Print

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

[Rooster]

Many people suggested that farming should be a lot harder, or take much space.
I don't agree. I agree that it should take a lot of time, and work, it doesn't have to be that realistic.
It's a game, and even harvest moon isn't that realistic.

My idea is that each plant should be very delicate and fragile.

Every plant (at least for now) should need:
- Proper moisture.
- Proper light factor (fake or real sun light)
- Minerals in specific proportions.
- Levels above or below ground

If there's even a little too much, or not enough, then plants should start dying or give bad crops.
Plump helmet should die when at level -10 or higher, and should thrive in deeper levels.
wild strawberries should be picky about nutrients
And stuff like that...

EDIT: That would be a challenge to a player to learn to keep up with this

[qoonpooka]

I think this is a little overboard, but some abstracted level of these factors I could get behind.  I think temperature and soil type would be the things I could see being added.  That covers a lot of your climate/mineral content/depth ideas but in a manageable mechanic that still requires some adaptation, clever thinking, or good planning.  It also will help incentivize not building on a volcano - the available soil would be very dry and in short supply, except on the exposed surface which would be difficult to farm.

[silhouette]

I dont believe every plant should be delicate and fragile, some are hard thick things.

Depending on the plant some may need little moisture while another may need heaps.
Light factor will just add too many complications that arnt really needed, underground plants grow underground and dont need light, above ground plants on ther otherhand...
Minerals shouldnt really matter, only soil quality.
Like before, differnt plant conditions.

[Neonivek]

I should state that a large bulk of the "Farming should be mor difficult" arguements have nothing to do with realism (rather they often use real life as a way to come up with ideas) but rather they are about improving gameplay by balancing things, making sieges effective, and not having one farm plot provide enough food to feed an entire fortress effectively making food superfluous even in the harshest badlands.

[Impaler[WrG]]

I generally agree with making farming harder and even started a lengthy thread on it, but I don't see why the actual depth below ground should make any difference for a subterranean crop, dark and underground is dark and underground if its one level or 100.  On the surface temperature could be a factor in how well a plant survives (frost kills many plants) but again actual height would be irrelevant outside of its effects on temperature.

[qoonpooka]

I should state that a large bulk of the "Farming should be mor difficult" arguements have nothing to do with realism (rather they often use real life as a way to come up with ideas) but rather they are about improving gameplay by balancing things, making sieges effective, and not having one farm plot provide enough food to feed an entire fortress effectively making food superfluous even in the harshest badlands.

I agree with these goals, but realism and gameplay should also be considered factors.  Simply slowing down the food production cycle so that you can get one, maybe two harvests per year will accomplish effective sieges.

[darkflagrance]

I should state that a large bulk of the "Farming should be mor difficult" arguements have nothing to do with realism (rather they often use real life as a way to come up with ideas) but rather they are about improving gameplay by balancing things, making sieges effective, and not having one farm plot provide enough food to feed an entire fortress effectively making food superfluous even in the harshest badlands.

I agree with these goals, but realism and gameplay should also be considered factors.  Simply slowing down the food production cycle so that you can get one, maybe two harvests per year will accomplish effective sieges.

Not really, because sieges won't be cutting most forts off from their standard food supply. For humans, the farms are generally outside the defenses, but the reverse is true for dwarves.

[Safe-Keeper]

Crop rotation would also go a long way towards the goal of eliminating "super-farms". Farm on a single plot for too long, and gradually its yield goes down until it's exhausted, along with the ground its built on. Rotate the crops (by building 2-4 farm plots and using only one at a time) and each of them lasts far longer.

But yes, plants probably need to grow more slowly, too. Sowing in spring and harvesting in fall sounds good to me, but this'd depend on the plant, of course.

[Draco18s]

Crop rotation would also go a long way towards the goal of eliminating "super-farms". Farm on a single plot for too long, and gradually its yield goes down until it's exhausted, along with the ground its built on. Rotate the crops (by building 2-4 farm plots and using only one at a time) and each of them lasts far longer.

That's not what crop rotation is.

[Safe-Keeper]

Thanks for correcting me.

[Zifnab]

As someone who majored in soils in college, there are a few things I'd like to point out.

It should be fairly easy to eventually link soil type and # of layers to the underlying bedrock types and climate.  If this is done, then certain types of soil would be associated with certain map features.  For example, coarser soils might be found closer to a river channel or on steep slopes, while soils like silt and silt loam would be found in floodplains.  A degree of randomness could be added to the deeper soils, as these may have formed during different conditions.

When starting a fortress mode game, a suitability index could be generated for soils present on the map.  This list of values would take into account the soil type, temperature, and moisture and relate it to individual plant preferences.  Each plant would have in the raws a couple of tags such as PREFERS_COARSE, REQUIRES_FINE, PREFERS_COLD, CANNOT_HOT, etc.  The suitability index could be used to control productivity of individual plant types. 

Additionally, fertilization and irrigation could be made more important.  Fertilization of poorer soils could give a temporary boost in production.  Ideally, the most productive soils would not benifit as much from fertilization.  If farm plots are in moist areas, irrigation would not be needed, but in dry areas, or tropics with dry seasons, lack of flood or bucket irrigation could cause diminished yields, crop failures or even a random chance of salinization (destroy the farm plot, replace tile with a salty version of the soil which is not farmable).

[Draco18s]

Additionally, fertilization and irrigation could be made more important.  Fertilization of poorer soils could give a temporary boost in production.  Ideally, the most productive soils would not benifit as much from fertilization.  If farm plots are in moist areas, irrigation would not be needed, but in dry areas, or tropics with dry seasons, lack of flood or bucket irrigation could cause diminished yields, crop failures or even a random chance of salinization (destroy the farm plot, replace tile with a salty version of the soil which is not farmable).

Fertilization already helps, but its equivalent to having Legendary growers, rather than using the dwarf's skill.

What I'd like to see in fertilization is a 2 or 3 axis "soil quality" measure.  2 would be better, which is based on the pH of the soil and is phosphor level (and ignore nitrogen).  This allows 4 quadrants to the soil meters and allows each of the four underground plants a "favorite" zone and 1 direction of modification (eg, plump helmets--likes high phosphore and low pH--reduce phosphor and leave pH the same while cave wheat--likes low phosphore and low pH--increases pH but leaves phosphore alone).

Technically a 2 axis "graph" has 9 regions: high, medium, low levels (3 zones, squared).  All plants would have a favorite, and would operate better in that zone, normally in neighboring (non-diagonal) zones, and poorly in those neighbors, and not at all anywhere else.  So a plant that favored medium/medium would never "die," just grow at a reduced level:


  ^ 1|2|1
pH| 2|3|2
  | 1|2|1
  +----->
   phosphor

3: ideal, increased yield
2: normal
1: poor, low yield
0: no growth

Compared to a corner plant:


0|0|1
0|1|2
1|2|3


And an edge:



0|1|0
1|2|1
2|3|2

[Impaler[WrG]]

while not to complex I fear by the time you add moisture and temperature to the equation you'll be over the appropriate complexity level.  If moisture is three levels (dry, moist, damp) then you end up with 9 combination and three dimensional graphs, temperature is yet another layer.  Perhaps dropping things down to a binary grow/no-grow and each plant has a specified range of tolerance for each factor and the UI simply blocks planting in inappropriate soil.  Also I really wouldn't want to see 'phosphorus' expressed in the Soil read out it's not time period appropriate, rather a silt-sand-clay designation would be more useful, it would also allow some soils to count as both types and grow a wider range of plants.

[Ze Spy]

it will make it almost impossible for newbies , causing lots of rage quits , , so unless there is a hard feature(choosable in embark , i guess?)that enables all that , but a normal mode that does not enable all that , i am against the idea.
 

[GlyphGryph]

I'd like to see something like this, where different plants grow better than in different places, but I think we're getting a bit too particular here.

The three possible factors should be
Temperature, determined by biome and season
Sphere, determined by biome and associated spheres. Opposing spheres would be bad.
Soil Richness, stored at some soil level. Raised a certain amount for each use of fertilizer. Stone and other non-soil based areas would have a nutrient level of 0 (which is good for mushrooms, but probably not much else) making fertilizer important.

These would all tie together and compare against the growers skill to determine the chance of the plant growing succesfully instead of dying.

Sun Berries
Arctic Glacier, sand, Evil
0% chance to grow
Temperate forest, some decent soil, Good
70% chance to grow
Desert, fertilized farm, Good
60% chance to grow