Which one? This or previous one?
      for k, preference in ipairs (preferences) do
        local material = dfhack.matinfo.decode (preference.mattype, preference.matindex)
       
        if preference.item_type == df.item_type.FISH then
          if preference.matindex == -1 then
            if preference.mattype == item.race then
              dfhack.println ("Buying " .. df.global.world.raws.creatures.all [preference.mattype].name [0])
              df.global.gview.view.child.child.child.trader_selected [i] = 1
              break
            end
           
          elseif material.mode == "creature" and  --  No fish producing milk or eggs, yet...
                 item.race == preference.mattype then
            local pref
           
            if material.material.prefix == "" then
              pref = material.material.state_name.Solid
           
            else
              pref = material.material.prefix .. " " .. material.material.state_name.Solid
            end
           
            dfhack.println ("Buying " .. pref)               
            df.global.gview.view.child.child.child.trader_selected [i] = 1
            break
          end
        end
      end
     
--    elseif --  item._type == item_foodst or  --  Cooked meals aren't sold (yet)
--           item._type == df.item_drinkst or  --  Should always be in a barrel
--           item._type == df.item_eggst then  --  Don't think there can be egg preferences due to eggs being 3 "creature" parts...               
         
    elseif item._type == df.item_barrelst or
           item._type == df.item_boxst then  -- for bags...
      if #item.general_refs > 2 then
        local found = false
       
        for k, ref in ipairs (item.general_refs) do
          if ref._type == df.general_ref_contains_itemst then
            local content = df.item.find (ref.item_id)
       
            for l, preference in ipairs (preferences) do
              local material = dfhack.matinfo.decode (preference.mattype, preference.matindex)
         
              if preference.matindex ~= -1 and
                 content.mat_type == preference.mattype and
                 content.mat_index == preference.matindex then
                local pref

                found = true

                if preference.item_type == df.item_type.DRINK or
                   preference.item_type == df.item_type.LIQUID_MISC then
                  if material.material.prefix == "" then
                    pref = material.material.state_name.Liquid
             
                  else
                    pref = material.material.prefix .. " " .. material.material.state_name.Liquid
                  end
           
                  dfhack.println ("Buying barrel of " .. pref)               
                  df.global.gview.view.child.child.child.trader_selected [i] = 1
                 
                else
                  if material.material.prefix == "" then
                    pref = material.material.state_name.Solid
             
                   else
                    pref = material.material.prefix .. " " .. material.material.state_name.Solid
                  end
           
                  dfhack.println ("Buying bag with " .. pref)               
                  df.global.gview.view.child.child.child.trader_selected [i] = 1
                end
               
                break
              end
            end
          end
         
          if found then
            break
          end
        end       
      end
    end
  end
end

buy_food_needs ()
[/code]

Edit: Corrected a number of additional bugs in the script.

[garlicfiend]

So I've read this whole thread, and it's a fascinating and helpful read.

And I have to say that stress is (IMHO) definitely broken still in 44.12.

I have a fortress that I started in 44.09. It's the first time I've started in a (nearly) dead civ, and it's the first time I've gotten serious about a steel industry (outside of goblinite). And I have my fortress trucking along for a few years, and the fort is well-established. I've been playing off-and-on since 34.something, and it's in my DF DNA to prevent bad thoughts. So there's a temple with individual sub-temples, tavern, library, 3x3 individual rooms that have been smoothed, lavish meals being churned out, plenty of booze. And of course it's 44.09 so everyone is happy as a clam.

But then memories and emotions! I was excited about that. I wanted to peek in on the internal lives of my dwarves as they each live out their own little stories. Fortunately, I decided to wait on 44.10 to see how it would go. Passed on that. So when the LNP came out for 44.12, I went ahead and upgraded my fortress...

And now it's a slow slide into depression. A large chunk of my dwarves have turned into milllennials. They seem to have no place in their heads for the vaguest idea that the world they have born into is capable of dark capricious randomly dished out violence and horror, and instead they have to take a personal mental health self-care day because the smoothie stand was out of wheatgrass. Literally, there isn't a single civilized site in my world except for my fortress (oops, set the number of mega-beasts too high in world gen) , but none of these migrants coming in seem to comprehend how lucky they are to just have a raised bridge between themselves and the rest of the savagery.

I think it's natural (even inevitable) that fortress created in 44.09 is going to fail in 44.12. There was just no way to foresee the need for this much stress micro. Barring any great change between now and the Myth/Magic update, pre-44.10, I think, will be seen as the golden age of DF mega-projects. Does anyone really think Archcrystal would have been possible in 44.12? In that sense, 44.10+ is save breaking if you don't have an emotional support infrastructure built into your fortress.


A fair comparison to make here is 34.xx when I started playing. I lost a lot of fortresses to tantrum spirals. Was that better or worse than 44.12? Well, in some sense, you could tick the boxes of basic dwarf care and you were mostly good. Game-wise, it acted as a pretty good motivator to provide for your dwarves, to give them a proper dwarfy life. And it inspired dwarfy strategies for dealing with it (dwarven daycare FTW!). And there was a beautiful awful epicness to a proper tantrum spiral. It was decent way to lose.

Compare that to 44.12. Do any of the strategies oulined in this thread feel dwarfy? Does anyone think it likely that a player will invent a crazy magma-powered cat repeater that keeps dwarves from getting rained on? As it stands, it feels like this issue is decreasing player creativity instead of encouraging it.


And my biggest worry is that this won't get resolved before the Big Wait. Ideally, all the new content Toady is adding to the game would slowly increase the player base as we create more and more cool stories to share while we have a single stable version of DF to play with. But if the Big Wait leaves us with a DF that has a steeper learning curve, with more restrictions on play style, then the player base could hemorrage instead of building, and that would suck. In fact, it could end up looking like a 44.12 fortress with a bunch of depressed players losing the will to play

[mikekchar]

My two cents (bear in mind that I don't have *that* many depressed dwarfs at the moment in my fortress):  I definitely prefer having an in game reason to pay attention to my dwarfs.  I tend to play slowly (*very* slowly compared to some people) and I like to pay attention to details.  I only started to play post tantrum spiral and one of my problems with the game was that apart from RP, there was no point to playing the way I play.  There were no consequences to any of my actions.  I often compare DF to a doll house because there is basically no "game" in it.  You just build your house and play with your dolls.

One of the things I've seen more and more is that players with a lot more experience than me at the game often get frustrated with the new features.  For them, the game is moving *away* from what attracted them in the first place: whether that's a big fantasy combat simulator, or whether it's a sandbox for building extremely clever engineering.  For me, it's moving *towards* what I enjoy: simulating a fantasy role play environment.

While dwarfy achievements interest me intellectually, I actually never get around to building them (although, I still intend to build my onsen one day).  Certainly the fact that I need to pay attention to the needs of the dwarfs individually is welcoming to me and even if they worked, I would never build some kind of dwarfy solution to rid me of that need.  And while I completely understand the frustration of players who enjoy other aspects of the game, I think it's pretty clear that Toady is steering the ship towards *more* of this RP dynamic, not less.

As for whether or not Archcrystal could be built in 44.12... I don't know.  Keep in mind that (if I remember correctly) the fortress had a very low population level for most of its history (I think it was capped around 50???  Can't remember).  So from that perspective where you have someone paying a lot of attention to their dwarfs, I think the game is going in that direction.  But can you actually sustain a fortress for mutliple decades without them all going suicidal?  I don't know.  Can your dwarfs put up with the tedium of building a structure that goes from the bottom of the clown car to the top of the sky without starting a revolt?  I don't know.  However, from my perspective I think the first is desirable and the second is less so.  Or at least maybe we need a "slave labour" arc ;-)

[Splint]

I think something like archcrystal would be doable with a touch of modding, mainly a corpse incinerator. One or two of those and the soldiers can clean up thier own mess, sparing everyone else from the worst of it (bodies and rain seem to be the biggest stress causers.)

EDIT: Rereading that a bit, I can see where it's coming from. It's just many of the new things make certain playstyles difficult or impossible (want to be hyper aggressive? You need a large clean up crew to mitigate the results, for example.) For me the violence and building is what brought me in, and overall I like the changes, I just don't like the drastic effects certain things has on our units - nobody should care about seeing a dead invader beyond having to clean up the mess, because it means the militia did it's job well, nor should anyone get so flipping angry over lack of cups and rain that they tantrum after two weeks from arrival.

[a52]

A fair comparison to make here is 34.xx when I started playing. I lost a lot of fortresses to tantrum spirals. Was that better or worse than 44.12? Well, in some sense, you could tick the boxes of basic dwarf care and you were mostly good. Game-wise, it acted as a pretty good motivator to provide for your dwarves, to give them a proper dwarfy life. And it inspired dwarfy strategies for dealing with it (dwarven daycare FTW!). And there was a beautiful awful epicness to a proper tantrum spiral. It was decent way to lose.

Compare that to 44.12. Do any of the strategies oulined in this thread feel dwarfy? Does anyone think it likely that a player will invent a crazy magma-powered cat repeater that keeps dwarves from getting rained on? As it stands, it feels like this issue is decreasing player creativity instead of encouraging it.

I think you've really hit the nail on the here wrt to the biggest problem. Stress/insanity/depression/whatever certainly aren't bad, in fact they're probably desirable -- they're realistic, they provide a challenge, and they result in interesting fortresses and interesting events. The issue right now is where the stress is coming from, and how the player can (or cannot) deal with it.

[billw]

...

I think it is very cool to have this deep simulation of the private lives of dwarves, even though I personally love the engineering and organisational aspects of the game. I can get into some dwarf psychology and "daycare" game play as well. However what I can't stand is tedious micromanagement of things that don't require any decision making. If tailoring the environment is required to meet the dwarves needs, then the tools need to be there for the player to make this a non tedious and non repetitive task when you have 200 dwarves to take care of. Crafting/creative needs is one example where the solution is obviously you need to give them a crafting/whatever job. Okay fine that requires no thought or decision, you just queue some random crafting job, enable the labor and they full fill their need. Unfortunately doing that 200 times is way too tedious, and leaving everyone with crafting enabled and a perpetual crafting job on repeat will bury you in useless craft junk and drain all your fortress resources and labor.

[a52]

List of most of the personality/value changes in my fort, and their potential causes:

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Highly values family - gaining a sibling, becoming a parent
Highly values nature - drinking water without a well
Highly devalues nature - drinking water without a well
Highly values sacrifice - drinking water without a well
Highly values concealment of emotions - choking on dust
Highly devalues emotional concealment - drinking water without a well
Values tranquility and peace - becoming a parent, seeing a kobold die
Values harmonious existence - seeing a dwarven citizen die

Almost never feels discouraged - seeing a kobold die, seeing a dwarven citizen die
Frequently depressed - drinking water without a well
Quick to anger - seeing a dwarven citizen die, drinking water without a well
Slow to anger - drinking water without a well
Often cheerful - becoming a parent
Seeks out exciting and adventurous situations - seeing a dwarven citizen die
Completely oblivious to any conception of neatness - drinking water without a well
Easily falls in love - gaining a sibling, becoming a parent
Can handle stress - being caught in the rain, drinking water without a well

Note that this data is not controlled for frequency of either the cause or the result, only how they're related! While drinking water without a well might seem to be the most common thought-changer, it might simply be because it can change a large range of different personality aspects. Other causes might be narrow in their effect but actually more common!


With that said, it looks like each thought has a list of values or personality aspects that they are capable of changing, and they randomly push it towards one end (but probably not the middle). The same thought will affect the same things in each dwarf, but likely in wildly different directions. Some thoughts likely only push towards one end, or are more likely to affect a dwarf in one way than the other. (For example, having a child probably doesn't make the parent hate families)

I might write a DFHack script to automatically pull all personality changes and their causes in tag form, and then organize that into a spreadsheet where you can sort by either change or cause. That would probably also include frequency data. But I'm not doing it tonight.

[garlicfiend]

A fair comparison to make here is 34.xx when I started playing. I lost a lot of fortresses to tantrum spirals. Was that better or worse than 44.12? Well, in some sense, you could tick the boxes of basic dwarf care and you were mostly good. Game-wise, it acted as a pretty good motivator to provide for your dwarves, to give them a proper dwarfy life. And it inspired dwarfy strategies for dealing with it (dwarven daycare FTW!). And there was a beautiful awful epicness to a proper tantrum spiral. It was decent way to lose.

Compare that to 44.12. Do any of the strategies oulined in this thread feel dwarfy? Does anyone think it likely that a player will invent a crazy magma-powered cat repeater that keeps dwarves from getting rained on? As it stands, it feels like this issue is decreasing player creativity instead of encouraging it.

I think you've really hit the nail on the here wrt to the biggest problem. Stress/insanity/depression/whatever certainly aren't bad, in fact they're probably desirable -- they're realistic, they provide a challenge, and they result in interesting fortresses and interesting events. The issue right now is where the stress is coming from, and how the player can (or cannot) deal with it.

My biggest frustration at the moment is feeling like I need to spreadsheet the personal preferences of 150 individual dwarves just to achieve baseline satisfaction in a fortress where nothing is happening. Literally, I have a boring fortress. There are no other civs to attack me. I've had two wandering monsters stop by in five years. My caverns are closed off. My tavern gets no visitors. We get one caravan a year from a nearly dead civ with no sites, and I buy out all their clothes with the mass of rock crafts I make all year. Much of the population rotates through military service. I have a nice dining hall, a tavern... etc.

I would really like the population to be mostly self-maintaining when the majority of needs are met and there are no external triggers. I don't mind the isolated nutcase now and then that needs dealing with -- that's a proper dwarfy situation. And we had those pre-44.10. And they made for good stories. But seeing the cancer of red arrows slowly growing through the population is completely different.

For an experienced players, this is frustrating. But for new players? You've just gotten the basics down -- say you've turtled in behind some drawbridges and you just want the win of a moderately successful fort -- and then the slow burn of depression starts to take over. And they come to the forums or to the reddit sub and ask "What's happening, what do I do?" And you tell them about dwarf's social and emotional needs. And then tell them that there is no effective interface to manage that in vanilla. And maybe by then someone will have coded an interface into DFHack or DT, but the poor newbie is likely going to feel overwhlemed and give up at that point.

[Shonai_Dweller]

A fair comparison to make here is 34.xx when I started playing. I lost a lot of fortresses to tantrum spirals. Was that better or worse than 44.12? Well, in some sense, you could tick the boxes of basic dwarf care and you were mostly good. Game-wise, it acted as a pretty good motivator to provide for your dwarves, to give them a proper dwarfy life. And it inspired dwarfy strategies for dealing with it (dwarven daycare FTW!). And there was a beautiful awful epicness to a proper tantrum spiral. It was decent way to lose.

Compare that to 44.12. Do any of the strategies oulined in this thread feel dwarfy? Does anyone think it likely that a player will invent a crazy magma-powered cat repeater that keeps dwarves from getting rained on? As it stands, it feels like this issue is decreasing player creativity instead of encouraging it.

I think you've really hit the nail on the here wrt to the biggest problem. Stress/insanity/depression/whatever certainly aren't bad, in fact they're probably desirable -- they're realistic, they provide a challenge, and they result in interesting fortresses and interesting events. The issue right now is where the stress is coming from, and how the player can (or cannot) deal with it.

My biggest frustration at the moment is feeling like I need to spreadsheet the personal preferences of 150 individual dwarves just to achieve baseline satisfaction in a fortress where nothing is happening. Literally, I have a boring fortress. There are no other civs to attack me. I've had two wandering monsters stop by in five years. My caverns are closed off. My tavern gets no visitors. We get one caravan a year from a nearly dead civ with no sites, and I buy out all their clothes with the mass of rock crafts I make all year. Much of the population rotates through military service. I have a nice dining hall, a tavern... etc.

I would really like the population to be mostly self-maintaining when the majority of needs are met and there are no external triggers. I don't mind the isolated nutcase now and then that needs dealing with -- that's a proper dwarfy situation. And we had those pre-44.10. And they made for good stories. But seeing the cancer of red arrows slowly growing through the population is completely different.

For an experienced players, this is frustrating. But for new players? You've just gotten the basics down -- say you've turtled in behind some drawbridges and you just want the win of a moderately successful fort -- and then the slow burn of depression starts to take over. And they come to the forums or to the reddit sub and ask "What's happening, what do I do?" And you tell them about dwarf's social and emotional needs. And then tell them that there is no effective interface to manage that in vanilla. And maybe by then someone will have coded an interface into DFHack or DT, but the poor newbie is likely going to feel overwhlemed and give up at that point.

Yes. The issues with dwarves not meeting needs properly is in the op. That's why this thread exists. So that they can be fixed. It's currently not working as intended.

Half-way through a release arc has never been a good time for new people to join. Most advice needs to be discarded a month or so after giving it when the next update hits.

[Shonai_Dweller]

And back on topic (sorry for double-post), can something be done for the children? We don't get much specific control over them and we can't exile them if their parents have been eaten by a dragon. And it's the kids whose parents were eaten who are the most problematic. In my fortresses, no kid experiencing horror will ever survive to adulthood, it's very sad.

Now, I'm not a child psychologist, and maybe seeing mum get eaten is a one-way ticket to insanity in real life, but I feel they need to be more robust. Especially the younger ones. Specifically, maybe they could file away short-term memories into long-term memories quicker than adults. That way, kids go through plenty of traumatic personality changes but might actually survive to adulthood.

I guess this is kind of planned when 'life stages' are addressed, but there's no indication when that will be.

[pamelrabo]

I jumped from .09 to .12 excited about personality changes and pretty sure I could manage my fort stress, I'm an experienced player and I RP a lot, taking care for my citizens' needs.

Well, I was wrong. I've got ±80 red arrows in a 120dwarves fort. Many of them depressed and melancholic and destructive when tamtruming.

Of course, I'll do better next time... Will I? I don't really know. Many stressed dwarves only show happy thoughts or rememberings. They're happy remembering praying, happy finishing work, extatic after this thing or that one... And yet, they appear as stressed. So I don't really know if any of the thing I'm doing to ease off stress is helping at all.

Also, it's quite annoying when some people are furious about not eating some impossibly exotic food or drink (I've got peasants born in my fortress who yearn for some strange beer they can't even know about). Or when they're lonely being away from the family they didn't bring with in the first place.

So, yeah, as interesting as is the stress and memories is, the game lacks transparency about what makes dwarves happy or unhappy the most, and probably also needs some rebalancing of the effects, good and bad.

Right now I can't play diplomacy or military expeditions, just dealing with tamtrums and putting people into jail for murdering other people is sucking my time and energies.

I'll take a dive on the stress modding tools.
Or I'll assign every unhappy dwarf to the "Atom Smashed Lads" and proceed to disintegration whenever fresh ones migrate in. But I don't like that idea at all.