Print

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

[Warlord255]

Changing Topic:

Will you guys still have arenas/pits for prisons and animals if there is going to be arena mode for such fun things?

I don't really see why this would change. Making your own Gladiator Arena is still amazing even with a mode that does it for you.

I concur; plus, it's more fun when there's context, such as throwing your goblin prisoners to your captive GCS.

[Areyar]

To me the arenamode has little purpose besides playtesting and such, Arenas in dwarfmode have a definite function in killing captured goblins in a controlled way* while training the troops. 
*As in with little chance of the gobbo winning.

So YES, we (I) will continue to build arenas and execution contraptions even when there is an (outside of game) mode to pit combatants against each other in an even more controlled manner with logs and extensive combat texts.

[smjjames]

Changing Topic:

Will you guys still have arenas/pits for prisons and animals if there is going to be arena mode for such fun things?

The fact that we can now see the combat logs will make it even more appealing and even more fun.

Arena mode will still be useful for playtesting and doing stuff that would be difficult or impossible to pull off ingame. In fact, I saw a post in the succession/community game section for pitting armies created from forts against each other.

While the arena mode is cool, there is nothing like exploding something and covering your arena with blood, the arena that you made.

[Kinnis]

Edit Change: Hmmm, I think I should just drop it for now.

Yes, everybody do this please.

Sorry Footkerchief, but I rather want to address this...

It's not my intention to start a flame war, so I hope this is taken in the spirit in which I mean it. Shoku, I hope you read this after you cool down, not before. 

People don't visit this forum with the same frequency as everyone else. There are clearly some people who almost live on this forum, others who may visit once or twice a year, and everyone else, who will fall somewhere in between. Fact is, that information for DF isn't the most organised, and particularly, anything in this thread is likely lost to anyone who doesn't visit more than once a day. I've been trying to come here once a day to catch up, but I still manage to miss most of what is discussed in this thread, since I simply don't have the time to read it all. Shoku, you yourself say that you are always playing catch up with this thread, so it shouldn't be hard to imagine the difficulty of keeping up if you were to visit less often than you currently do. It soon becomes impossible to keep up with absolutely everything.

There happens to be another forum I'm involved with, where despite having much information stickied, as well as a reasonably decent FAQ, we still have the same questions being asked quite often. Sometimes it's obvious that it's pure laziness on the part of the person posting, and in such a situation, little mercy is shown. However, much of the time, it's more a case of their lack of familiarity with our forum (or forums in general,) inability to do a proper search, difficulty in understanding the information which has been given (particularly for people with English as a second language,) etc. The regulars groan, but fortunately, they're mostly pretty tolerant. It is possible to genuinely not see a link that says 'FAQ', and most people are suitably embarrassed when it's pointed out to them.

What's my point? It seems that some people are assuming that anyone asking something common, which apparently has been asked and answered many times in this thread, must be lazy for not knowing the answer already. But not everyone will have read all 600 pages in this thread, nor should it be considered reasonable to expect them to do so. I would hope it's clear that that's nothing to do with laziness. On the subject of hearing a term and knowing what it means: I've heard the term 'caste' mentioned here myself - it was mentioned in conversation in much the way I've just mentioned it. I.e. lacking an accompanied explanation of what it is. I didn't know what it referred to until this conversation. So it's far from unlikely that a casual reader may have heard of a term yet not know what it means.

Summing up, I'd humbly suggest that showing a little more tolerance to commonly asked questions might be a good thing. 

[PermanentInk]

The main thing that keeps pointless forum arguments going is that people Just Keep Posting About It.  Regardless of who's right or wrong in a given situation, the most damage to the thread (in its capacity to host non-bickering discussion) is done by the number of posts it takes for everyone to shut up about it.

This mostly falls to the regulars, because occasional readers aren't going to read this post (or other such admonitions at different times), and there's no point railing against that fact because it's basically a force of nature.

So what I'd encourage everyone to do is really try and let arguments die by starvation, or take them to private messages or make new threads.  Don't post just one more thing thinking that you'll put the matter to bed.  Someone else won't see it that way and then they'll have to have their last word, and so on.  It takes very little of this to fill up three pages of bullshit, and that's exactly what makes it hard for more casual readers to keep up (and hence not ask questions that have already been answered) in the first place.

[DooMJake]

With the castes system in the next version, can we do something like this?
While playing Fortress Mode is it possible that my - for example Werewolves-civ - can give birth to wolves that only count as pets in addition to 'normal' children (in this case Were-kids)?

[BigFatDwarf]

Nope, IIRC, everyone is a full member of the civilization.
So they'd all have the same person status, not the animals status like livestock has.

[Bryan Derksen]

Aww. For a moment there I thought I might make a completely self-sufficient fort by having my dwarfs give birth to cows. Or vice versa.

[Neonivek]

Aww. For a moment there I thought I might make a completely self-sufficient fort by having my dwarfs give birth to cows. Or vice versa.

Well think of it this way. If you gave birth to an non-logical animal you, and it was natural to do so, you would be very likely to care for that animal anyhow rather then treating it purely as a pet.

It is a complex relationship though.

[Greiger]

Only in Dwarf Fortress would somebody seriously consider something like that.

Ninjad

[CobaltKobold]

With the castes system in the next version, can we do something like this?
While playing Fortress Mode is it possible that my - for example Werewolves-civ - can give birth to wolves that only count as pets in addition to 'normal' children (in this case Were-kids)?

I think that civ-or-not intellect level is not a caste-specifiable tag. I may be wrong, because I recall attribute differences being specifiable, but...

[Reese]

Regarding the *man generation from existing creatures, how much definition does a creature need to have for the *man function to be able to create it? would I be able to create a [vermin]man, like a flyman?

If I create a *man from a creature that one of my dwarfs has a preference or dislike of the base creature, will the game(at some point) be able to apply the thought that would be generated by the normal version when encountering the anthropomorphic version?  referencing my first question, If I could create a flyman, would encountering one be capable of producing the same (or, better, a stronger, because having the thing you detest come to life human sized could be tramatic) bad thought as encountering a fly[swarm of flys]?

[Askot Bokbondeler]

Regarding the *man generation from existing creatures, how much definition does a creature need to have for the *man function to be able to create it? would I be able to create a [vermin]man, like a flyman?

i think it was referenced not long ago that the new vermin raws have a much more detailed body, preciselly for that kind of situations


EDIT: acording to footkerchief

On a subtler note, the next version does allow vermin to have distinct body plans, as you can see in the raws for the revamped fluffy wambler.  They'll generally go unused, but will come in handy if worldgen drops a Fluffy Wambler Titan on you.

from there, it's not a big leap

[Neruz]

Giant Cave Spiderman.

[Kinnis]

The main thing that keeps pointless forum arguments going is that people Just Keep Posting About It.  Regardless of who's right or wrong in a given situation, the most damage to the thread (in its capacity to host non-bickering discussion) is done by the number of posts it takes for everyone to shut up about it.

I'm sure the ostrich would agree with you. Personally, I don't think ignoring a situation improves anything.

As for it falling to the regulars, yes - that's who my post was aimed at. The last word I saw in this particular discussion was basically advocating intolerance, and I didn't want that to be the last public word - I didn't feel it was appropriate to have that as the last word, and I couldn't change that by taking it to PMs.

I hope you also appreciate the irony inherent in responding as you did.

Don't bother responding - I'm done.

Edit: Not quite done. Incidentally, the better solution, rather than dropping all arguments, is that moderation get involved and split any and all off topic discussion to a new thread. Right - now I'm done.