Print

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

[Manveru Taurënér]

Well, logically, as long as you havent removed the ramp in front of your entrance, it should be visually displayed as a fully functional ramp.
With graphics, that ramp becomes way more visible, i get it, its not nearly as distracting in ASCII.
But, why would you have a ramp in front of your doorway?

I always remove ramps in front of my entrance, when playing with ascii. It just makes sense you know.
I Also did it the first time i played DF.

I dont think new players Will be confused.
To dig an entrance in the first place, they have to enter the same menu that happens to contain the 'remove ramp function', which i believe is listed closely underneath the 'dig' option. So i think its pretty hard to miss out on that.

Depends on if they can parse what's going on in the image I guess, to me at least it just looks really weird.

[PatrikLundell]

Concerning Rekov's grid suggestion: a 16*16 major grid aligned with DF's blocks would probably fit DF better than an "arbitrary" 10*10  one. However, it depends on what you use if for, I guess. If you're counting tiles decimal fits humans better, but if you try to align things with DF's divisions the hex one works better.

[Superdorf]

Honestly, the little entry-ramp looks fine to me. Fits nicely with the other ramps, and still reads OK as an opening into the underground.

[Rekov]

Concerning Rekov's grid suggestion: a 16*16 major grid aligned with DF's blocks would probably fit DF better than an "arbitrary" 10*10  one. However, it depends on what you use if for, I guess. If you're counting tiles decimal fits humans better, but if you try to align things with DF's divisions the hex one works better.

Yeah I mean it's arbitrary in the sense that most human civilizations have adopted a base 10 system in recent years. Making the major grid 16x16 would make it very obvious where to put those lines. You would just divide each embark tile into a 3x3 grid, where as with a 10x10 major grid, it's not going to line up with embark tiles.

That said, dwarf fortress is a PC game, and this is the kind of thing which could be made configurable. And if DF provided you with the numerical dimensions of whatever box you're dragging out as you do it, you wouldn't need the grid for counting as much as for an easy reference.

[Manveru Taurënér]

Honestly, the little entry-ramp looks fine to me. Fits nicely with the other ramps, and still reads OK as an opening into the underground.

Maybe I'm just weird, dunno. For me it shifts the entire 3D perspective to where the tunnels seem to be one z-level higher than it should be.

[Uthimienure]

Honestly, the little entry-ramp looks fine to me. Fits nicely with the other ramps, and still reads OK as an opening into the underground.

Maybe I'm just weird, dunno. For me it shifts the entire 3D perspective to where the tunnels seem to be one z-level higher than it should be.

For me too.  It looks weird because the bottom of the ramp doesn't reach all the way to the z-level below.
Visually, I see a dwarf walking south, halfway up a grass slope, then entering underneath the brown floor.
The dark "in-shadow" look of the little triangle appears to be leading underneath the brown floor.

[Starver]

I think the problem with the ramp is that it doesn't appear to fit the ground.

Code: [Select]

Minor heights above Z
000000000|000000000|00000000
000000000|000000000|00000000
---------+---------+---------
000000000|000000000|000000000
111111111|111111111|111111111
222222222|222222222|222222222
333333333|333333333|333333333
444444444|444444444|444444444
555555555|555545555|555555555
666666666|666545666|666666666
777777777|776545677|777777777
888888888|876545678|888888888
---------+!!!!!!!!!+---------
#########|000000000|#########
#########|000000000|#########
That entry-with-ramps is obviously designed to work with a single-width channel (in the layer above) terminating in a convex half-channel (ramps up to all points of compass except North, in this case).

I would suggest perhaps something more like:

Code: [Select]

000000000
111111111
222222222
333333333
444444444
5.4.3.4.5
654323456
7.4.1.4.7
864202468
(dots aren't integer values, which doesn't matter in shade gradients but buggers up my diagram)

That's if we don't go for the full "double-steep sides" format:

Code: [Select]

000000000
111101111
222202222
333202333
444202444
554202455
664202466
764202467
864202468
...but we've already gone through the pros and cons of that imagery, and if we've gone for half-depth trench rather than double-steepness (in general, you'll note my first recommendation has fringes at double-steep gradient, though it adheres to the half-depth philosophy) then the latter might look out of place. And don't forget that an entryway of this form[1]

An alternate plan, though not easily diagramised at that resulution of ASCII, is to have a conic-style "inner-pillar" that emphasises the transition between (either kind of) slit-trench and flat (not necessarily indoors) ground. Sort of a folded-curtain effect is the best way I can describe it.

Spoiler: And it's not easy to cater for *every* case (click to show/hide)

A long time ago, I mapped out all possible ramping combinations (each of the eight compass-rose points could be tied to zero (must be ground level, no access to Z+1 in that direction), one (must be a ramp connection, no access to Z=0 in that direction), neither (only verticalities, free to float as most convenient to each adjacent direction, either or both of which may themselves be neither) or both (no connection of its own, but the adjacents are zero and one, that need to be transitioned between). A subset of these 8⁴ versions (including reflections and rotations, naturally) mapped from the various combinations of adjacent flat-access (including to a lower adjacent ramp-up), ramp-access, sheer-wall or sheer-drop.

Then I started looking at how to blend any given tile's 'ramp-edge' with any 'ramp-edgec any-or-all of the eight adjacent tiles might consider presenting (themselves seeking to blend with this tile, if they're also ramping, though not ramping specifically to our original tile). That's when it got complicated.

But this comparatively simple one is almost a doddle to service.

[1] A wagon-entrance can get away with a profile of 88|876543210|000000000|012345678|88 at its deepest, which could be several tiles long, but it still might look confusing when meeting totally-non-rampy ##|000000000|000000000|000000000|## on the next tile along, without any perspective view on the 'cliff edge', which I already know why we don't get to see in tile-details like this.

[Bumber]

Concerning Rekov's grid suggestion: a 16*16 major grid aligned with DF's blocks would probably fit DF better than an "arbitrary" 10*10  one. However, it depends on what you use if for, I guess. If you're counting tiles decimal fits humans better, but if you try to align things with DF's divisions the hex one works better.

Shift+Direction moves by 10. 16 grid fits perfectly to all embark sizes, though.

[Ray_Anor]

Concerning Rekov's grid suggestion: a 16*16 major grid aligned with DF's blocks would probably fit DF better than an "arbitrary" 10*10  one. However, it depends on what you use if for, I guess. If you're counting tiles decimal fits humans better, but if you try to align things with DF's divisions the hex one works better.

What if give an option to set the player's settings about the size of the major grid?

[voliol]

It’s probably less clear that ramps exist as a separate thing that’s not just graphical flavor to the hillsides, now that they melt into the environment. I can see some noobs being confused, but they still have to learn about ramps, so it’s inevitable.

[Bumber]

Depends on if they can parse what's going on in the image I guess, to me at least it just looks really weird.

At the very least there should be shading between the ramp and the hall, like there is at the bottom of the ramps.

[PatrikLundell]

Concerning Rekov's grid suggestion: a 16*16 major grid aligned with DF's blocks would probably fit DF better than an "arbitrary" 10*10  one. However, it depends on what you use if for, I guess. If you're counting tiles decimal fits humans better, but if you try to align things with DF's divisions the hex one works better.

What if give an option to set the player's settings about the size of the major grid?

I did hesitate suggesting an option as that means more work for Toady to code the option selection up, and time is not an abundant resource. However, an option would be good.

[Meph]

The ramp does look a bit odd, I think a freestanding 4-way ramp would fit better there.

Anyhow, what do you guys think about the grass? We cut back on the more varied grasses after some worries about it looking too distracting. We haven't really touched them since, but now I think it's time to revisit that area. Here the look of the current sprites. There would be some variation added with lighter/darker tiles, just like the grass in the latest screenshots/video.

[Starver]

If we want to avoid the 'too distracting' (YMMV), perhaps the 2nd and 3rd need to be avoided, though I'd be happy with them myself. #4 is actually a hotch-potch of surfaces and features (but because it is). I like the variations in 5+6, 7 looks '8-bit flat' again (might as well have no variation, some might say - or wish for). The last I like, though I imagine for those who don't like 'uselessly busy' or think there's supposed to be something there[1] the tuft variation would be excessive.


[1] I'm assuming I'm reading each one right, myself, not mistaking actual clumps of Gatherable Plants for mere eye-candy grass, etc. (Do we have an idea what a larger set of GPs look like, yet, similarly atop of whatever range of grass graphics we care have them on?)

[PatrikLundell]

Since you're looking for opinions I'll provide mine. Take it for what it's worth.

I find #1 to be boringly uniform, #2 to be about right, and #3 to be a bit distracting, but wouldn't be upset about #3 either.
#4 looks like a mess (which is understandable if it's a variation of surfaces), #5 looks OK on the mild side, #6 is OK if all the things looking like shrubs are shrubs, but not if some of them are intended to be grass variation (bamboo is going to be a challenge, though, given that it doesn't look like a lawn or pasture in real life).
#7 and #8 are both fine, although my preference would probably be in between those, but go for #8 if I had to select one or the other.