Print

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

[assimilateur]

If you want more ores, there's a couple of things you can do.

1. Change the cluster size of all your undesired minerals to cluster_small. Removing them altogether by deleting their environment tag would probably work as well, but it might have unexpected consequences like the measures you've tried yourself. I can sort of vouch for the "cluster_small" way working as expected (I say "sort of" because I have played one fort with those mods so far, and was satisfied with the results, but your mileage may vary).

2. Change the environment of your most desired minerals to all_stone and their size to cluster.

The second step is important in that it positively makes aluminum or gold or whatever you want as common as microcline. Merely getting rid of the useless minerals might not be enough to give you shitloads of ores, as you might end up with only your "layer" stones and a couple of veins or small clusters of the good stuff.

[NecroRebel]

I know there are other ways of doing things; I just wanted something quick and simple and assumed that altering the raws so the game no longer knew that the bad stones were there would be good enough.

I suspect that if I had removed them altogether that it might've worked better, but I didn't want to have to load up a fresh copy of DF if I wanted to undo it and didn't think to make a copy of the original until just before I saved the altered version. Considering I did make a copy of the original, though, I probably should've just cut out the undesirable stuff and been done with it. Regardless, for the purposes of the fort that I'm working on now, it probably doesn't matter much, especially as I'm hoping for it to be my last fort before the new version.

[Innominate]

I just discovered that one of my modding attempts had some surprisingly fortunate, but weird and undesired effects.

I wanted to remove all of the useless rocks, like orthoclase and microcline, from the game in the hope of getting more gems and metal ores instead of large clusters of crap. My attempt involved just taking the matgloss_stone_mineral.txt entries and removing the brackets around all of the useless stones' names, believing that this would remove them from the game without actually deleting all of them.

Well, then I started up a map, used Reveal to survey the landscape, and found that there were mica and alunite clusters amongst my various igneous layers. This annoyed me, but I decided to make a fort anyway and just deal with their presence. A couple ingame years later, I chance to look at a mica stone. In its uses list, it claimed that it was an ore of aluminum, and was worth 120 instead of the expected 3. I found this more than a little confusing, so I looked at my stones screen.

Sure enough, mica is now, inexplicably, an ore of aluminum. Native aluminum apparently doesn't exist, despite the fact that I didn't mod it at all. Horn silver also doesn't exist, nor does calcite; instead, brimstone and alunite take their places, uses, and values. This was not what I had intended when I tried to remove useless stones from the game... 

On the bright side, I now have flux (calcite-called-alunite) on a purely igneous map, as well as... Oh, probably about 400 native-aluminum-as-mica so far, with at least 2 more totally-untouched large clusters. Once I get a blacksmith up to legendary, I think I'm going to make enough aluminum tables and chairs to furnish my entire public dining hall, and maybe make all of my nobles full-aluminum rooms (the king'll get adamantine, since I've got a funhouse on my map).

Yeah, so what you did was just delete the "new stone definition starts here" tags, meaning that the old definition of "[MATGLOSS_STONE:ALUMINUM]" replaced some of its tags with those of borax, then olivine, then hornblende, kaolinite, serpentine, orthoclase, microcline and finally mica. Since none of those stones replace aluminium's "[METAL_ORE:ALUMINUM:100]" tag with "[METAL_ORE:ALUMINUM:0]" (whereas they do replace "[TILE:'^']" with "[TILE:'v']", as well as most other tags), aluminium (with the name and otherwise equivalent functionality of mica) drops aluminium ore.

I'm astounded that Toady even lets the game compile the files with such a mess in the raws. Long story short: deleting the entire section for each stone would have been approximately 10,000 times better than what you did.

[assimilateur]

I probably should've just cut out the undesirable stuff and been done with it.

Let me reiterate: that probably wouldn't be enough. I refer you to the following part of my previous post:

2. Change the environment of your most desired minerals to all_stone and their size to cluster.

The second step is important in that it positively makes aluminum or gold or whatever you want as common as microcline. Merely getting rid of the useless minerals might not be enough to give you shitloads of ores, as you might end up with only your "layer" stones and a couple of veins or small clusters of the good stuff.

It might seem like going over the top, but as I said, merely reducing the number of useless stone from the mineral file (or even removing it altogether) doesn't strictly equate to getting more ores. You might merely end up with more andesite, granite, marble or whatever your layer is made of.

[Safe-Keeper]

[OT]

2. Use Dwarf Companion to kill off the other Dwarves, but do so while your hermit is out of sight of them; otherwise, you will have one very unhappy hermit.

You can kill dwarves with Dwarf Companion?! How? Do you press Delete with a dwarf selected or something?[/OT]

[NecroRebel]

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Yeah, so what you did was just delete the "new stone definition starts here" tags, meaning that the old definition of "[MATGLOSS_STONE:ALUMINUM]" replaced some of its tags with those of borax, then olivine, then hornblende, kaolinite, serpentine, orthoclase, microcline and finally mica. Since none of those stones replace aluminium's "[METAL_ORE:ALUMINUM:100]" tag with "[METAL_ORE:ALUMINUM:0]" (whereas they do replace "[TILE:'^']" with "[TILE:'v']", as well as most other tags), aluminium (with the name and otherwise equivalent functionality of mica) drops aluminium ore.

I'm astounded that Toady even lets the game compile the files with such a mess in the raws. Long story short: deleting the entire section for each stone would have been approximately 10,000 times better than what you did.

Good to know why it happened. If I end up generating a new world again before the update comes, I'll probably end up doing that.

-snip-

I am aware that it wouldn't ensure more useful materials, but it would help give more, and at the very least it would make the walls of my forts more solidly-colored and prevent the annoying "You have discovered microcline!" messages.

Besides that, I didn't want to make precious materials as common as the large cluster stones. Note that I accidentally made "native aluminum" as common as mica, and considered that an undesired consequence of my modding. I just wanted to make the layers to be filled with small clusters of gems and veins of ores. From what I understand, each level of each region block absolutely does have a few small clusters and veins or a single large cluster, so if there are no large clusters, you will get more other stuff. Not hundreds more, like making precious materials into large clusters, but just more.

[OT]

2. Use Dwarf Companion to kill off the other Dwarves, but do so while your hermit is out of sight of them; otherwise, you will have one very unhappy hermit.

You can kill dwarves with Dwarf Companion?! How? Do you press Delete with a dwarf selected or something?[/OT]

Right-click on their name, Hurt. Or double-click their name then click the Hurt button at the top of the unit window that pops up. Either way, it makes them have red wounds on every body part, which usually rapidly kills them. If they survive too long for your tastes, go into the unit window and give them some bleeding, too.

[assimilateur]

From what I understand, each level of each region block absolutely does have a few small clusters and veins or a single large cluster, so if there are no large clusters, you will get more other stuff. Not hundreds more, like making precious materials into large clusters, but just more.

I thought it was one large cluster and some veins and small clusters. I'm going to have to test that.

At any rate, I see where you're coming from. If getting rid of all the generic stones was one of your main objectives, then I guess that would be the way to go about it. Personally, I kinda like the variety. I've gotten rid of the generic large clusters mainly to make room for more ores, I don't have a problem with the useless stones themselves.

Either way, it makes them have red wounds on every body part, which usually rapidly kills them. If they survive too long for your tastes, go into the unit window and give them some bleeding, too.

Don't red wounds entail bleeding? I mean, how else are you gonna kill them if not by bleeding or suffocation?

[NecroRebel]

I thought it was one large cluster and some veins and small clusters. I'm going to have to test that.

At any rate, I see where you're coming from. If getting rid of all the generic stones was one of your main objectives, then I guess that would be the way to go about it. Personally, I kinda like the variety. I've gotten rid of the generic large clusters mainly to make room for more ores, I don't have a problem with the useless stones themselves.

I think many of the large clusters have the possibility of veins and small clusters inside them. I know one of the green stones, olivine I think, tends to have platinum veins included within it, for instance. I usually check for present minerals with reveal before starting my forts, and I'm fairly certain that it's either a large cluster or other stuff. I very well could be wrong, though.

I've not had a problem with the large clusters, really, but I just decided to do away with them to see what the game was like without. I thought it would be nice to not have to deal with unnecessary stones, especially that eye-searing blue microcline 

Either way, it makes them have red wounds on every body part, which usually rapidly kills them. If they survive too long for your tastes, go into the unit window and give them some bleeding, too.

Don't red wounds entail bleeding? I mean, how else are you gonna kill them if not by bleeding or suffocation?

Normally it'd be basically impossible to get a red wound without taking a hit that would make you bleed, but companion use isn't exactly normal circumstances. I've had creatures survive for a couple of weeks after I used the hurt feature of companion on them, but they die almost instantly after I magic their blood away.

[assimilateur]

Normally it'd be basically impossible to get a red wound without taking a hit that would make you bleed, but companion use isn't exactly normal circumstances. I've had creatures survive for a couple of weeks after I used the hurt feature of companion on them, but they die almost instantly after I magic their blood away.

I'm curious as to what their stated cause of death is if you only give them red wounds and wait.

[NecroRebel]

...You know, I'm not sure. I've never done it to my own dwarves, nor have I had combat reports on to see, since last I checked that feature of companion was still very buggy, or even if that would be included in combat reports since no combat is going on.

Edit: Just checked; it says that they bled to death. This despite the fact that they supposedly aren't bleeding; at least, Companion says that they have 0 bleeding. I had a 5-toughness wounded champion survive long enough to be taken to bed, though, and I know I've seen things survive longer, so I'm not quite sure how that works.

[assimilateur]

Thanks for testing that. Your results make the wound system appear even more strange than it already was. If supposedly non-bleeding red wounds are, indeed, bleeding, then I'm wondering how the chance of survival is calculated.

[NecroRebel]

Thanks for testing that. Your results make the wound system appear even more strange than it already was. If supposedly non-bleeding red wounds are, indeed, bleeding, then I'm wondering how the chance of survival is calculated.

Well... The test wasn't exactly intensive, especially as I ctrl-alt-deleted out of the game after killing 13 of my 17 dwarves to see if I could get one to survive for a while.

I suspect that the game just doesn't know how to deal with a creature that is totally mangled but was never injured. "Bled to death" is probably just the generic cause of death that is defaulted to when something dies of their wounds. Since that's probably the most common cause of death, it would make sense to have all of the other, less-common causes of death just have a special message instead of having a special message for all causes of death, especially since the latter might make the game more confused if something impossible happened (like, say, something getting red wounds all over its body without taking a single hit).

[SimRobert2001]

I just had one last night.  A dwarf had breached the HFS, so i quickly set him to "masonry" and tried to wall it up.  However, a spirit of fire had popped up, and he quickly met a quick, horrid, burning end. Now, the rest of my dwarves were down a LONG 2 tile wide tunnel, so i quickly ordered 2 masons to build a wall down the hallway.  Now, i have my ONLY miner mining nearby.  So, i try to have the masons save him.  However, the Clowns of Fire were too quick, and son roasted one of my masons while the other ran.  Fortunatly, another peasant was wandering around, so i drafted him so he could distract the CoF's while he build a wall furhter down. The mason was scared, and went off to get a drink, so he wouldn't do it, but soon, MORE showed up, and it was too late.  My dwarves were slaughtered.

2nd facepalm: as the CoF's were destroying EVERYTHING, i notced them approaching an access floodgate that leads to several pipes that feed the waterfalls in my dining room.  I watch as one approaches, and soon utterly DESTROYS the floodgate. This leads to MASSIVE flooding through my fortress. Well, it would have, except that the CoF decided that it would stand in front of the approaching water, and began to evaporate it.

3rd facepalm: as the Cof's were destroying everything, i quickly ordered my dwarves to wall themselves in.  i considered drafting several of them and having them stay inside safe rooms, but i decided against it.  Too much work and all that.  Then 3 of them ran out into the hallway JUST as the last wall was finished. >.<

[Greiger]

I'm not sure but I wouldn't be surprised if a red heart is enough to cause a bled to death message.  Considering a red heart qualifies as a mortal wound to anything that can bleed, it could very well just start a countdown to death modified by toughness, regardless if the creature is actually bleeding. That would explain why they still die despite not actually bleeding. 

If it's the heart it's bled to death, lungs or throat is suffocation.  Maybe when your so royally boned as to have all 3 messed up it just defaults to heart.

The game certainly knows what a mortal wound is, since red lungs heart or throat all bring up the mortal wound warning and prevent travel in adventure mode.

[assimilateur]

Maybe when your so royally boned as to have all 3 messed up it just defaults to heart.

It probably isn't a matter of defaulting, just a matter of one (red lungs) taking longer than the other (red heart) to kill you.

red lungs heart or throat all bring up the mortal wound warning and prevent travel in adventure mode.

I'm curious, does one pierced lung qualify as a mortal wound in adventure mode? I think I've read about super tough dwarves surviving with just one functional lung, but I can't be sure.