Print

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

[Shoku]

when will we be able to forge non-dwarf size weapons and armor?
I want to make adamantine longswords and large platemail and then find them with my adventurer.  Presumably in the ruins of a fortress that was destroyed by hfs because they were not properly equipped with usable weaons and armor.

This brings up a question, but it's not worthy of being green'd.

Where does everyone think the hidden fun metal will be hiding this time?

Largely because civilizations use whatever metal is available to them and having that stuff show up like goblin iron would be dumb.

Of course the site choice matters, if i choose a site with a Magma Pipe then i'll have easy early-game access to Magma. If not, then getting to the stuff is going to be a late-game prospect. That alone will substantially change how i build my fort, as access to Magma is a key gameplay componant.

That is nothing compared to magma or glass being an another-game prospect 

Due to the way the Worldgen works, it will always be possible to generate rediculous worlds where you have the Grand Canyon next to Mt. Everest with a polar ice cap at one end and a tropical rainforest at the other. Perhaps not in the default Worldgen, but with customisation, most certainly.

This is not necessarily true. There will likely be a point where there are enough biome/region-specific features that it's simply impossible to fit all of them into one site.

In fact, this is already true to some degree: It's currently impossible (or so infeasible as to be considered impossible) to embark on a site where every single possible animal and plant in the game can exist naturally on the same map.

Once we get the ability to access multiple sites, then i'll fully support making features more dispersed. But until then i will thougherly object to it, simply because there is no reason to force players to have to use crazy worldgens just to get the world they like.

If you don't want to play on a site with everything, you don't have to. If you do, you can. It's a wonderful thing.

Do you say this about every game where you can't have absolutely every single piece of content at once? If so, I really have no freaking clue how you manage. Most games involving any sort of player choice have the player choose between options. That's what choice is.

You should, in fact, have to use crazy worldgen parameters if you want to get a world that makes absolutely no sense at all. If you want a crazy world, use crazy parameters. Personally, I consider an embark area with both a glacier and the Sahara Desert to be pretty damn crazy, and that's not even considering features that don't exist yet.

If there is a "perfect site" available, but choice is meaningless, because there's no actual strategy involved. The only reason, in that case, to choose an "imperfect" site is if you intentionally want to cripple yourself.

Choice should be meaningful, and choice is not meaningful if there's a single perfect option that you're an idiot not to take.

Here's the big blind answer for you:
Nobles don't demand yeti leather boots and elephant ivory toy boats in the same map. They do ask for glass things in maps without sand and so many players have taken to adding plumbing to the rooms of their nobles. When the best option for dealing with a task is to kill the person that gave you the task players take to metagaming.


Just to settle it thought I like choosing from flavors. In flavor A you accomplish this task through means a and in flavor B you accomplish it through means b. If in flavor C you just cannot do it (including situations where it would take twenty years in the fortress to do what can be done in one or two with option A) then flavor C is only around if I want to intentionally deprive myself of game play.

Leather I can do anywhere there are animals to skin, which is anywhere. And really I don't need that because caravans bring so much of the stuff. Metalwork I can do anywhere there are trees or magma. If I have to entirely import wood from elves I can never have steel because they stop bringing wood. Worse is how I can't make beds from anything but wood so my already limited pool of wood to use is drastically scaled back.

So what did I do? Obsess over underground water so that I could make forests. That doesn't actually work so much how I thought though so it isn't a solution (unless I could magically get back fps many years into a fort  )

Also i think we can finally milk cows, goats and horses.

Where did you hear that?

Also i think we can finally milk cows, goats and  horses.

Heck people i was just thinking that if toady fixes the maggots he does cows and alike at the same time.

You think that because you have no idea how it works. (Edit: or not?)

To us a better choice of words would be you hope that, because you have no idea how it works.

Here's the thing. He made it so that dwarves don't eat purring maggots before regular food. This was what kept use from using those to make milk in our forts. Have you had any issues with dwarves tackling a cow instead of going to the food stockpile?

will we be able to milk sentients?

Why did I just suddenly get an Idea for a new elf torture method.

Capture elfs.  Milk elfs.  Make Elf Cheese.  Cook elf cheese into elf cheese roasts.  Sell to elfs.


And last I heard milking a creature doesn't care about gender.  You would be able to get cowman milk from both genders...unfortunately.

Male mammals do have mammary glands after all. I know that for mothers the amount of milk they produce is an on demand thing, as in the more the baby eats the more the breasts will work to produce. I don't know that males would produce anything more that a few drops of what would essentially be blackened sweat but with hormone treatment men can grow breasts. Provided that you could find the right way to kick start it you should be able to set up a Mudoken style fluid harvesting factory that might even produce something you could eventually use in trade.

Tamed sentients can die of dehydration though so you would have to give them something to drink...

The rotting solution is a good one, but having dwarves eat more often clashes with the existing craziness of the passage of time in DF. If dwarves ate even one meal a day, it would basically be the only thing they did. I think the best solution is to have them eat as often, but just eat more food when they do. Decreased farm output could also help here.

Well requiring the fields to be fertilized to continue having decent output would give some slight push but you could also just have the dwarves throw bigger parties as the fort got larger (with more wasted food per dwarf.)

We'd obviously just game things to stop parties but if you made it so that a dining room started losing ranks of awesome if nobody had thrown parties in it we would welcome having idle dwarves.

[Orkel]

Where mah devlog at

for two days

slowly going mad

must have more devlogs

[Diablous]

Where mah devlog at

for two days

slowly going mad

must have more devlogs

*throws another tantrum* WANT DEVLOG!

[GRead]

Well requiring the fields to be fertilized to continue having decent output would give some slight push but you could also just have the dwarves throw bigger parties as the fort got larger (with more wasted food per dwarf.)

We'd obviously just game things to stop parties but if you made it so that a dining room started losing ranks of awesome if nobody had thrown parties in it we would welcome having idle dwarves.

I think the real problem with parties is their ability to completely grind a fortress to a halt. Back when I allowed parties I had multiple instances of otherwise valuable dwarfs spending entire seasons drifting between breaks, sleep, and a constant stream of parties thrown by bored children. If dwarfs attended parties in lieu of going on break, I think we would be less draconian about it.

[zwei]

The rotting solution is a good one, but having dwarves eat more often clashes with the existing craziness of the passage of time in DF. If dwarves ate even one meal a day, it would basically be the only thing they did. I think the best solution is to have them eat as often, but just eat more food when they do. Decreased farm output could also help here.

Solution i myself like most is:

1) Track calories. Just existing burns enough calories to that dwarf has to eat once per season, but if he works hard (sparring and combat, any physical labor, etc ...) he will burn callories much faster, hence he will have to eat more often (capping out at, say, twice per season).

Getting anything done would directly cost food.

2) Fix animals. They are basically endless source of food and many other interesting things that require zero input. Require livestock (and possibly cats/dogs) to eat and drink. This would require additional infrastructure. At very least some grazing area with water source (cuts down into wood production, animals eat gatherable plants - they need fairly large area to get by without player farming).

For many fortresses, animals needing to eat once per season would basically double food consumption.

3) Irrigation, Fertilizing fields, etc ... suggested way too many times.

[Huesoo]

Could it be possible to mod in a God Emperor-esque leader that only spawns once for the civilization (at the beggining) and when it dies the civilization collapses?

Such as having a robot uprising with its leader being a massive mecha, when that mecha dies the whole civilization would fall.

[Lancensis]

Could it be possible to mod in a God Emperor-esque leader that only spawns once for the civilization (at the beggining) and when it dies the civilization collapses?

You could mod in a race with an extremely rare (1 in 10 000, say) caste that's considerably stronger than the rest of the species with very aggressively powerseeking personality traits and make the civilization choose their leader based on combat. If you gen a few worlds, you can probably get what you want. The civilization won't likely just fall apart when they die, however.

[tfaal]

You could also create a second civilization of one creature, and give it the POWER tag, and the right personality traits/spheres to rule the first civilization. There would still be no way to ensure that the destruction of the ruler would lead to the death of the civilization.

[Footkerchief]

You could mod in a race with an extremely rare (1 in 10 000, say) caste that's considerably stronger than the rest of the species with very aggressively powerseeking personality traits and make the civilization choose their leader based on combat. If you gen a few worlds, you can probably get what you want. The civilization won't likely just fall apart when they die, however.

You can also directly restrict positions by caste.  You might be able to ensure that the leader caste spawns at year zero and never thereafter by giving them the MEGABEAST tag and a birth ratio of zero.

There was a similar discussion a while back about "Ancestral Dwarves."  These will probably all require some experimentation.

[Shoku]

Solution i myself like most is:

1) Track calories. Just existing burns enough calories to that dwarf has to eat once per season, but if he works hard (sparring and combat, any physical labor, etc ...) he will burn callories much faster, hence he will have to eat more often (capping out at, say, twice per season).

Getting anything done would directly cost food.

2) Fix animals. They are basically endless source of food and many other interesting things that require zero input. Require livestock (and possibly cats/dogs) to eat and drink. This would require additional infrastructure. At very least some grazing area with water source (cuts down into wood production, animals eat gatherable plants - they need fairly large area to get by without player farming).

For many fortresses, animals needing to eat once per season would basically double food consumption.

3) Irrigation, Fertilizing fields, etc ... suggested way too many times.

You kind of want to back load the food consumption though. In a lot of those... "flavor choices", getting farms set up can be a late task.
Plus new players often have their dwarves starve to death or run out of things to drink, so you wouldn't want to punish them for having their dwarves actually get to work on something. The learning curve is steep enough as it is.

Having animals in close quarters waste feed is the sort of thing I'm thinking. You would either have to situate them efficiently for dwarves to feed them or put more dwarves on the task because of all the walking back and forth it took to get to the animals.

[G-Flex]

1) Track calories. Just existing burns enough calories to that dwarf has to eat once per season, but if he works hard (sparring and combat, any physical labor, etc ...) he will burn callories much faster, hence he will have to eat more often (capping out at, say, twice per season).

Getting anything done would directly cost food.

This is, to whatever degree, already accomplished in the upcoming version; see Toady's comments on fatness and such. There's a concept of energy storage, and burning energy from strenuous activity.

[Spiders Everywhere]

Well, I think there have been lots of ideas on how to fix farming. Starvation in the early game was one of the types of Fun that got lost in the 3D switch. Some combination of ideas like unfertilized farms having low output, farming being more labor intensive, lower seed multiplication, and dwarfs eating more per meal would get back more in that direction. Certainly if you were only eating a few times a year you'd probably want more than one mushroom.

A food consumption amount raw tag would be pretty sweet, so like half your fort would have to keep working to keep feeding your Hive Queen or whatever.

[Name Lips]

One of the first mods I make to any DF installation is make all crops only grow for a single season, make nothing edible raw, and make nothing grow during the winter.

It's still ridiculously difficult to actually fail and starve to death, though.

[MrWiggles]

One of the first mods I make to any DF installation is make all crops only grow for a single season, make nothing edible raw, and make nothing grow during the winter.

It's still ridiculously difficult to actually fail and starve to death, though.

Why would winter matter to underground plants? Or seasons in general really.

[Untelligent]

And why would nothing be edible raw? Plenty of plants are edible raw. Some of them don't even have to be rinsed off. Not that dwarves would care if their plants were covered in dirt, I guess.