Print

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

[Bumber]

Or remove the woodcutter uniform, and have dwarves with the labor enabled haul around an axe (like when the hammerer fetches a war hammer, but don't drop it afterwards.)

Hunters are more complicated because they need ammo.

[FantasticDorf]

Or remove the woodcutter uniform, and have dwarves with the labor enabled haul around an axe (like when the hammerer fetches a war hammer, but don't drop it afterwards.)

Hunters are more complicated because they need ammo.

This used to be relatively easy to manage with the old military systems allocation towards giving hunters their own cache of reserved ammunition (which from today's FotF replies ammo selectivity isn't implemented yet).

Perhaps they could just be given their own barracks/hunting hide zone to base out of where they'd drag back kills too far away from butchery shops to store & store ammunition (possibly just lie silently waiting for something to come by to attack)

[Azerty]

When trade will be improved, maybe some merchants and travellers might want weapons for self-defense, and when crime will be fully developped and an underclass will be created then I could see some wealthy residents wanting to carry weapons.

[Shonai_Dweller]

When trade will be improved, maybe some merchants and travellers might want weapons for self-defense, and when crime will be fully developped and an underclass will be created then I could see some wealthy residents wanting to carry weapons.

Merchants are the most heavily armed deadly dorfs you'll ever meet most of the time. And travellers are generally armed too.

[Red Diamond]

The title of this thread is a little misleading, the game's enemies currently don't make any distinction between civilians and soldiers, it is only that the game's interface prevents civilians from being armed/armoured which is what the current situation in the game presently requires.  However the present situation isn't exactly ideal because it prevents invaders from taking over sites (like in worldgen) and instead requires them to massacre every last dwarf.  On a tactical level it is also problematic because they run around killing things that aren't a threat and getting scattered about.

The OPs ideas are really need to wait until we have a surrender mechanic.  If fighting intelligent opponants, a party with no chance of coming out on top needs to remove all their military gear and be flagged to ignore by the enemy they surrendered to.  Unarmed civilians should be flagged in the same way, but not civilians that are armed.  This means that is you arm all your civilians, what will likely happen is that you will end up giving weapons to those who will then surrender and throw said weapons onto the ground. 

I am talking about invaders here.  Hostile animals should attack everyone indiscriminately, while with bandits/criminals the priorities should be reversed, they avoid armed soldiers and target unarmed civilians as a priority. 

[ayy1337]

The title of this thread is a little misleading, the game's enemies currently don't make any distinction between civilians and soldiers, it is only that the game's interface prevents civilians from being armed/armoured which is what the current situation in the game presently requires.  However the present situation isn't exactly ideal because it prevents invaders from taking over sites (like in worldgen) and instead requires them to massacre every last dwarf.  On a tactical level it is also problematic because they run around killing things that aren't a threat and getting scattered about.

The OPs ideas are really need to wait until we have a surrender mechanic.  If fighting intelligent opponants, a party with no chance of coming out on top needs to remove all their military gear and be flagged to ignore by the enemy they surrendered to.  Unarmed civilians should be flagged in the same way, but not civilians that are armed.  This means that is you arm all your civilians, what will likely happen is that you will end up giving weapons to those who will then surrender and throw said weapons onto the ground. 

I am talking about invaders here.  Hostile animals should attack everyone indiscriminately, while with bandits/criminals the priorities should be reversed, they avoid armed soldiers and target unarmed civilians as a priority. 

Whoa whoa who said anything about wanting their dwarves to surrender? I want them to go armed and into battle more, the problem is they won't do that now because Urist McLumberdorf thinks he needs to go grab a different battle axe before charging in, gets caught naked, and dies.

[Tamren]

I don't see any reason why we shouldn't be able to create uniforms for civilians too and assign workers different uniforms based on their job. There are so many potential uses for this beyond simply making everyone a soldier by default.

For instance maybe you want your miners to wear iron hard hats and leather gloves as standard, which is both practical and thematic. Or maybe you have embarked on a terrifying glacier and you want your civilians to both wear a shirt of chainmail at all times as well as several layers of warm clothing.

A uniform system does not need to involve armour at all, it could literally be a uniform. If I was making a logging and woodworking themed company town of a fortress I could mandate that every fortress resident should perform all wood related tasks like tree felling, carpentry, wood burning etc. While at the same time enforcing a strict dress code of shirt, pants and steel toed boots for both men and women. Cloaks, dresses and the like are not allowed as they are not OSHA approved.

[Red Diamond]

Whoa whoa who said anything about wanting their dwarves to surrender? I want them to go armed and into battle more, the problem is they won't do that now because Urist McLumberdorf thinks he needs to go grab a different battle axe before charging in, gets caught naked, and dies.

It isn't about what we the player want to happen.  It is about the problem of seeing to it that when we lose to an invasion, everybody isn't dead.  Presently that is the case in world-gen but not in fortress mode.  The whole idea of turning everybody into a (bad) soldier follows from a situation that is itself a discrepancy between world-gen and fortress mode.  Since enemies treat everybody as an enemy, armed or otherwise; that means it 'makes sense' to turn everybody into a soldier. 

If enemies do not just kill everybody indiscrimately, there appears benefits to having properly harmless civilians rather than turning them into bad soldiers that will get killed in 5 minutes if they go up against properly trained soldiers.  Having beaten/outmatched soldiers surrender, helps to prevent the result of us arming the whole population being everybody being dead. 

I don't see any reason why we shouldn't be able to create uniforms for civilians too and assign workers different uniforms based on their job. There are so many potential uses for this beyond simply making everyone a soldier by default.

For instance maybe you want your miners to wear iron hard hats and leather gloves as standard, which is both practical and thematic. Or maybe you have embarked on a terrifying glacier and you want your civilians to both wear a shirt of chainmail at all times as well as several layers of warm clothing.

A uniform system does not need to involve armour at all, it could literally be a uniform. If I was making a logging and woodworking themed company town of a fortress I could mandate that every fortress resident should perform all wood related tasks like tree felling, carpentry, wood burning etc. While at the same time enforcing a strict dress code of shirt, pants and steel toed boots for both men and women. Cloaks, dresses and the like are not allowed as they are not OSHA approved.

What if not everybody wants to wear your uniform?  You aren't really important enough in the game to decide the fashion preferences of an entire civilisation on a whim.

[jipehog]

The problem is that someone like me will put the whole fort in armor to passively train their armor use skill, ending with the colony turning into knight order with everyone in "power armor".

This should take in to account encumbrance i.e. wearing armor or carrying weapons should reduce a person capacity to effectively preform other tasks. Also I think it should give most bad thoughts, from being constricted in their choice of clothing and i doubt anyone enjoy being forced to wear some same sweaty constricting armor while operating the magma forge for example

Also given the how time handled in DF (people can go on for month without eating) and simplification involved, with military only having the concept of on/off duty, i am leaning toward how things are handled right now.   

[FantasticDorf]

A uniform system does not need to involve armour at all, it could literally be a uniform. If I was making a logging and woodworking themed company town of a fortress I could mandate that every fortress resident should perform all wood related tasks like tree felling, carpentry, wood burning etc. While at the same time enforcing a strict dress code of shirt, pants and steel toed boots for both men and women. Cloaks, dresses and the like are not allowed as they are not OSHA approved.

In a way, i think the player would enjoy the experience of giving dwarves a strict uniform vs the freedom to add trinkets/garments to whatever fits outside of pure practicality.

Especially hot environments with dwarves overheating in their wool mittens, cloaks and hoods might not be appropriate if that contributive factor to adding heat was implemented rather than just combatting it with the insualtive properties of wool (on the sheep yarn details), but rather wander around as sparsely as possible in a shirt and loincloth. (ofc there's also creatures like centaurs who have unusual biology, so might benefit from wearing scarcely any civilian clothing at all as players have been trying to achieve for a long time but the game keeps thwarting them on the 'need' to wear clothes without DFhack)

As well as reducing the natural costage of either drafting everyone in the military to reduce clothes, or specifically ordering the clothes to be replaced on your soldiers so there's a optimal amount of layer-space for them to store their weapons on the body without having a coat or multiple layers in the way.

What if not everybody wants to wear your uniform?  You aren't really important enough in the game to decide the fashion preferences of an entire civilisation on a whim.

If its cultural to wear a thing in a particular way, it might not be more different than hairstyles civ per civ, but specifying against the norm for that particular creature or civilian is just good gameplay. Like "Urgh, they made me wear a helmet, this is really uncomfortable and feels weird"

[SixOfSpades]

Merchants are the most heavily armed deadly dorfs you'll ever meet most of the time.

Merchants' bodyguards are among the most deadly dwarves, because they are active militia. The merchants themselves are not, because they are civilians. Which is the "problem" I addressed in the OP; combat readiness/willingness is currently an On/Off switch, when it should ideally be more like a dimmer knob.

The OPs ideas are really need to wait until we have a surrender mechanic.

Err, no. While I agree that surrendering (on a more individual level than the fortress-wide "Succumb to the Invasion" option available in the Fort-mode Menu during a siege) would be a very flavorful option to have, it's hardly a necessity, or indeed even as desirable as giving one's dwarves the ability to protect themselves with things that they really should be wearing/carrying in the first place. To be sure, dwarves fleeing from, and even surrendering to, enemies is a very realistic possibility--ONE possibility, among many--and it should be chosen only by the more cowardly or pacifist dwarves, who have led more sedate lives, and who have very little in the way of military training or equipment. Every other dwarf, however, should be mentally ready--and indeed willing--to fight to the death, their only concerns should be about whether or not there's a reasonable chance of survival, and if they'll be able to buy others time to escape. In my opinion, that scenario paints a far more "dwarven" picture than that of half your fort immediately throwing down their tools so they can be led off to slavery.

I don't see any reason why we shouldn't be able to create uniforms for civilians too and assign workers different uniforms based on their job. There are so many potential uses for this beyond simply making everyone a soldier by default. . . . A uniform system does not need to involve armour at all, it could literally be a uniform.

Precisely, there's a TON of possible scope in this. Once trade guilds get fleshed out, they could submit petitions for the overseer to provide them with things like protective leather aprons & safety glasses. Large & important families could distinguish themselves by instigating livery, in which members of their household wear (reasonably) standardized garments, dyed in particular colors and/or decorated with specific images. The faithful of different gods could do it too. Etc.

The mechanic that one kind of uniform (e.g., Hunter) will "conflict" with another kind (Marksdwarf) may have been an easy/logical choice in DF's early stages of development, but it bars the way to just so much potential richness of flavor & realism that I for one say it really needs to go.

You aren't really important enough in the game to decide the fashion preferences of an entire civilisation on a whim.

Why not? You certainly already decide damn near everything else. Where people eat / sleep / work / worship, the defensive layout of your settlement, the allocation of workers & resources to the various industries. The location, direction, & scale of the fort's agriculture. Its trade & military relations with its various neighbors. The kind of medical care your citizens receive. You can plunge your whole civilization into WAR if you choose to, you can theoretically even burn down your entire CONTINENT. Considering that you control whether or not your dwarves have clothes to wear at all, choosing what they will wear seems a trifling detail by comparison.

This should take in to account encumbrance i.e. wearing armor or carrying weapons should reduce a person capacity to effectively preform other tasks.

Especially hot environments with dwarves overheating in their wool mittens, cloaks and hoods might not be appropriate if that contributive factor to adding heat was implemented . . .

Indeed. This whole thread would not be a balanced suggestion if giving one's civilians arms & armor did not carry its own appropriate drawbacks. Which is why I've already mentioned things like gauntlets hampering fine motor skills, & others have raised the possibility of tavern brawls escalating into lethal knife fights, etc. Armor's effects on various aspects of civilian life (encumbrance, comfort, agility, temperature, fatigue, ability to swim/climb, etc.) should all be considered, both by Toady himself and by each individual player. Now, a given player might indeed weigh the advantages & disadvantages of an armed citizenry, and choose not to avail himself of that option . . . I'm just saying that armed & armored civilians is an option that each player certainly should have.

[Pillbo]

The OPs ideas are really need to wait until we have a surrender mechanic.  If fighting intelligent opponants, a party with no chance of coming out on top needs to remove all their military gear and be flagged to ignore by the enemy they surrendered to.  Unarmed civilians should be flagged in the same way, but not civilians that are armed.  This means that is you arm all your civilians, what will likely happen is that you will end up giving weapons to those who will then surrender and throw said weapons onto the ground. 

I am talking about invaders here.  Hostile animals should attack everyone indiscriminately, while with bandits/criminals the priorities should be reversed, they avoid armed soldiers and target unarmed civilians as a priority. 
...
It isn't about what we the player want to happen.  It is about the problem of seeing to it that when we lose to an invasion, everybody isn't dead.  Presently that is the case in world-gen but not in fortress mode.  The whole idea of turning everybody into a (bad) soldier follows from a situation that is itself a discrepancy between world-gen and fortress mode.  Since enemies treat everybody as an enemy, armed or otherwise; that means it 'makes sense' to turn everybody into a soldier. 

This is a different suggestion you should make, most fighting in my forts is with wildlife/monsters/megabeasts. The world they live in constantly presents them with life or death fights, so they should be able to deal with it.

[jipehog]

I've already mentioned things like gauntlets hampering fine motor skills, & others have raised the possibility of tavern brawls escalating into lethal knife fights, etc. Armor's effects on various aspects of civilian life (encumbrance, comfort, agility, temperature, fatigue, ability to swim/climb, etc.)

We already have some of these implemented for military use but I think the penalties would need to be much harsher to people and equipment (maybe even bring back armor wear) in daily tasks. And a system that goes into such details (like jewelers can use gauntlets) might get really complicated trying to encompass all armor variants (type/material), professions, and conditions of life.

Otherwise, if that is implemented, there is going to be a need to handle military inventory better, so we might need an option to assign equipment to specific barracks (btw do the shared and armor/weapon rack system finally works?)

Precisely, there's a TON of possible scope in this. Once trade guilds get fleshed out, they could submit petitions for the overseer to provide them with things like protective leather aprons & safety glasses. Large & important families could distinguish themselves by instigating livery, in which members of their household wear (reasonably) standardized garments, dyed in particular colors and/or decorated with specific images. The faithful of different gods could do it too. Etc.

The mechanic that one kind of uniform (e.g., Hunter) will "conflict" with another kind (Marksdwarf) may have been an easy/logical choice in DF's early stages of development, but it bars the way to just so much potential richness of flavor & realism that I for one say it really needs to go.

That is interesting, but I think that the ability to assign work clothing/outfits and armor/weapons is in different categories. But I would add that in either case I would love to have an option that allow to force a certain item condition. for example that only XItemX and better are used.

[Red Diamond]

Err, no. While I agree that surrendering (on a more individual level than the fortress-wide "Succumb to the Invasion" option available in the Fort-mode Menu during a siege) would be a very flavorful option to have, it's hardly a necessity, or indeed even as desirable as giving one's dwarves the ability to protect themselves with things that they really should be wearing/carrying in the first place. To be sure, dwarves fleeing from, and even surrendering to, enemies is a very realistic possibility--ONE possibility, among many--and it should be chosen only by the more cowardly or pacifist dwarves, who have led more sedate lives, and who have very little in the way of military training or equipment. Every other dwarf, however, should be mentally ready--and indeed willing--to fight to the death, their only concerns should be about whether or not there's a reasonable chance of survival, and if they'll be able to buy others time to escape. In my opinion, that scenario paints a far more "dwarven" picture than that of half your fort immediately throwing down their tools so they can be led off to slavery.

That can be your head-canon regarding your own dwarves, but that isn't how world-gen works.  In worldgen, existing dwarf fortresses are taken over, they don't all fight to death and the idea is to have world-gen and fortress mode move together, not apart over time.

Part of the reason that fortress mode cannot be harmonised with world-gen is the exact thing that you are proposing we increase, the invaders do not know who the civilians are and who the soliders are.  Surrending gives the game a means of dealing with the situation where you just turned your fortress population into crap-tier soldiers and mobbed the enemy army with them.  Your 'soldiers' should just surrender and become 'civilians' living under enemy occupation. 

Why not? You certainly already decide damn near everything else. Where people eat / sleep / work / worship, the defensive layout of your settlement, the allocation of workers & resources to the various industries. The location, direction, & scale of the fort's agriculture. Its trade & military relations with its various neighbors. The kind of medical care your citizens receive. You can plunge your whole civilization into WAR if you choose to, you can theoretically even burn down your entire CONTINENT. Considering that you control whether or not your dwarves have clothes to wear at all, choosing what they will wear seems a trifling detail by comparison.

Yes, but it doesn't mean they have to like everything you do,

It is also why they need to, in extreme cases be able to overthrow you, the player and forcibly retire your fortress, forever. 

[ayy1337]

I can confidently say I don't think anyone wants masses of their civilians to surrender to the enemy in a siege lmao, whether that happens in worldgen or not.

Besides which it's difficult to imagine a goblin invasion force treating your surrendered civilians honorably instead of just killing them or torturing them to death for fun.