Print

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

[Fedor]

Before I list the advantages of the old version (IMHO), I want to make it clear that 1) the new version kicks the old version's ass (IMHO) and 2) the new version's ALREADY great and will get even better as Toady matures it.  The entire point of this post, in fact, is to use the old, highly polished 2D version as a handy tool to suggest areas where additional polishing of the new 3D game would be most worthwhile.

All this said, "Something has been lost amidst the gains.":

* Rivers that flood every so often, with all the fertility, death, new resources, and engineering challenges that means.  Rivers with sand.  Rivers without roofs.  Rivers that don't need temperature ON to un-freeze.  Rivers with limestone walls and branches.
* Fully draining floods (no annoying pools of leftover 1/7 water).  Fast flooding through channels.
* Much less annoying channel-digging AI - dwarves don't dig out from under each other, get themselves trapped in the level below, or require you to wreak the nearby walls when they dig out the wrong channel and leave themselves stranded on an island.
* Less CPU-intensive flows (after initial flooding), which means no worries about making more and more fun things with water and magma.
* Indoor trees and herbs (haven't seen either yet in any game post-v23a; I'm sure others have, but they're RARE).
* Plenty of cavern dwellers with no loss of framerate except when they are doing something interesting.  Ambushes, no frighten-off-worker annoyance, replenishing underground and magma monsters.  Surprise gremlins (?), raids from wells (?).
* The ability to make far larger and more interesting fortresses before the framerate bogs down excessively on a single-core Pentium machine.
* Much less trouble to find a site with good gameplay value (a decent sub-set of the possible Neat Stuff).  In particular, there's certain to be enough energy somewhere to smelt metal and work glass, and there will always be dangerous monsters of some sort underground.
* Guarantee of liquid water (and many other things, but liquid water's more essential than most).
* Interesting rock banding and mixing instead of entire screens of nothing but a single base rock, with occasonal clusters of colored rocks, each one almost identical to other clusters of its type.
* Colored rocks, more valuable then the basic types when used for furniture or smoothing or what have you, with handy interfaces for them and special treatment in demands and moods, that don't look like ores or gold or adamantite.
* Being able to access all of your squads in the 'x' interface without looking at various z-levels for them.
* Knowledge of (approximately) where traders and immigrants will come from, instead of the current total ignorance and randomized placement that often makes preparing a safe passage past the Giant Eagles a PITA (invader placement should be a surprise of course).
* A series of escalating underground challenges, each with its own rewards.  This is the feature I miss the most, by a long, long way.  The more valuable gems past the river, the iron and gold past the chasm, the magma, and finally, far far away and not just 10-15 z-levels down, the admantite beyond (not in front of) the deadly Pits - these add gameplay value and wonderment missing in the 3D version at the moment.

Hope this list is thought useful.

[Sector 7]

It seems like adding in the river/chasm/magma wouldn't really be possible on 3d - but I do agree, there should be a higher chance of interesting features when selecting a site.

[Bricktop]

What the game really needs for more interesting gameplay is more hidden stuff. At the moment there is barely any challenge. The armies will probably add a bit more challenge as seiges could be more common, but we need more stuff underground. There have been hundreds of topics listing loads of possibilities ranging from buried temples to caverns full of dinosaurs.

[CharonX]

quote:Originally posted by Fedor:
Before I list the advantages of the old version (IMHO), I want to make it clear that 1) the new version kicks the old version's ass (IMHO) and 2) the new version's ALREADY great and will get even better as Toady matures it.  The entire point of this post, in fact, is to use the old, highly polished 2D version as a handy tool to suggest areas where additional polishing of the new 3D game would be most worthwhile.

All this said, "Something has been lost amidst the gains.":

* Rivers that flood every so often, with all the fertility, death, new resources, and engineering challenges that means.  Rivers with sand.  Rivers without roofs.  Rivers that don't need temperature ON to un-freeze.  Rivers with limestone walls and branches.

Floods would be nice (even though they'd wreck the CPU load with flow-stuff). Rivers do have sand-banks. Rivers without roofs? Ah, you mean the "brook" issue - try starting in a stream tile. Can't agree on the unfreeze without temp, that's what temperature does. Branching rivers are also part of the game afaik.

quote:
* Fully draining floods (no annoying pools of leftover 1/7 water).  Fast flooding through channels.

Sorry, no way to do that - 1/7 water is basically "moist floor". And water speed is capped with flow mechanics.

quote:
* Much less annoying channel-digging AI - dwarves don't dig out from under each other, get themselves trapped in the level below, or require you to wreak the nearby walls when they dig out the wrong channel and leave themselves stranded on an island.

Dwarves are stupid. Toady will probably work ALOT on the AI, but so far you'd better take them by that hand.

quote:
* Less CPU-intensive flows (after initial flooding), which means no worries about making more and more fun things with water and magma.

Er... yeah... Physics simulation is a difficult thing, so unless you can pull an extremely efficient algorithm out of your pockets I'd suggest you back off.

quote:
* Indoor trees and herbs (haven't seen either yet in any game post-v23a; I'm sure others have, but they're RARE).

Yup, they are. But they are neat.

quote:
* Plenty of cavern dwellers with no loss of framerate except when they are doing something interesting.  Ambushes, no frighten-off-worker annoyance, replenishing underground and magma monsters.  Surprise gremlins (?), raids from wells (?).

Again, "make things faster" is hardly a very good suggestion unless you follow it up by "using X". I can't understand the rest.

quote:
* The ability to make far larger and more interesting fortresses before the framerate bogs down excessively on a single-core Pentium machine.

See above.

quote:
* Much less trouble to find a site with good gameplay value (a decent sub-set of the possible Neat Stuff).  In particular, there's certain to be enough energy somewhere to smelt metal and work glass, and there will always be dangerous monsters of some sort underground.

The sad truth is: Most of the world is boring. The fact that we get chasms, volcanos etc. at the current rate is very neat. I'd suggest you start near a named location or a volcanic vent. Also you can check the biomes beforehand.

quote:
* Guarantee of liquid water (and many other things, but liquid water's more essential than most).

In a Desert? Sorry, the game lets you decide where to start, so if you decide on a scorching spot with no brook in sight - tough luck!

quote:
* Interesting rock banding and mixing instead of entire screens of nothing but a single base rock, with occasonal clusters of colored rocks, each one almost identical to other clusters of its type.

We already have that AFAIK.

quote:
* Colored rocks, more valuable then the basic types when used for furniture or smoothing or what have you, with handy interfaces for them and special treatment in demands and moods, that don't look like ores or gold or adamantite.

Same as above.

quote:
* Being able to access all of your squads in the 'x' interface without looking at various z-levels for them.

Agreed.

quote:
* Knowledge of (approximately) where traders and immigrants will come from, instead of the current total ignorance and randomized placement that often makes preparing a safe passage past the Giant Eagles a PITA (invader placement should be a surprise of course).

I guess this will be in army arc or so. (Keeping fingers crossed)

quote:
* A series of escalating underground challenges, each with its own rewards.  This is the feature I miss the most, by a long, long way.  The more valuable gems past the river, the iron and gold past the chasm, the magma, and finally, far far away and not just 10-15 z-levels down, the admantite beyond (not in front of) the deadly Pits - these add gameplay value and wonderment missing in the 3D version at the moment.

Well, dwarf fortress is a freeform game. Feel free to make up your own challanges. Repairing the broken siege AI was extremely cool too.

quote:
Hope this list is thought useful.

[BurnedToast]

For me the only advantage of the 2d version is less lags and 100% chance of endgame stuff. lags are unavoidable and endgame stuff is being worked on, so I have no real complaints about those.

Everything else, the 3d version is way way better.

[Torak]

How is this a suggestion? I only see "bring back the 2d version".

[Fedor]

CharonX, several of your responses make me suspect that you haven't played the 2d version.  Remember, everything I mention, Toady has already done.  I don't have to suggest how to do it, conjure up new algorithms, or what have you - Toady's been there, done that.

quote:<STRONG>Floods would be nice (even though they'd wreck the CPU load with flow-stuff).</STRONG>

The floods in 23a didn't wreck framerate.

quote:<STRONG>Rivers do have sand-banks.</STRONG>

Are you sure?  Are you speaking of deep (dark blue rivers only or brooks as well?  If only rivers, you do know that they're not available in mountains.  If both, I'd love to see a brook with a sand bank in a place otherwise without sand.  I've never gotten one yet, and believe me I've looked.

quote:<STRONG>Can't agree on the unfreeze without temp, that's what temperature does.</STRONG>

You clearly have a faster machine than I do.  Liquid water's a little too important to sacrifice to a init file toggle.  'Course, that's just my opinion.

quote:<STRONG>Sorry, no way to do that - 1/7 water is basically "moist floor". And water speed is capped with flow mechanics.

</STRONG>It was done in the 2D version; I ain't asking for anything new here.

quote:<STRONG>Dwarves are stupid. Toady will probably work ALOT on the AI, but so far you'd better take them by that hand.

</STRONG>What Toady has already done on the AI is vastly appreciated.  I am proposing that the game also look at ways to ease the burden on the AI.

quote:<STRONG>Er... yeah... Physics simulation is a difficult thing, so unless you can pull an extremely efficient algorithm out of your pockets I'd suggest you back off.

</STRONG>I'd like an apology for this statement.  You're grossly out of line here.  I'll be happy to explain precisely why if you're still in any doubt.

quote:<STRONG>The sad truth is: Most of the world is boring. The fact that we get chasms, volcanos etc. at the current rate is very neat. I'd suggest you start near a named location or a volcanic vent. Also you can check the biomes beforehand.

</STRONG>It doesn't matter how much of the world is boring.  The game should not be boring!  A player, especially a newbie player, should not be thrown, without advice or even warning, into a game that lacks the great majority of the Neat New Stuff that Toady has so painstakingly coded!  

This is an amazing game; I want it to more consistently put its best foot forward.  Version 23a did a better job of this than the new version does just yet.  For both the reasons I give and others.

=================================================

=================================================

quote:Originally posted by Torak:
<STRONG>How is this a suggestion? I only see "bring back the 2d version".</STRONG>

You know what?  I knew somebody would only see that.  Doesn't matter how clearly I state the contrary starting in the first sentence, doesn't matter how carefully I detail what the post is all about, doesn't matter how many times I express my tremendous respect for the 3D version here and elsewhere.  There's always Somebody who Doesn't Get the Word.   :roll:

[CharonX]

Fedor, I played the 3D version - ALOT - , but let me explain in detail:

 

quote:
The floods in 23a didn't wreck framerate.

Of course they did not - there was only "water" / "no water" and nothing in between. Also floods were either "flood the adjacent space, up to X squares away" or "infinite flood, till turned off", both of which does not care how much water the "source" has. The new system implements a (more) realistic liquid system, where water does not just appear on the edges on a flood (which it did in the 2D version)

 

quote:
Are you sure? Are you speaking of deep (dark blue rivers only or brooks as well? If only rivers, you do know that they're not available in mountains. If both, I'd love to see a brook with a sand bank in a place otherwise without sand. I've never gotten one yet, and believe me I've looked.

I believe to recall seeing one, but I might be mistaken or it might have been caused by a bordering biome with sand in it.

 

quote:
You clearly have a faster machine than I do. Liquid water's a little too important to sacrifice to a init file toggle. 'Course, that's just my opinion.

That's part of the problem. You are disabling an important part of the game (temperature) but expect that the game works as if you didn't. You will see other glitches, like your dwarves happily swimming in Magma/Lava, but that's the price you pay for higher framerates.

 

quote:
It was done in the 2D version; I ain't asking for anything new here.

Again, the 2D version did not have flow mechanics. I can only guess here, but I suppose the 2D version had something like a "ripple" that moved along the edges of floods and spawned "water" and again an "anti-ripple" that moved along the edges of "anti-floods" which de-spawned water. The 1/7 water really means nothing more than "the floor is moist" and will evaporate eventually; I don't know how much you have studied the flow mechanic concept, but imagine it as a "stack" of water. 1/7 is a stack. If you want water to spread out, you program it that it moves from a high stack to adjacent space with a lower stack. At the 1/7 level you have to "nail them" to the floor as you'd otherwise have wandering pools of water, which would look, honestly, quite dumb. That's the price for flow mechanics you have to pay.

 

quote:
What Toady has already done on the AI is vastly appreciated. I am proposing that the game also look at ways to ease the burden on the AI.

No way to do that. Let's say dwarves don't dig under each other. Now you end up with two miners on adjacent squares waiting for the other to move so they can dig the square below him. And to avoid the dreaded "painting in a corner" syndrome you'd have to have to make the AI do a number of additional calculations. Any way you don't reduce the burden on the AI, you just increase it. That's the cost of "smarter" dwarves. I think Toady will get to it eventually, but it will take time.

 

quote:
I'd like an apology for this statement. You're grossly out of line here. I'll be happy to explain precisely why if you're still in any doubt.

So far I have only read demands by you, not a single suggestion. I loathe to do it, but you are like a pointed hairy boss who goes into the office of a automobile maker and demand that they -pronto- design a car that runs on straw and water: "What, you can't? Look at horses, they were the predecessors of cars and they only needed straw and water." You are assuming that the 3D version works just like the 2D version, but the implementation of flow mechanics changed the game quite a bit. So unless you can provide a workable solution to the issues, you just make random demands laced with "just do it, you did it before, lazy git". Honestly, if you were a dwarf noble, you'd get relocated to a room with an odd hole in the ceiling, along with your friend the baron who keeps mandating adamandite toy anvils, just about now.

 

quote:
It doesn't matter how much of the world is boring. The game should not be boring! A player, especially a newbie player, should not be thrown, without advice or even warning, into a game that lacks the great majority of the Neat New Stuff that Toady has so painstakingly coded!

This is an amazing game; I want it to more consistently put its best foot forward. Version 23a did a better job of this than the new version does just yet. For both the reasons I give and others.

Well, Toady could make every region auto-spawn complete with chasm, magma, pits, caveriver, whatever, but that would actually take away the fun. What use is being able to select a region you like, while being assured that everything but the kitchen sink is there. Just start near a named location, and include some mountains and you should be pretty well set - use reveal.exe if you really have to, (I don't) to make sure <your> is there.

But I'll add another thing here:
If you don't like it, don't play it - if you feel the 2D version is more fun and less CPU demanding, I'll be the last person to force you to play the 3D version. Increased hardware demands and (temporary) loss of certain features is a price you have to pay for such a big step of going 3D, changing the game from river-mountain-caveriver-chasm-magma-demonpits-admadite to a authentic environment and including stuff like flow mechanics.

[ January 04, 2008: Message edited by: CharonX ]

[Torak]

quote:Originally posted by Fedor:
<STRONG> You know what?  I knew somebody would only see that.  Doesn't matter how clearly I state the contrary starting in the first sentence, doesn't matter how carefully I detail what the post is all about, doesn't matter how many times I express my tremendous respect for the 3D version here and elsewhere.  There's always Somebody who Doesn't Get the Word.    :roll:</STRONG>

You can detail all you want, doesnt change the fact you're not suggesting anything, you're just complaining about stuff you want back from the 2d version. Put it in any words you like, it's hard to cover up the truth.

[MyBeardIsOnFire]

There's one point I can completely agree about. This one:

quote:* A series of escalating underground challenges, each with its own rewards. This is the feature I miss the most, by a long, long way. The more valuable gems past the river, the iron and gold past the chasm, the magma, and finally, far far away and not just 10-15 z-levels down, the admantite beyond (not in front of) the deadly Pits - these add gameplay value and wonderment missing in the 3D version at the moment.

There just needs to be more surprises underground. Surprises meaning features that don't touch the surface so you discover them when you embark (chasms and caves are no good right now, sorry). I'm thinking:
- Monster lairs that have their exit concealed
- Self-sufficient cities built entirely underground
- Underground creatures a-la Shaihulud. Please don't tell me those are purring maggots
- Natural dangers like rock caving in, seismic activity creating small chasms and rearranging your lower levels a little
Pits can stay the way they are. As it is, it's easy enough to accidentally unearth them (unless of course you're using reveal.exe).

[Red Jackard]

quote:Originally posted by MyBeardIsOnFire:
<STRONG>There just needs to be more surprises underground.</STRONG>

http://www.bay12games.com/dwarves/dev_req_101-150.html

Do people even bother to read these anymore?

[Fedor]

quote:Originally posted by CharonX:
<STRONG>Fedor, I played the 3D version - ALOT - , but let me explain in detail:

</STRONG>Then there's only one other possibility:  You are misunderstanding what I'm trying to say.  

Honestly, when I write

"The entire point of this post, in fact, is to use the old, highly polished 2D version as a handy tool to suggest areas where additional polishing of the new 3D game would be most worthwhile."

Does it make sense to anyone?

quote:Originally posted by CharonX:
<STRONG>Well, Toady could make every region auto-spawn complete with chasm, magma, pits, caveriver, whatever, but that would actually take away the fun. What use is being able to select a region you like, while being assured that everything but the kitchen sink is there. Just start near a named location, and include some mountains and you should be pretty well set - use reveal.exe if you really have to, (I don't) to make sure <your> is there.

</STRONG>

quote:Originally posted by CharonX:
<STRONG>But I'll add another thing here:
If you don't like it, don't play it - if you feel the 2D version is more fun and less CPU demanding, I'll be the last person to force you to play the 3D version. Increased hardware demands and (temporary) loss of certain features is a price you have to pay for such a big step of going 3D, changing the game from river-mountain-caveriver-chasm-magma-demonpits-admadite to a authentic environment and including stuff like flow mechanics.</STRONG>

Strawmen responses that inflate a request to the point of absurdity don't help you, they don't help me, and most importantly they don't help Toady.  Which is kinda the whole point here.

- You are not being considerate or collegial.  
Who cares?

- You are tap-dancing around virtually all the points at hand.
*yawn*

- You keep saying that things absolutely "can't be done" when Toady's far better capable of making that determination than either of us.  
Meh.

- You insist upon my providing new methods and algorithms despite 1) the thread being about Toady's already existing work, 2) Toady's repeatedly stated preference for keeping coding (as opposed to ideas) in-house, and 3) this forum being open to everyone with ideas (even folks like me who can't code their way out of a wet paper bag!).
Same, 'ol, same 'ol

- You are sticking a spoke into somebody else's honest attempt to offer constructive ideas, instead of helping to improve them for our common benefit.  Instead of bringing out the gold, you're digging for the dross.

Here you've got me mad.  Toady relies on all of us to give him feedback.  I'm giving it to the best of my poor ability, and you're not helping!

[Fedor]

And I think I've probably done enough arguing about presentation.  Back to the ideas!

The essential point I want to bring out in this thread for Toady's benefit is that adopting certain game-play elements of the old version will help the 3D version further raise its game.  

Among these elements are:

1) A more consistently large and interesting faction of the total available Neat Fun Stuff.
2) A wider player hardware base for both small and (especially) for large and complex fortress.
3) Several newbie-friendly features vital to a newbie-unfriendly game; suggested fortress sites and guaranteed liquid water (or a warning of its absence) being two.
4) Various Neat Fun Stuff that can profitably be resurrected.  Helpful ideas for adding interest to the underground, the true dwarven focus.  Good examples of interface cooperation that helps make certain rocks special.
5) Adamantite that's just as interesting to get at to as to use.  Various other small but helpful bits.
6) And, most importantly, a series of underground challenges the player may (mostly) tackle at his own pace.

What can be taken straight from the old code, what can be adopted, and what must be rewritten from scratch none of us non-coders can judge.  All we can do is ask for them.  Pretty please?  

[WillNZ]

Correct me if I'm wrong, Toady said he'd eventually implement the option to switch Dwarf Fortress from 3D into 2D. In a distant, distant future.

[Eagle of Fire]

quote:The floods in 23a didn't wreck framerate.

Are you guys insane. Of course it did! The game always crawled to an almost halt everytime you tryied to flood a big room in 23a. It's only when the room was either completely full or completely empty that the game was going back to it's original framerate...

This thread make no sense.