Print

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

[Aquillion]

Wait, wait, stop!  I just realized what's wrong with this suggestion.  It was in the back of my head for a long time, but I couldn't put it into words.

In my fortresses, I do what's described above (channelling a floor out from below using a staircase, specifically without linking the stair into the open area above) all the time.  I use it whenever I want to build a new moat in a potentially dangerous area.

Staircases up to the ceiling (and no further) are important to give the dwarves access so they can open up pits, moats, and so on from below.  This suggestion would make that impossible, because your 'access' staircase that you use to dig out the moat from below would automatically become a 'two-part' staircase giving access to anyone on top of the moat, even if you don't want it to.

And that's terrible.  Well, for me, anyway.  I use digging-from-below as my primary way of making moats, pits, and many other structures in hazardous areas; for me, this suggestion would cripple the way I play the game.

[Neruz]

All that really means is that we need a reverse channel designation.

Stairs are needlessly complex atm and really need to be simplified.

[Silverionmox]

Basically, what I'm saying is to have the "down" stair implied automatically when the staircase is dug out (just as the "floor" above a wall is implied automatically). No change would have to be made in how movement through these two objects is handled. Technically, there's still a "floor" on the level above; the "floor," however, is now the half of the staircase leading down.

Yeah, that's the idea.

I don't see a problem with this. The only problem with this system is the inability to use stairs to look down a level without cutting it out.

Well, we shouldn't be able to do that anyway. That should be done by prospective drilling (by a miner with a hand drill) or something.

It's not like the rock is going to jump out and eat your dwarves or anything.

Yet.

[Random832]

Wait, wait, stop!  I just realized what's wrong with this suggestion.  It was in the back of my head for a long time, but I couldn't put it into words.

In my fortresses, I do what's described above (channelling a floor out from below using a staircase, specifically without linking the stair into the open area above) all the time.  I use it whenever I want to build a new moat in a potentially dangerous area.

Staircases up to the ceiling (and no further) are important to give the dwarves access so they can open up pits, moats, and so on from below.  This suggestion would make that impossible, because your 'access' staircase that you use to dig out the moat from below would automatically become a 'two-part' staircase giving access to anyone on top of the moat, even if you don't want it to.

And that's terrible.  Well, for me, anyway.  I use digging-from-below as my primary way of making moats, pits, and many other structures in hazardous areas; for me, this suggestion would cripple the way I play the game.

In any change in behavior it's important to differentiate between stuff that is reasonable behavior, stuff that should be done another way, and stuff we really shouldn't be able to do at all.

What does "up to the ceiling (and no further)" mean once the ceiling is removed? What do you think these staircases actually look like?

[Aquillion]

In any change in behavior it's important to differentiate between stuff that is reasonable behavior, stuff that should be done another way, and stuff we really shouldn't be able to do at all.

What does "up to the ceiling (and no further)" mean once the ceiling is removed? What do you think these staircases actually look like?

Scaffolding.  Toady actually described this use of them as such IIRC, way back when the 3D arc was coming in.  They go up high enough for a dwarf to reach the very base of the ceiling and collapse it, but they don't connect to surface above -- there's no landing platform providing an easy way to walk down from there.  We don't know the 'thickness' of a floor (remember, you only have to reach the bottom to wreck its structural integrity and collapse it), and we don't really know the area of one space (a staircase in the center could be impossible to reach from the sides, if it's not deliberately connected.)

Now, sure, you can argue over whether that's a valid situation or not (the distances and structures involved are a bit too abstract to say with certainty), but the important thing is that this changes the nature of the discussion.  Now you're talking about taking away an option and a utility for stairs that players currently have.  That's a very different position than just arguing for what's been presented until now as a clear, obvious improvement that costs nobody anything.

I'm against it.  I don't see the benefit.

[Silverionmox]

As I see it, a staircase is a built or carved spiral in the whole square to the edges, and from the floor up to the ceiling. The ceiling itself has the thickness of a step or two. This has the consequence that mining out any adjacent square gives horizontal access to the staircase, and that simply removing the floor at the top of the staircase, i.e. the ceiling, makes a functional staircase if there is empty space above the staircase.

[Aquillion]

Yeah.  I disagree.  I feel players should be able to build a staircase up to reach the ceiling so they can interact with it if they want to.  After that, they should be able to remove the ceiling (rather than continue the staircase through it) if they want to, opening up a 'pit' above them.  Doing this should not make the access stair that they built to the ceiling magically extend itself the rest of the way up through the gap so every wild animal wandering around above can wander down into their fortress.  That behavior is both unintuitive and unhelpful.

Dwarves should be able to dig out channels, pits, and so on from below.  It shouldn't be impossible or deliberately difficult.

Under your suggestion, it would still be possible to dig out areas from below, yes...  but you would have to first place the staircase, then precisely after the channel had been dug, you would have to remove the staircase.  And you would have to hope that a dwarf gets around to removing it before a wild animal wanders in, because what you're asking for, basically, is "take away the ability to build half-complete staircases for use as scaffolds."

That's not a good way for it to work.  The benefits to your suggestion were, IMHO, never very good -- all you're doing is obscuring the way floors/ceilings work by having them automatically removed, which is a bad idea IMHO -- players will have to deal with them eventually to do any complicated digging.  And the idea of constructions that extend their effects into two levels is something that I find inherently bad.  I don't like the way ramps work, and I don't think stairs should work that way.

But all that aside, what you're asking for is something that would introduce another step to digging pits and moats from below that, in effect, would cripple it the way channeling out areas from above is currently crippled -- forcing players to designate multiple steps at different points.  That's not a good idea.  You're asking for the interface to be crippled in a small but significant way, one that would seriously impact the way I play the game.

You asked me to come up with something that your suggestion would break.  I explained it to you.  What else is there to say?

[Neruz]

It would make more sense to simplify stairs and then add a 'scaffold' construction or something which acts in the way of the current stairs.

While i agree that it should be possible to do what you say you currently do with stairs; i don't think it should be stairs that do it. Stairs are a pretty simple and core part of any structrural design and they bring with them a number of assumptions, people expect stairs to connect one level to another, they don't expect to have to build down stairs to connect to up stairs. Hell they probably don't even expect stairs to have a direction.


Basically, they expect stairs to act like stairs, not like scaffolding; scaffolding should act like scaffolding, stairs should act like stairs. It's all about intuitiveness, and DF is a game ,which means it should be as intuitive as possible without compromising gameplay.



It would be far more intuitive to add a scaffold construction\designation and make stairs act like omnidirectional ramps.

[Silverionmox]

Yeah.  I disagree.  I feel players should be able to build a staircase up to reach the ceiling so they can interact with it if they want to. After that, they should be able to remove the ceiling (rather than continue the staircase through it) if they want to, opening up a 'pit' above them.  Doing this should not make the access stair that they built to the ceiling magically extend itself the rest of the way up through the gap so every wild animal wandering around above can wander down into their fortress.  That behavior is both unintuitive and unhelpful. Under your suggestion, it would still be possible to dig out areas from below, yes...  but you would have to first place the staircase, then precisely after the channel had been dug, you would have to remove the staircase.  And you would have to hope that a dwarf gets around to removing it before a wild animal wanders in, because what you're asking for, basically, is "take away the ability to build half-complete staircases for use as scaffolds."

What you want is scaffolding. A staircase goes both ways. I agree that digging out the channel from below should be as easy as digging a tunnel. If we define a square as the reach of a dwarf's pick, they should be able to do that, so you wouldn't need staircases to remove the ceiling.
I think that attaching something to the ceiling (if and when ceiling decorations, lamps etc. go in) should require something to stand on, because it is more precise work - but that can be as trivial as bringing a chair along, or asking a passing dwarf to lend a hand for a moment: something they should take care of themselves without player involvement anyway.

That's not a good way for it to work.  The benefits to your suggestion were, IMHO, never very good -- all you're doing is obscuring the way floors/ceilings work by having them automatically removed, which is a bad idea IMHO -- players will have to deal with them eventually to do any complicated digging.  And the idea of constructions that extend their effects into two levels is something that I find inherently bad.  I don't like the way ramps work, and I don't think stairs should work that way.

Now it is worse: you can designate stairs down that don't allow dwarves to go down, and stairs up that don't allow dwarves to go up, and it takes two designations to make one stair. With my suggestion, you only need one to make a functional staircase, while you can keep the ceiling intact by mining it out and constructing a staircase (the builder is not assumed to carry breaking tools), if you only want to breach it later on. But you'll have a functional staircase as soon as you do. If you don't want to, don't build one and breach it without one.

Even splitting it up in the two tasks make staircase - remove ceiling would be better than it is now, split up in the two tasks make a dysfunctional stair up and a dysfunctional stair down. Although that would remove the benefit of requiring only one designation for one connection, it would still be more clear in the interface, because seeing stairs down would certainly give acces downward; otherwise you'd see a hole. For stairs up you still need to look a level higher to see if both the square is passable and the floor is removed.

But all that aside, what you're asking for is something that would introduce another step to digging pits and moats from below that, in effect, would cripple it the way channeling out areas from above is currently crippled -- forcing players to designate multiple steps at different points.  That's not a good idea.  You're asking for the interface to be crippled in a small but significant way, one that would seriously impact the way I play the game.

On the contrary: as it is now, you need to designate both and up stair and a down stair, otherwise it won't work. With my suggestion, you only need one designation to connect two levels, on the lower level of the two. If you don't want a walkable connection but a hole, designate a channel on the same place. You will not need to build stairs just below the surface, unless you want to connect that level with the surface.

[Draco18s]

You still need to designate 2 spaces when digging though.  Just because the upper tile effects the lower tile (or is it the other way around!?  You'd need two different types of designations, "dig up from here" and "dig down from here"!) doesn't mean that the lower tile GAINS a dig designation.

For example, look at channeling.  I frequently bugger up my channels (when creating "no goblin zones") and end up digging into a square of my fortress.  If the lower tile gained a designation I could easily see, "oops, that's too far."

With stairs it'd be even worse, I'd have to leave a spot blank (no designation) on one level while continuing to designate hallways.  God only knows what'd happen if I designated that tile as another staircase, under your proposal there can't be two stairs in the same tile!

[Silverionmox]

You still need to designate 2 spaces when digging though.  Just because the upper tile effects the lower tile (or is it the other way around!?  You'd need two different types of designations, "dig up from here" and "dig down from here"!) doesn't mean that the lower tile GAINS a dig designation.

You designate a staircase to be carved. That includes the removal of the floor/ceiling above, otherwise it would not function. If the above square is rock, it stays rock and the above square remains impassable until you designate it to be dug out, be it by digging, carving another staircase, or channeling. I don't know wether it is currently possible to have a square filled with rock, but without a floor, but that is what it would be.
So it functions the same as channeling, except that you designate it on the level itself and you end up with a staircase instead of a hole. (Digging a channel that you can't get out of, without a ladder, from above: now that is strange )

For example, look at channeling.  I frequently bugger up my channels (when creating "no goblin zones") and end up digging into a square of my fortress.  If the lower tile gained a designation I could easily see, "oops, that's too far."

You designate the staircase on the lower level to be connected. That would solve your problem.

With stairs it'd be even worse, I'd have to leave a spot blank (no designation) on one level while continuing to designate hallways.  God only knows what'd happen if I designated that tile as another staircase, under your proposal there can't be two stairs in the same tile!

Again, you designate the staircase on the lower level to be connected. Either there is a staircase, or there is none. If another staircase is carved under an existing one, it will function and show as the current up-down stair (X).

[Sunken]

Aquillion, you make valid points about digging out things from beneath. But if we go for verisimilitude, it doesn't really make sense the way you put it either. If a dwarf standing on the floor of one level is just exactly able to dig out squares at that level - then he won't be able to dig out more than half of any square above him, if he's standing on a "half-height" staircase on the level below.
So you're right that it's practical to be able to do what you describe - but it's no more realistic for that. And it, again, leaves the problem with two-stairs-per-stair being so unintuitive and awkward.

The way dwarfs would solve this in reality would, as has been suggested, neither be to build a full-height staircase up to the ceiling and dig from that, nor to build a half-height staircase, but to bring a ladder along (or a stepladder, more likely). They'd take it away with them as soon as they're done, so no trouble with having to remove stairs - nor of having to build them in the first place.
Well, a dwarf might leave his stepladder to go get a drink sometimes, letting the elephants in - but that would simply be another hilarious dwarfish lapse like so many others we've come to love...

Ladders, by the way, could be used for other things. Getting out of pits you've dug yourself into, for example. Or getting up on walls for temporary tasks, etc. Dwarfs failing to path to such a spot could look around for a furniture pile with a stepladder in it.

[Demonic Gophers]

It would make more sense to simplify stairs and then add a 'scaffold' construction or something which acts in the way of the current stairs.

While i agree that it should be possible to do what you say you currently do with stairs; i don't think it should be stairs that do it. Stairs are a pretty simple and core part of any structrural design and they bring with them a number of assumptions, people expect stairs to connect one level to another, they don't expect to have to build down stairs to connect to up stairs. Hell they probably don't even expect stairs to have a direction.


Basically, they expect stairs to act like stairs, not like scaffolding; scaffolding should act like scaffolding, stairs should act like stairs. It's all about intuitiveness, and DF is a game ,which means it should be as intuitive as possible without compromising gameplay.



It would be far more intuitive to add a scaffold construction\designation and make stairs act like omnidirectional ramps.

So... rename stairs 'scaffolds' and add stackable ramps named stairs, in essence?

[Time Kitten]

okay, lost.

So, what would happen if these new stairs were placed over a constructed stair,you tried making a construction without channeling the floor above first, or, by clearing the space above the stair, you are unable to continue upwards digging later because you need to clear the stair to move through?

[Silverionmox]

okay, lost.

So, what would happen if these new stairs were placed over a constructed stair,you tried making a construction without channeling the floor above first, or, by clearing the space above the stair, you are unable to continue upwards digging later because you need to clear the stair to move through?

If you didn't clear out the space above the staircase, there would be no room to make a construction. Yes, you have to choose whether you dig out, channel or carve a staircase out of the square above the staircase. That's a choice you should make, just like it is now. You can always dig or channel it out and build a staircase later in that square above the staircase, if you don't want to carve a staircase right away (for example, to delay making a connection with the level above, if it is a floor).