Print

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

[Miles_Umbrae]

VislarRn was arguing for the possible portrayal of classes and societal tiers of privilege.

GoblinCookie was arguing against the portrayal of a society where some have more privilege than others.

If it is not allowed to use a "passive-aggressive" tone in comments to other posters then why did you, Detoxicated just do do?

[PlatinumSun]

''We are socialists, we are enemies of the capatilist economic system for the exploitation of the economically weak, with its unfair salaries, with its unseenly evaluation of a human being according to wealth and property instead of responsibility and performance and we are all determined to destroy this system under all conditions ''

-Urist McHitler

[PlatinumSun]

Well I dont really feel the people should be able to uprise the player. I dont think we should have it be this complex unless it can be toggled. For those who like games with advanced governments can keep it on while laymen like me who simply want to have UNLIMITED POWAHR! And only want to deal with keeping my Dwarves happy with nice decor and trinkets of there favourite materials.

And I disagree with GoblinCookie if your going to add in advanced governments dont half ass the job becuase of PC bollocks.

[Shonai_Dweller]

Well I dont really feel the people should be able to uprise the player. I dont think we should have it be this complex unless it can be toggled. For those who like games with advanced governments can keep it on while laymen like me who simply want to have UNLIMITED POWAHR! And only want to deal with keeping my Dwarves happy with nice decor and trinkets of there favourite materials.

And I disagree with GoblinCookie if your going to add in advanced governments dont half ass the job becuase lf PC bollocks.

Toady disagrees with you, however. When talking about stress and needs he said a long-term solution (as opposed to the current 'go insane, smash stuff, die' ) would more likely end up being political. To have the dwarves begin to rebel against you if you insist on keeping them in terrible conditions.

[Detoxicated]

Well your post only targeted gonlincookie while not adding anything to the discussion, so that comes across as p.a. I merely pointed it out because these things tend to heat up quickly. Also I didn't say it wasn't allowed I merely tried to inform you that there is more constructive behaviour patterns that are more constructive in a discussion and that we all should thrive to cultivate.

We are all flawed beings, and therefore my communication is too, so I would like you to point out in what way I was passive aggressive so I can adjust my speech in future interactions. Since we cannot read the body language and facial expressions of one another it is hard for us to understand what the other is trying to say if we don't use extremely precise language.
In no way did I intend to be aggressive towards you, so sorry if I made you feel otherwise.

[PlatinumSun]

Well I dont really feel the people should be able to uprise the player. I dont think we should have it be this complex unless it can be toggled. For those who like games with advanced governments can keep it on while laymen like me who simply want to have UNLIMITED POWAHR! And only want to deal with keeping my Dwarves happy with nice decor and trinkets of there favourite materials.

And I disagree with GoblinCookie if your going to add in advanced governments dont half ass the job becuase lf PC bollocks.

Toady disagrees with you, however. When talking about stress and needs he said a long-term solution (as opposed to the current 'go insane, smash stuff, die' ) would more likely end up being political. To have the dwarves begin to rebel against you if you insist on keeping them in terrible conditions.

What are you talking about, I just said I think its a good idea, as long as "it can be toggled". I would like to once in a while try out complex governments turned on. Who know maybe I will really like it and only use it from then on.

[PlatinumSun]

WAIT!

AMAZING IDEA AFOOT!

WHAT IF!

WE! Make it so the rest of the world works with all this fancy governments and voting and uprising.

But your fort being ran by the all powerfull god which is you. The worst that happens is Dwarves tantrum but I can understand making it so the player needs to start making furniture or jewelry for dwarves of a specific material or dwarves will be much less happy. Or just have a marketplace when the economy update arrives so dwarves can buy what fancies them, unless your Fortress isa giant gulag like mine.

So this is the perfect compromise (I think) for those who dont want complex governments becuase they just like the way it currently is. Not for PC reasons becuase other civilizations may or may not have sexism or racism. Also if you wanted you could make homlsexuals or dwarves of certain race second class seeing as it is your fort. Or the devs could just add in economical and caste classes and not touch on this non PC stuff (people can mod it in anyways). I simply cant find the sense that GoblinCookies thinks theres no reason to add in econimical and caste classes unless you also add in other things like sexism. Also in DF the devs said there not going to stay just with english mythology so why should they just stay with medieval europe cultures? Ever here of Sparta where men and women were equal. But I feel the way it should work is every government local or federal (unless prohibited by the federal one) does a coin flip f there is discrimination based on race or sex and then for sex 2 dice rolls for men or women the other for homosexuals. And for race, lets say there can be no more than 3 master races so there is a dice roll for how many master races and then which ones become the master race. For religion it has to do with the values of a specific civilization and if a certain religion conflicts with them or if the population is lied to like and told it conflicts with them (People can also lie about a certain race being savages to cause a racist value to exist in a government) like Hitler so a certain value might be the outlaw of a certain religion in this case Judaism and the Hebrew and Judah race this could also happen for homosexuals or certain fetishes.

And also Detoxicated when you said what I said could come off as a personal attack and said VislaRn was passive aggressive. Well with what your saying you sound alittle condescending.

EDIT: AND PRETENTIOUS I FORGOT TO MENTION PRETENTIOUS. Sorry, caps lock.

[VislarRn]

Maybe you should not post if it annoys you so much when people talk about such issues. Class oppression is a common trope in human history and its art, so it does make sense to include it in one way or another as it a) creates interesting stories of heroes overcoming such struggles and b) it can make a deep simulation like dwarf fortress rounder and more realistic.
In my opinion there should be worlds where this is a part of the history while still having worlds where there is no class struggles, though I find that quite silly as about every civilization has had these struggles one way or another. These struggles continue to this day in some countries so I wonder why it poses such a problem to you when people discuss these possibilities for the game.

Furthermore I would like to point out that your first sentence as well as your pc assumption read as passive aggressive, but as I believe that your ibtention was not to infuriate, I wonder if you could use a less aggressive language to get your point across.

And now I feel myself a little autistic because I were not able to tell right-away if this post was meant as a a clever irony or not. 

To answer your question. My criticism was not meant to be argument-filled complex discussion about society and classes, because I find these discussions generally not guiding game development at all. DF developers take general ideas and try to put them inside the framework of the game while not trying to follow every single philosophical implication that it brings along.

My criticism was only meant as a metaphorical *smack* to GoblinCookie's head, because I don't find the guy dumb and I wouldn't even care if GC was dumb. But the problem is that he is very obsessive about certain ideas. And I actually find it kinda fascinating how this obsession leads him to react to things and ideas very specific way. Like in the topic of "Dwarven Social Lives" he brought out some existential ideas he found horrifying and I compared his existential fears to mine concluding that he is probably metaphysical opposite of me since, I am also obsessed with different philosophical ideas and ideals, but they are located in opposite spectrum.

I have realised that these obsessions are unhealthy when not controlled. And in case of myself, when I find out that I act on behalf of obsession, I metaphorically smack myself and ask - "Is this me or is this my obsession acting out right-now?" This simple Cognitive-behavioral technique has helped me to find out if my behaviour is unconstructive and save huge amount of my time and energy. Otherwise I fear I might be really annoying person in every social circle

I hope this explained my post and my emotionally motivated need to smack GC while telepathically yelling him that "Hey, you don't have to take these things obnoxiously seriously!"

[Dorsidwarf]

The idea that conflicts and political dramas and rebellions are happening elsewhere in the world but I’m deliberately banned from participating fills me with horror, Platinum

[Detoxicated]

Thank you for your response there.
I too feel that going to much into detail about these philosophical ideas derails the actual topic when overextended. At times they can bring insight though and i feel that the opposed views of you and gc should be represented in DF as reasons for conflicts of varying types.


Maybe I was a bit condescending earlier. I just saw many threads derailed because people became more and more aggressive towards one another even though they all held the interest to create possible additions to the game we all loved, and I wanted to counter it before the flaming actually started.

Your suggestion is kind of how I envisioned the game to play out. These government types should have way more influence in adventure mode than in fortress mode.

[PlatinumSun]

I HAVE ANOTHER GREAT IDEA!

So this ties in to the economical arc of our favorite anime known as Dwarf Fortress. And its a way for trading reputation to work. So there are to variables for trading fortress reputation and civilization reputation with a specific trade partner. Two things effect fortress reputation the percentage of dwarves that dont like the civilization or race of the traders vs the ones that do or dont care. The other thing that matters is what system we currently have which there happier the more stuff that we trade with them.

EDIT: Also every site with a -rep with another civ will lower the overall civ rep of the civ its part of a little bit. This is true for +rep sites aswell. Also the capital of a civ always has double the effect aswell.

EDIT: ALSO TARIFFS which the effects they would have are self explanatory.

For civilization reputation its just how two civilizations get along the variables for getting along ive already mentiond in my last comment.

[KittyTac]

I HAVE ANOTHER GREAT IDEA!

So this ties in to the economical arc of our favorite anime known as Dwarf Fortress. And its a way for trading reputation to work. So there are to variables for trading fortress reputation and civilization reputation with a specific trade partner. Two things effect fortress reputation the percentage of dwarves that dont like the civilization or race of the traders vs the ones that do or dont care. The other thing that matters is what system we currently have which there happier the more stuff that we trade with them.

For civilization reputation its just how two civilizations get along.

SOunds pretty simple, I'm surprised if this isn't already planned for the next 20 years.

[PlatinumSun]

YET ANOTHER GREAT IDEA!

So lets say you have 3 civs, one civ the dorfs get along with the humans but not the elves. The humans get along with both the dorfs and the elves. The dorfs complain to the humans about them being on good terms with the elves, whlist the elves do the same but complain to the humans about them being on good terms with the dorfs. So now what? The humans must choose between the elves or the dorfs or lose a military alliance with both since the dorfs and elves are about to go to war with each other. So since the player isnt playing any of these civs. Both the elves and dorfs will start giving the humans land and resources and get rid of tarrifs and get trade and military deals. So then all land gained or items gotten will be measuered in one unit and added together. So the unit used will be called phaffs. A phaff is every certain amount of worth of an item up to a certain number, lets say one million. Once an items value gets above one million it stops counting as phaffs how much item value is a phaff is not important. For land lets say every 1 tile in the local map when embarking is a phaff. So since dorfs, obviously superior to elves will of course give the humans more phaffs and the humans an dorfs go to war with the elves. Another factor of what the humans decide has to do with the military might of either the dorfs or elves becuase why would the humans join the elves side if they see the dwarves will most likely beat them?

[PlatinumSun]

I hope Toady reads this thread.

[KittyTac]

Also, the plan is (I think) to NOT have the overseer as an omnipotent god. Toady has the final say everywhere. If a suggestion goes against the plan, it won't be implemented. And yes, he reads all suggestion threads that aren't obvious trolls (like your battle royale thing).