Print

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

[Gaulgath]

The different color of the ramps represent the material of them, such as green for grass, grey for rock, etc.

Toady: Damn, those new towns look fantastic. Can't wait to explore the world in adventure mode!

[Abalieno]

What's tentative release date for the new version considering what's still on the to-do list?

Also, two points that are important for me:

- Rewalling will be in for the next version or it will be pushed back?

- Are we going to have some control on migrants so that we can accept only those who are needed and fit in the economy or we still have to resort to cheap tricks like trapping them to kill them? I think there is something on the to-do list about this.

[Wood Gnome]

perhaps once the apropriate noble arrives you would receive a report in spring informing you what immigrants are petitioning to move into your fortress and you could either accept or refuse them individually.

"sorry, don't need any more jewelers, but i'll take that farmer and the three forgeworkers, thanks..."

also, perhaps once the new version is released a new thread should be started for "Future of the Fortress".  sixty-some pages is quite a lot  

[ July 11, 2007: Message edited by: Wood Gnome ]

[axus]

Something that just occurred to me for the view of lower Z-levels, maybe the cyan color could just be at the border between Z-levels, and show the level below as normal.  Anything existing or flying on the same Z-level in the "sky" area would have the cyan border around it also, to prevent confusion with things that are below.

[Rictus]

quote:Originally posted by Wood Gnome:
<STRONG>perhaps once the apropriate noble arrives you would receive a report in spring informing you what immigrants are petitioning to move into your fortress and you could either accept or refuse them individually.

"sorry, don't need any more jewelers, but i'll take that farmer and the three forgeworkers, thanks..."

also, perhaps once the new version is released a new thread should be started for "Future of the Fortress".  sixty-some pages is quite a lot    

[ July 11, 2007: Message edited by: Wood Gnome ]</STRONG>

Hmm...too open to abuse I reckon.  If there is a method for refusing immigrants then it should be an all or nothing option, with declining immigrants if there are constant refusals.

[Abalieno]

quote:Originally posted by Rictus:
<STRONG>Hmm...too open to abuse I reckon.</STRONG>

I don't want anything that isn't possible already. I just would like it to be more consistent and better presented.

You already can kill all those dwarves you don't want. The design problem here is that this game isn't a "God game", the player's hand should be seen as less as possible and all the actions should be carried over by the dwarves themselves.

In theory it should be possible to just maintain a small fortress if you choose so. This would become especially interesting when you can start different sites, all using independent resources, so that you can chunk down the organization better.

[Geekwad]

quote:Originally posted by Toady One:
<STRONG>With caravans being sent out from the fortress, I haven't thought so much about that, and who'd be more in charge of that, as far as enterprising dwarves vs. the player, especially when they arrive at their destinations.  ...</STRONG>

I've always presumed that the Adventure/Fortress split was a temporary affectation until the game was developed enough to make it seamless.  I've since realized I'm probably wrong, but a lot of these difficult design questions just go away when you assume that the split is temporary.

I had expected that some day, I'd be able to take the followers I'd collected in Adventure Mode and go off and start a settlement.  The PC would continue to exist in this new "Fortress Mode", and orders would have to be relayed through a command chain; initially your PC would automatically walk around barking commands, later you'd have a bunch of pages and tubes (like on an old ship) to relay them.

The pain of PC death, which would otherwise mean the death of the Fortress as far as the player was concerned, could be reduced by allowing the player to take over the next highest-ranking character.

In addition to creating fortresses, these well-integrated PCs would also have the ability to found independant caravans for trading.  In "Fortress Mode", whether the PC controls the caravan or whether an NPC does would simply depend on whether the PC chooses to lead it or stay home.

The same would apply to leading armies, which could lead to very difficult choices for the player -- always a good thing.  Do you lead the offense or the defense?  Or do you just take all the gems, your best followers, and flee like the tinpot dictator we all secretly love to be?

[ July 11, 2007: Message edited by: Geekwad ]

[Toady One]

You can change the level viewed in dwarf mode freely.  In adventure mode, you can do it already with the look command (with <> ).

Yeah, right now when they embed themselves in the hillside, they place a wall on top of the roof wherever the cliff was.  I don't have a tile that has a wooden base and a <soil> wall, so they just place a wooden wall.  Each square is a main+floor combinations, which is why this issue arose.  It wouldn't hurt to have a rock ceiling, but a 'sand' ceiling would be odd, and would cause problems once I get caveins back in.  I haven't run a ramp space nuking routine on any of the maps yet, so there are some residual downslopes on all the maps.  Yeah, colors for ramps are the soil/grass/etc type.  You can make the ground uniform.  That changes ,.'` into . and sandy tildes become uniformly double tildes.

I have no release date.  I think rewalling will still make it in at this point.  There's nothing on to-do about controlling the current version migrants.  There are issues with the new migrant groups dropping by which is too disruptive right now.  This doesn't impact current version migrants.  There was a suggestion thread or two floating around about how to handle immigration but I'm not acting on that until the new migrants groups have completely replaced the old migrants, which isn't going to happen this version.

Using a cyan border is roughly like the topo-lines idea that's discussed somewhere up there.  The lines retain more information and the cyan border sticks with the ascii display, I guess.  Anyway, I'm not sure I'll be doing any of that at this point now that things have taken so long.

Geekwad, adventurers founding settlements is up on a dev in a few ways.  You'll be able to settle wherever you like, or lead a group to reclaim a site, at the minimum.  However, while you describe the dwarf/adventure mode split as a temporary affectation, there's no reason why a fortress should always have a "PC" in it, especially as a way to resolve design issues.  Having the dwarves act autonomously is a feature of dwarf mode, and while that might differ from how a PC founded outpost functions, the design questions surrounding dwarf mode remain.

[qwertyuiopas]

Is it possible to make an AI that can form forts based on what human players do that succeeds, in FORTRESS MODE? It would be an almost useless feature unless the player can go from fort mode to adventure mode by selecting a dwarf to control. Also, in adventure mode, you should be able to do ALL tha things that dwarves can do in fort mode. I havent played much, but those would be nice.

[Geekwad]

Thanks for the response, Toady One!

quote:Originally posted by Toady One:
<STRONG>...there's no reason why a fortress should always have a "PC" in it, especially as a way to resolve design issues.  Having the dwarves act autonomously is a feature of dwarf mode...</STRONG>

Just riffing.  I would not want to sacrifice the convenience of the current Forturess interface.  I would have had the "PC" behave autonomously when in command mode.  Its task queue would consist solely of issuing further tasks to others through various means and subordinates.

The only game I can think of that works that way is Bullfrog's Powermonger.  I loved that my orders had a physical manifestation (in that case, carrier pigeons) and that there was no "spooky action at a distance".  It opens up a lot of possibilities for espionage and sabotauge, which unfortunately Powermonger did not explore.  I've always thought it was an underexpoited means of layering some interesting complexity on top of logistics and resource oriented games.

Fortunately, I get to ignore the complete overhaul that would be required to implement a real chain of command.  ;-)

[0x517A5D]

quote:Originally posted by Eiba:
<STRONG>
This is just one of those phrases that you read and think, "I never imagined I'd read that that phrase."</STRONG>

In my opinion it doesn't beat "Your world was destroyed by the price of plant cheese."

(Why doesn't this web board have a preview-post function?)

out 0x517A5D, 0xD

[Faces of Mu]

quote:Originally posted by Abalieno:
<STRONG>
I don't want anything that isn't possible already. I just would like it to be more consistent and better presented.

You already can kill all those dwarves you don't want. The design problem here is that this game isn't a "God game", the player's hand should be seen as less as possible and all the actions should be carried over by the dwarves themselves.

In theory it should be possible to just maintain a small fortress if you choose so. This would become especially interesting when you can start different sites, all using independent resources, so that you can chunk down the organization better.</STRONG>

Toady could create a concentration camp building. Here you stuff all the immigrants that you think are useless or threatening to your culture, promise them release when their visa apps go through but never ever deliver, deny them all the rights normal citizens and human beings have including proper health care and freedom of choices, and allow them to raise children there. You would only start letting some out when you wanted them or people started tantrumming on the outside, and not once would you lift a finger to help the nation that has made these dwarves migrate in the first place.

But seriously, go to the init file and take the population cap down to whatever you want. Make sure you exit yr game and reload. Then you'll have the small fortress of yr dreams (with some exceptions: children + nobles).

[qwertyuiopas]

Couldnt you just remove the children?
Mules dont have them.....
And why waste your traps on the inaders? They are for killing nobles.

[Will]

so it would appear that lakes and ponds now have depth do does that mean we will sink in them now (if we dodge in?

[Veroule]

I removed children in my fortress.  One way is fun, let them breed some then execute 4 siblings at once.  Instant tantrums from the parents and all other siblings.  Another fun way is execute all of one gender that comes to your fortress.

Finally the easy way is mod them out for yourself.  That is one of the great things that Toady has done.  Yes, it is a very real simulation.  In some ways that makes it even more real that we are the god of that world.