Print

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

[Digger]

Right now all we can do is abandon fotress, but how about keeping it and just throwing the control of it to the AI? There are many towns out there, and some will finally have a functional infrastructure  

However i suggest "validating" the fortress for several years before it can be left alone. Say check if dwarven population drastically decreases or if they starve and such for 4-5 years, and then the user can leave it to the AI. Of course the fortress wont get any more immigrants after that, since you won't be there to accomodate them.

[Capntastic]

The problem with this, which has been discussed numerous times, is that Toady would want the AI to act semi-smart about controlling the fort.   This is hard to program, or even abstract decently, so overall it's a big hurdle.   At least, that's my understanding of the situation.   Not sure if it's changed lately.

Toady, please post and give us the scoop.

[Drunken]

To be honest I don't think it would even be a big deal if the fortress was simply saved as is. It would require some suspension of disbelief but if your adventurer rolled up and the fortress were all dying of thirst you could pretend they hadnt been dying of thirst for 10 years while you were not playing and the problems only just started.

[Capntastic]

Yeah but why would Toady half-ass anything, ever?

[Squeegy]

Just make it give the fortress a town's AI. You just need to make it have a big enough supply of food and water, or maybe you could make it like a town and they magically have food appear in their hands and they scoot over to your dining room.

EDIT: Reworded.

[ February 18, 2008: Message edited by: Squeegy ]

[Forumsdwarf]

It does seem to me a little harsh that you can't visit your own city unless you wreck it first.

I'd like to be able to have an actual "win" ending, maybe after the King comes, some series of challenges the player can meet which passes the Fortress on to its next incarnation, a "Dwarf Metropolis" maybe, and when you polish that final stone you get a message like, "Though you've built a hostile wilderness into a thriving metropolis, your talents are wasted here now.  The restless spirit of the frontier calls to you to select 7 of your bravest kinsmen and start anew!"

Then your Fortress passes into Legend and you can visit it as an adventurer and all that good stuff.

We all know "Losing Is Fun," but so is winning!

If this ending were "mandatory" it would of course trigger a mutiny, and tantruming Dwarf Fortressaires would throw me through a green glass window, but all I'm saying is make it an option, like building the Wonder or Spaceship in various other civ-type strategy games.

Nothing would make me more proud than visiting a Metropolis of my own founding, even if none of the things I built worked right.  I don't care if the artificial waterfall isn't working, I just don't want my fortress to be a wrecked ruin when I visit.

[Digger]

quote:Originally posted by Forumsdwarf:
<STRONG>I don't care if the artificial waterfall isn't working, I just don't want my fortress to be a wrecked ruin when I visit.</STRONG>

Yeah, this is the main idea behind my suggestion, sometimes you just have to move on, but can't simply abandon what you have created so far. That's where "status quo" comes in. I mean, if the town IS functional isn't it better than the ones created by world generation? If we CAN populate the world with our towns, and not just abandon them every time, doesn't it make a more lively world?

The only problem i see, is that the area, used by the living fortress should be forbidden for any further embarking, "The local dwarves told you off".

[ February 18, 2008: Message edited by: Digger ]

[Zogundar]

This is probably my most desired feature.

[Deon]

I second this.

[penguinofhonor]

.

[Sowelu]

Right.

Because AI is someday going to be good enough to raise bridges and flood with magma when the goblins come.  And open the floodgates just enough to irrigate.

There's too much freedom :/

[verdigriss]

Actually, it might not be all that hard.  All the things you mentioned are in regard to switches (and, perhaps, door locking).  So what if, as part of your 'turning the fort over', you (all in-game, mind you) set up certain simple scripts for the switches to be worked in certain circumstances, like

code:

if siege
then switch 01=1 switch 02=1 switch 03=0  

... and so on?  You could set up switch patterns for the different seasons and for sieges, so the dwarves know what to do in spring, when the goblins come, etc.

[Align]

It's not like the current towns can handle(or need to handle) any of that, so our abandoned forts shouldn't either.

[Hague]

Even if the dwarves simply followed familiar patterns. It remembers their enabled labors and they continue to do them even if they don't really produce any results.

[Digger]

People who can't leave their fortresses are relying on their job management too much. In the game everything can be done by the manpower, i mean dwarfpower. IMO, the more freedom they have and the more stuff they do, the less is left to me   so in case of siege(you are assuming there will be one) you better have military at hand. You are supposed to leave a functional fortress after all, functional in terms of current AI being able to manage it.