Print

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

[Kazindir]

Game functions aren't goals. They are teh basics of getting the game to do what you want it to do. Goals would be actual "mission objectives".

Neither of these things are part of a tutorial. And if they are, the game's UI is broken.

The moment I start a game that is new to me, I want to be able to actually accomplish things. Not to read a wall-of-text. A tutorial on complex things, like complicated supply lines (a meat industry, a steel industry, a glass industry), makes sense. One for designating tiles to dig out, doesn't.

So what you're trying to say is absolutely no effort should be made to help people trying pick up the alpha release before the presentation arc has even been started?

Because thats what you *are* saying, intentional or not.

[dyze]

So what you're trying to say is absolutely no effort should be made to help people trying pick up the alpha release before the presentation arc has even been started?

Because thats what you *are* saying, intentional or not.

did you actually read the first post, or even the topic title?

[SmileyMan]

Hmm, a tutorial would be nice, although having learned to play "my way", I have my own style now (carefully stationed guards rather than traps, horribly inefficient corridor layouts, etc.) which I might not have developed had I followed a list of "good ideas".

Perhaps as a stop-gap, you could create a sot of "starter fortress" which is installed with the game, along with a basic world, so a complete beginner could load up a game with the essentials (farms, stills, dining rooms, bedrooms) already built, so they could understand the basic relationships and get started quicker.

On the other hand, the "losing is fun" mantra means that there is a cadre of gamers who will never "get it".  One of my early fortresses I had no idea that dwarves would go mad without booze.  The resulting destruction of the fortress was a lesson learned, but it was also hilarious, and those poor souls have stuck in my memory long after more "successful" fortresses have been and gone.

My main bugbear is the micromanagement - I'd much rather that the Manager could be told to keep booze levels between 100-200 (ie when it drops below 100, queue up 100 brew drink jobs) than having to remember it myself while I'm busy planning my extravagant anti-gobbo defense grid.

[Andir]

My main bugbear is the micromanagement - I'd much rather that the Manager could be told to keep booze levels between 100-200 (ie when it drops below 100, queue up 100 brew drink jobs) than having to remember it myself while I'm busy planning my extravagant anti-gobbo defense grid.

Agree.  Settable inventory limits should be considered.  Especially if the lower limit is smart enough to queue jobs:
ie: My minimum/auto-queue bed stock is 7, my preferred inventory is 10.  I hit 7 beds in storage.  Auto-queue 3 more to meet my target of 10 bed stock.  It would be nice to be able to make the lower limit a hard cap.  If set, dwarfs would be denied access to the items until stock is replenished.  You would need a bookkeeper/quartermaster to enable said feature though.

[Angellus]

I've introduced over 10 people to this game. 10/10 made the quote: 'I've got my gamer's pride' over the ASCII graphics.

One played the game eventually, but he got demotivated after his first fort died to smithereens by food disaster.

Maybe a Rookie mod to start out with? with food to make dwarves happy but not being a necessity, so that people can learn the controlls without having to learn everything at once?

[CynicalRyan]

So what you're trying to say is absolutely no effort should be made to help people trying pick up the alpha release before the presentation arc has even been started?

Because thats what you *are* saying, intentional or not.

Actually, quite the contrary. The UI needs to be reworked somewhat fierce so that new players cna pick it up without getting a shock, and never coming back.

The goal is to make tutorials redundant, not to make the game opaque to the newby (it doesn't need help in that regard, anyway). I, for one, play DF *despite* its UI.

[Jakkarra]

ill mod you an "easy mode" if you want...

what dont you want in? and ill use Maydays graphics for ease and Pulling-in-friends power.

Love, jakkarra

(after this, no derailment)

[azazel]

This thread is highlighting a lot of stuff as well:
http://www.bay12games.com/forum/index.php?topic=34743.0

[CynicalRyan]

ill mod you an "easy mode" if you want...

what dont you want in? and ill use Maydays graphics for ease and Pulling-in-friends power.

You missed the point so very completely.

It isn't about the difficulty of the game. It's that the UI is next to useless. No tileset or modded gobbo is gonna change that.

[Aquillion]

The biggest turn-off for me is the lack of a simple save-game system, instead of this rogue-like system we have right now.
I just lost a fortress because I tried to go back to an older savegame, but being unable to find it again after I saved it.

I kinda agree; there's no question that the audience of 'roguelike' fans is limited, and things like this (and the ASCII) make it hard for DF to move beyond that (though certainly not impossible.)

But, with that said, DF just doesn't work that well with a simple "list of saved games"-style save system.  That would give players the impression that they can, for instance, save their game during a fortress and then go adventure -- which would prevent the fortress and adventure from overlapping.  Basically, the big consistent world doesn't play well with the 'branching' that you get from a large number of saves.

[CynicalRyan]

But, with that said, DF just doesn't work that well with a simple "list of saved games"-style save system.  That would give players the impression that they can, for instance, save their game during a fortress and then go adventure -- which would prevent the fortress and adventure from overlapping.  Basically, the big consistent world doesn't play well with the 'branching' that you get from a large number of saves.

Actually, it does. As long as there is an active fortress on a map, it can be blocked from Adventure mode. If you activate seasonal saves with auto backup in the init.txt, you get an old fashioned save game list (you jsut can't revert to a previous save that easily if you "quick save").

[Jakkarra]

i did not miss the point my good fellow, i should be able to remove most of the neccessary UI features through liberal use of the smelter.

only for training purposes however...


love, jakkarra

[Chaingun]

I find the lack of indication of what to do the hardest thing to deal with.

Make a tutorial (accessable from main menu & using a preloaded map) where one command at a time is introduced (everything else hidden until it appears for first time), in the order you'd use these commands to make a simple functioning fortress...

Examples of order of introduction:

1. Teach how to look around in 3D with the default view and with the with v, u views.
2. Teach how to dig. (Including stairs.)
3. Teach how to designate food stockpile indoors.
4. Teach how to designate meeting hall inside.
5. Teach how to set up mason and carpentry workshops.
6. Teach how to manage labour.
etc.

My other major inital hurdle was (surprise surprise), the lack of mouse support. A complex micromanagement strategy game is NOT cool without it...

-----------

I find the biggest long term obstacle for my enjoyment of the game to be the fact it's ridiculously easy after a certain point. Enemies aren't equipped to deal with hitech dwarven defences; traps are overpowered. Economy is endless; just trade those worthless rock crafts with the caravans; the merchants will not adjust the price according to the laws of economics. There aren't enough design considerations for a fort (having to deal with ventilation & proper cave in risk for poorly unsupported sections would be start). As it is right now you can just dig out a big square space and place most of your buildings there, with some exceptions.

[FistsOfTinsel]

I've been playing a few more days since my last n00b post, I thought I'd add/emphasize some more stuff:

1.  Again, micromanagement.  The way DF plays, I should be managing things from the top down almost always, with the option to dig down into details when necessary.  The whole menu/command interface needs to be rethought with this in mind:  The top level entry point, conceptually, should be based on goals, not on details.  For example, I need to build an army - the "military" menu is a good start, but from there, I need to drill down to all the minutia, to the point where I need to be mining magnetite, if necessary, to get ore for my equipment.  This leads to...

2.  An interface that is more "browser" like, in that I can follow links.  The current interface consists almost entirely of dead ends, but the game itself is a web of dependencies.  Taking the example above, I want an army; I start by designating some dwarves, then I want to equip them.  The game should let me know that there is not enough equipment (and show me what is available); if I want to make swords and armor, the link in the equipment screen should take me to a list of forges and smithies; I shouldn't have to hunt for them around my map, or have to figure out which build menu they live under.  Once built, or in the "add" menu, it should do me the same favor for raw materials.  And once I'm done with these menus, backing out should work like "back" in a browser, and bring me to where I was, not just bomb me out to the main menu.  Same thing with inspecting dwarves; when I'm looking at a dwarf, I shouldn't have to exit that view, remembering the dwarf's name, then go into another menu and find the dwarf's name again to get to some other aspect (e.g., I see a bedroom he owns, I have to exit, "u", find his name in the list, and go from there).

3.  It is not useful to distinguish tasks from one another by category - (d)esignate, (b)uild, (p)ile, (z)one, etc.  All of these things are modifying a square, either by function or construction; After playing a week, I still have to go back to the tutorial page when I need to create a farm, since I can never remember what menu it lives under.  Similarly loo(k), (v)iew and others are similarly confusing.  We already have the ability/requirement to navigate through multiple items in a square, so there is no intersection between these two commands.

4.  Consistency - menu navigation, consistent methods for marking areas - either the umkh expando-square, or the "mark the corners" technique, but we don't need both.  I'm sure there are others.

5.  Management of production buildings should be able to be done via a main list, not navigating around the map with your cursor using the "q" command.  Doing this would also allow you to set up supply queues that go from one workshop to the next, with rules about what to do when you hit a resource block.

6.  Better notification.  Every dwarf that I've had die on me so far (other than the one that went crazy because I didn't know about moodiness), died from thirst, or being killed by a carp while trying to drink from the river, all because I missed the notification that I couldn't brew any more booze for lack of barrels.  Since "job cancelled" notices are fairly common for me (and non-fatal), there needs to be notices that are raised when there are fortress-wide crises looming (like no food or drink).

7.  Lists, lists lists.  For the love of Armok, sort those damn lists, and menu choices too.  I should also be able to group and sort by type or attributes (value, weight, value/weight, etc.), and collapse sections.  duplicate items in a container could just be indicated with a (quantity) to the right.  Given the limited screen real estate, the names should be formatted as (size) (name) (material); having material first is pretty useless - I don't care whether my leather helm is made out of carp leather or rhesus monkey leather when I'm selling tons of junk.

8.  Explanations of roadblocks:  This goes back to the browser link/drill down issue.  I have ordered a building built, but nobody is building it.  It says it needs "Architecture", and I have architects, so why no action?  When presented with roadblock, there should be a link that takes me to a decision screen where I can reallocate jobs/resources/whatever to get that construction moving.  Looking at questions online, there is a lot of "I have done X, why isn't it working".  I still can't figure out why one of my champions (who's carrying a baby in her arms) refuses to drop her artifact hammer even though I've flagged her as "unarmed" in the weapons screen.

9.  The general rule of software interface design should be, "Make the common thing easy, and the difficult things possible".  There are some tasks that I think should be easy (like emptying my cages of the kobolds I caught, or sending a squad of soldiers to a spot to fight bad guys), that I still haven't figured out how to do; for both tasks there seems to be a whole series of commands I have to execute in order to get this done right, but these tasks seem like they are relatively "obvious" - why isn't the method for executing them obvous?

=======

Finally, only tangentially related to this thread:

People have complained about lag once you get a lot of dwarves; I'm seeing it now with around 100 little guys.  I read in an interview that you're using an A* algorithm for pathfinding, since you can't lay down "cheater paths" that other devs might do on maps that are not dynamic.  If the amount of cpu that's being used for A* is a significant factor in the lag, this could help:

Could you implement something similar to how ants navigate?  Basically, the way it works is that ants leave a pheremone trail behind them (that gradually fades) depending on what task they are on, and they follow these trails also depending on their task.

For example, an ant is on "forage"; it leaves the hill, and is leaving behind "forage" scent.  It randomly wanders until it finds food.  Once it does, it follows the gradient of decreasing "forage" pheremone back to the hill, only this time it's leaving behind "food" scent.  When it reaches the hill, the other ants can detect the food trail and follow it back.  They all do the same thing, so the more traffic, the heavier the scent.  Once the food is gone, the scent gradually evaporates.

Now, the dwarves in DF are not as dumb as ants - they know where they need to go, using A*, but you could have them leave behind the virtual "scent" that subsequent dwarves could follow to simplify the A* search they need to perform.  You could also have a number of "pathfinder" dwarves that don't follow the trails but do use the straight A* path in order to "update" trails in cases where changes in the environment has opened up new trails or closed off old ones.  You would have lots of virtual "pheremone trails" all over the map that would act as highways for common dwarf tasks.

[Phenixmirage]

I'm grateful for the site finder, it's been a great help in locating good sites, but I'd like to see a "Find Next" option to cycle through all sites that match my criteria. And of course, the ability to search for sites with sand would also be greatly appriciated.  Too many otherwise perfect sites have been turned down due to lack of sand.