Print

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

[Funkadelic Jive Turkey]

NPC civ towns are never exactly "bustling" at this point, it'd be the same kinda hit that 50 more horses would add -significant maybe, catastrophic not.

Honestly, I've been worried about pc requirements, as I like to have large forts, but the more I think about it the more I think it'll be alright in the end. Code optimization + newer technology will fix it in time. And I'm not suggesting upgrading your PC for a single game, but I've a feeling by the time the game has left "alpha", most of us will have upgraded for one reason or another.

In the meantime, those of us that experience slowdowns will have to do without hundreds of dwarves + hundreds of animals underneath settlements, which really isn't so bad... honestly I challenge anyone to know WTF 50% of their dwarves are doing by the time they start to get slowdowns.

[Pnx]

I dunno this stuff has to be gotten out of the way at some point and I think I would rather get it out of the way now then have it interfere with the game later. But I'll tell you what would be REALLY confusing is placing a fortress on another fortress...
Imagine the issues and bugs that would have.

But it's all Toady's decision in the end.

[Mechanoid]

quote:Originally posted by Skyrage:
Obviously all Toady has to do is set some kind of border or radius around existing settlements which disallows you to settle too near.

Why? I can understand a in-game stone wall that the humans have made to stop invaders that you could eventually undermine or 'diplomacy' your way through, but creating an invisible "No, you can't do that here" is a little much to stop player interferance, and if anything, that would demonstrate that the game isn't as free-action as it claims to be.

If there are invisible walls over human /elf /dwarf towns that were made durring world gen, you may as well forbid the player from digging into 1-tile mountain peices on the world map, to stop them from making a short-cut to the other side...

[As for dwarves living 'outside' on the hills, let them. Living exposed on the mountainside has it's benifits (easy farming; no cave adaption) but also it's detractions (easilly-defeatable melee army; civilian population heavilly exposed) which ultimately ballance the entire situation...

Assuming the Ai of NPC towns will be beefed enough to mine their own ore and forge their own weapons (has to happen eventually; where do you think they get the stuff?) building on a human town would be a bad idea, not because humans are there, but because the natural resources of the area will be strained, and you may not be able to grow properly.
... In fact, once goblins use resources like iron and copper by physically removing it from the mountain and refining it into weaponry and armor, you will no longer be able to have an infinite source of iron from seiges, because their source is just as limited as yours is, if not more.]

[ July 07, 2007: Message edited by: Mechanoid ]

[Stromko]

They certainly should allow you to make a fortress that is also a tunnel, that'd actually make a very adventurous shortcut if it's ever abandoned or falls to a siege. It'll be riddled with dangerous critters if it's anything like how abandoned forts are now. If it's still an active fort, it's hard to say for sure the dwarves would mind anybody and everybody passing through their forts; they could just set up a bunch of shops along the way and take them for everything they're worth  

As for dwarf fortresses beginning in towns and sites.. I think relations would start souring the instant they started digging or placing buildings, unless there was a way to form some agreement with the locals that allowed you to start settling and working in their territory. I'm not sure if the coding for such agreements would be worth it for such limited occurences.

Generally speaking when a group enters your territory, wishing to govern themselves and follow their own laws instead of yours, you call them invaders and deal with them accordingly. In other words, start a fortress in a human town, and their existence and yours become mutually exclusive. Civilizations do not share land, no exceptions spring to mind.

As for the worldmap tile, I think it should be considered a single town, just different. A different color for a town that includes dwarven habitation might be useful to the player, but really a civ-spot is a civ-spot.  But it's only a symbol, whatever is in the tile exists the same no matter what the map shows, so as far as I'm concerned it doesn't matter if you have two different icons that swap positions or just one.

[Dryn]

quote:Originally posted by SwiftSpear:
[QB]
It drives me nuts to no end when I set up a magma forge and general base on the far end of my fort, with the idea being that miners and metalsmiths could work autonomously without having to go back to the main base in order for any of their nessesities, and then just finding that 95% of my fortress spends most of their time trekking back and forth rather than just choosing an area to regular and staying there for the most part.

I think the next update will help with this (at least I think it is in the next release). You will be able to set up burrows that will give dwarves neigbourhoods.

quote:
and nearly every strange mood dwarf I have gets stuck on a spot outside rather then claiming a workshop

This could just be because you haven't built the right workshop. It might be more helpful if they gave you some clue as to which one they want, esp if it is a peasant that goes fay.

quote:Originally posted by Deathworks:
If there is something in the AI or rather task handling that hinders newbies, it is workshop robbing.

I feel your pain.  

You might want to try setting up a stockpile just for raw meat just outside the butchery. That way the meat will be dumped just outside and while it still wastes a haulers time it is less of a hassle.

[Stromko]

I think when you hear 'raw meat', read 'corpses'.  

If he's really sick of dwarves spending all their time hauling, one solution that springs to mind is just getting rid of all stockpiles. See stockpiles as a timesink, something to have your farmers do over the winter, and not a necessity. edit: Err, though food stockpiles are pretty damned important. Without them all your food rots and everybody dies. Oops. =)

[ July 07, 2007: Message edited by: Stromko ]

[Dryn]

Yeah sorry, corpses not meat.  

And I agree, stockpiles can take up a lot of labour. Best to wait till you have a good sized fortress. (And only dedicated haulers doing that work helps.)

[nornagon]

A side note: just found dev_now, boy am I slow. It's fascinating to watch. So fascinating, in fact, that I'd love to put it in my RSS reader. Ah. No RSS feed. :-(

*goes to look for methods of scraping pages and converting to RSS*

[Toady One]

This next version won't have burrows.  Too much on the plate already.

You can use http://www.bay12games.com/dwarves/dev_now.rss.

[ July 08, 2007: Message edited by: Toady One ]

[Gaulgath]

As long as I get to send armies to Elf Forest Retreats and burn them to the ground, I could care less about burrows.  

[Toady One]

You can't do that in the next version either, unfortunately.

[Gaulgath]

Well, there goes my hopes of using their dead bodies to climb to the top of the new Z-Axis trees.

Pray tell, how advanced will the armies be in the next version? Or will they not be really in until the one after that?

[nornagon]

quote:Originally posted by Toady One:
<STRONG>You can use http://www.bay12games.com/dwarves/dev_now.rss.</STRONG>

!!

Thanks!  

[Fieari]

My understanding is that the armies of the next version will be: Merchants, Migrants, and (possibly?) Megabeasts.  Army being defined as any creature or group of creatures who's specific location is tracked on the global map.  More "traditional" armies will come very soon.  This is the initial framework, and unbreaking all the stuff that had to break in order to lay that groundwork.

[Funkadelic Jive Turkey]

As I understand this next version is just optimized with z-axis and the foundation for all the features we're giddy about. But minus some interface clean-up, and z-axis, most things will be relatively the same.

That's fine though. Assuming the foundation is solid, we'd be seeing perk-based* versions being released more regularly.

* - By perk-based I mean more gameplay oriented features rather than technical stuff. (Of course Z-Axis will definitely change gameplay, but things like having to redefine flows, etc. aren't very interesting from a strictly player perspective.)