Print

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

[schnobs]

So now we've come around full circle, I believe. IIRC the current rewalling discussion in this thread was occasioned by the fear that future siegers may be able to dig, thus turning the carefully designed fortress into sort of a swiss cheese.

I share TomTheHands opinion:  

quote:I think that if you're the kind of person who'll exploit rewalling by simply walling the entrance of the fortress up, you're the kind of person who's already got a flood-the-world-with-magma lever.

I'd also like to point out that digging alone won't necessarily suffice; not if there's an obstacle like a river that needs to be crossed. Invaders trying to force their way across while defenders shower them with bolts... could be interesting. Provided the defenders actually show up and don't go on break instead.

[Xeirxes]

I'm sure that in the future, rewalling and magma floods would easily be discouraged by side effects; imagine if the magma actually burnt grass, trees, and the river out, for like 10 years. It would probably discourage use of it.

And rewalling? Well, dwarves need air, right?

[Capntastic]

quote:Originally posted by Xeirxes:
<STRONG>And rewalling? Well, dwarves need air, right?</STRONG>

Been there, discussed that.

[Zaratustra]

Stale air would probably not be needed. Now that there's no guaranteed chasm inside the mountain, the dwarves will have to place the refuse somewhere in the open before it stinks up the place.

[schnobs]

Never mind stale air, locking themselves up is a drastical measure. Refuse has just been mentioned; it will also prevent all trade and immigration. If that doesn't suffice, it could still be made that dwarves *need* contact with the outside world: if noone knows about and envies us, do we even have a hoard?

[haftan]

How about this for a solution to the tunneling issue... Dwarven diggers!   :eek: Did I just blooooooowwwww your mind?  I always figured goblins stole dwarf children to keep them as blind slaves to work dig for ore.  If they are successful at kidnapping then they get tunnellers.  If not then they dont.  And they dont breed in captivity.

[Gigalith]

quote:Originally posted by Zaratustra:
<STRONG>

I'm sorry, I'll check with you if Toady is free for suggestions before giving them.</STRONG>

I don't have any more knowledge about Toady's workings that anyone else here. I'm just giving my guess on how coding it might take.

[ March 12, 2007: Message edited by: Gigalith ]

[Tylui]

Look, I'm sorry for what I'm about to do...  I've only been on these forums for about 2 or 3 weeks, but I think this needs to be said.

We know you all want enemy miners and rewalling.  I'm almost positive that Toady knows it.  About every other thread I read has at least something about it in there.  If I'm not mistaken, he'd say he'd put it in there eventually in the future.  Now, this thread is called "Future of the Fortress", but I'm pretty sure it means the immediate future... As in what's currently being added.  So let's get back to that... Please?

quote:Originally posted by haftan:
<STRONG>
... river, lava and chasm as 100% likely?  And the river doesnt have to run the entire map.
</STRONG>

Why do those three have to be 100% likely?  Personally, I think it'd make the game more interesting to be lacking one or more of those.

quote:Originally posted by Eiba:
<STRONG>
I actually quite like the sound of that.
My only concern is that players who go into a game with a specific, or even general plan would be highly screwed over by, for instance, a lack of water... A cave climate indicator that says whether there's a source for water or lava underground might be in order...

Be sure to keep us updated as you actually add various mountain-bits back in! It would make the wait for the next release much more tolerable...</STRONG>

Sure, it'd make me angry too, if I had a plan that involved a certain situation, yet it didn't arise.  But that's interesting, IMO...

[Capntastic]

quote:Originally posted by Tylui:
<STRONG>STUFF</STRONG>

I concur on all points.

[Gigalith]

quote:Originally posted by Tylui:
<STRONG>Why do those three have to be 100% likely? Personally, I think it'd make the game more interesting to be lacking one or more of those.</STRONG>

Now there's an idea. How about a waterless map? You'd have to make a gigantic brewing operation or your dwarfs would all die. Of course, no water is no farming, and no farming is no alcohol. Still, it could get interesting.

[Combatjuan]

There is something to be said for the excitement of not having any idea what a mountain may hold.  On the other hand, many people will probably want to be guaranteed, at least sometimes, that they will have all their rivery/chasmy/magma needs met at the outset of the journey.

A nice compromise may be to have the degree of knowledge of the mountain available when choosing a site along with wildlife and climate and whatnot  Depending on the algorithm Toady uses to generate terrain, this would be hard or easy.  Only he knows (give us the source, please Toady!  (-8)  Lots of algorithms that generate terrain start from the general (Is there a river here?  How high generally are the hills?) and work toward the specific.  If this is the case, it would be relatively easy to implement a system where the Dwarves could be more or less certain of the contents of their site.  Perhaps even the "richness" of the mountain could be a property of the site.  I don't know, Toady has done a fantastic job making such decisions and I'm sure he'll come up with a sensible solution.

As sort of an aside, I don't know how much Toady cares about what his players suggest on this forum, but the fact that he reads and responds to our incessant demands and suggestions is an absolute wonder.  Thanks Toady.

The future of the fortress is bright indeed!

[haftan]

I concur with Combatjuan.  I personnally do not want tunneling, but want rewalling.  I dont see why a mountain cant have EVERYTHING in it on its z levels.  Its not a HILL!!! Its a freakin MOUNTAIN that couldnt be dismantled by 200 miners in a 1000 years. If you dont want something, like water or lava defenses, DONT USE THEM.  I want more not less.  Its like do you want to make your own home more dangerous by cutting off all water and air OR letting loose invisible rabid wolverines in the hallways?? Whats more exciting?
<invisify>

[LordBucket]

quote:it'd make me angry too, if I had a plan that involved a certain situation, yet it didn't arise

Here's a totally random thought: What if "fortress mode" were integrated with "Adventure" mode...and you could recruit people from Adventure mode, find a suitable site and colonize it, then switching you over to fortress mode?

Then add a new profession: "Surveyor" that would allow you to have an idea of what the insides of the mountain looked like? Players could choose whether to invest in it, or not.

I'm not sure I follow why, out of a strip of mountain range twenty squares long, only one or two are considered "suitable" for a fortress. Maybe do away with fixed sites, and allow a player to build anywhere he wants. He just has to wander the map looking for a place "suitable" by his own criteria, all while his food stores are diminishing. The sooner you settle, the easier it will be, but the more you search, the more chances you'll have to find the type of site you're looking for.

Bucket Man

[Eiba]

quote:Originally posted by Tylui:
<STRONG>Look, I'm sorry for what I'm about to do...  I've only been on these forums for about 2 or 3 weeks, but I think this needs to be said.

We know you all want enemy miners and rewalling.  I'm almost positive that Toady knows it.  About every other thread I read has at least something about it in there.  If I'm not mistaken, he'd say he'd put it in there eventually in the future.  Now, this thread is called "Future of the Fortress", but I'm pretty sure it means the immediate future... As in what's currently being added.  So let's get back to that... Please?</STRONG>

Hear hear!

 

quote:<STRONG>Sure, it'd make me angry too, if I had a plan that involved a certain situation, yet it didn't arise. But that's interesting, IMO...</STRONG>

Well, I think that it's the same thing as having no wood- it would be a cool game to play, but you should have some warning... I realize there's no rational reason you should be able to know, but I think there should be some sort of indication of what's inside the fortress on the selection screen, like there is for such things as vegitation. Just a simple "wet" or "dry" mountian, or something similar for magma...

Edit: Yeah, that's basically what Combatjuan proposed... Should have read more carefuly.

[ March 12, 2007: Message edited by: Eiba ]

[M@]

quote:Originally posted by Eiba:
Well, I think that it's the same thing as having no wood- it would be a cool game to play, but you should have some warning... I realize there's no rational reason you should be able to know, but I think there should be some sort of indication of what's inside the fortress on the selection screen, like there is for such things as vegitation. Just a simple "wet" or "dry" mountian, or something similar for magma...

Edit: Yeah, that's basically what Combatjuan proposed... Should have read more carefuly.

[ March 12, 2007: Message edited by: Eiba ][/QB]

Maybe a 'wet/dry mountain' indicator for water, a 'cool/hot mountain' indicator for magma (as I know that magma heats things for quite a distance thanks to a tour of a volcanic park on Lanzarote). How to indcate the presence of a chasm is a bit tougher, though.