Print

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

[Haven]

There should be a lot of tags to choose from, and some more settings for the ones that we have here.

Names being placeholders for numbers (I think), there wouldn't be a lot of effective difference, but for user-friendliness...

BIOME could have multiple biome options. Possibly also BIOME_PREFERRED and BIOME_FORBIDDEN

Could condense things into CRITERIA :(EXPORT/DIPLOMACY/POPULATION/) :(Type/Civ) :(Amount) :(priority)

[Krash]

quote: How about this: the map generates a short list of the 'worst' (Savage, hot/freezing, no trade) and 'best' (Benign, lots of trees, no Goblins) sites for each biome and allows you to quick-select them. So you'd be able to select a Terrifying Saltwater Marsh quickly rather than having to search for one yourself.

This is a damn good idea in my opinion, as well as being newb friendly.

[Draco18s]

quote:Originally posted by Neonivek:
<STRONG>"just assigning abritary numbers to things that are already there to generate some psuedo-difficulty select"

Yep exactly!

That was the ONLY thing I could come up with to fix that near non-existant problem.</STRONG>

...am I the only one that sees the sheer stupidity of this statement?  He even ADMITS that he's trying to fix a NON-EXISTENT problem.

By the way, surroundings aren't a simple 0-8 number, it's a 3x3 grid.  Is "savage + good" better or worse than "benign + evil"?  That is, would you rather be in Joyous Wilds or Sinister?  Savage is scary, evil is scary, but benign undead are things like skeletal groundhogs which aren't scary.  Joyous Wilds has things like Unicorns and Elephants.

[mickel]

quote:Originally posted by Dasleah:
<STRONG>But all this information is already on the embark screen.</STRONG>

No. The data is on the embark screen, the information is not.

The point is presentation. The rock layers information means nothing to me, it's just junk data. Sedimentary rock? What does that mean? Nothing. How will that affect my gameplay? Can't tell. If the game told me that on a scale from 0 (bad) to 10 (good) having sedimentary rock in the map was a 3, that would tell me something. If I could see that moving the embark location a little to the right would put me in a situation that rated me 4 for minerals instead of 3, that would mean something. If the game simply says one location has two layers of sedimentary rock and the other only has one, that tells me sweet Fanny Adams.

[Neonivek]

"He even ADMITS that he's trying to fix a NON-EXISTENT problem"

Near non-existant. It is fun often to think of solutions.

[Dasleah]

quote:Originally posted by mickel:
<STRONG>

No. The data is on the embark screen, the information is not.

The point is presentation. The rock layers information means nothing to me, it's just junk data. Sedimentary rock? What does that mean? Nothing. How will that affect my gameplay? Can't tell. If the game told me that on a scale from 0 (bad) to 10 (good) having sedimentary rock in the map was a 3, that would tell me something. If I could see that moving the embark location a little to the right would put me in a situation that rated me 4 for minerals instead of 3, that would mean something. If the game simply says one location has two layers of sedimentary rock and the other only has one, that tells me sweet Fanny Adams.</STRONG>

But what qualifies as 'good' is entirely subjective. Does plenty of soil make something good? Some players would agree. Others would classify having plenty of ore as a good thing. Others want maps with bauxite, or iron, or microlite, or gold, some want sand, others want magma, others want rivers. Some think trading is good, others think nothing but sieges is good. Some love aquifers, some don't. You could get a score of 10 for minerals on a map that contains plenty of Adamantine, but no trees, no soil, no water, no access to trading, no sand, but hey - it's still a 10, right?

You're right on your point that the data is there but the information isn't. Perhaps a part in the manual that you can access from the embark screen that tells you the basics of geology? Like what is to be expected in each layer (is there something like this already?)

[ May 22, 2008: Message edited by: Dasleah ]

[Neonivek]

"could get a score of 10 for minerals on a map that contains plenty of Adamantine, but no trees, no soil, no water, no access to trading, no sand, but hey - it's still a 10, right?"

Adamantine makes things more difficult... not easier...

Given that you have... no method of survival... the Adamantine doesn't help at all

[Dasleah]

Yeah, but it's still a highly sought-after and valuable mineral, hence the 10 score for Minerals. That's kind of the point I was making - it's all subjective, as what some players want isn't what's best.

[Neonivek]

"Yeah, but it's still a highly sought-after and valuable mineral, hence the 10 score for Minerals. That's kind of the point I was making - it's all subjective"

It is based on difficulty not on "You get what you want".

In fact Adamantine makes the map as I said harder.

A land with no allignment, with a River (or Limited Aquifier), Soil layers, Mineral Deposits, with no attackers, and all trade routs is easier.

The Rating is NOT based once again... off of preference but on the lack of ability to succeed at the location.

Yeah a 10 with Adamantium would be MUCH more desirable then a 10 with squat if you really like Adamantium.

[ May 22, 2008: Message edited by: Neonivek ]

[The-Moon]

quote:Originally posted by Neonivek:
<STRONG>So I have listened around and some people (or rather one person) has complained that there is no way of making the game harder without intentionally doing mistakes.

So I created this brainstorming thread to think of some ways to fix this since it is rather difficult to add difficulty settings.
</STRONG>

http://www.bay12games.com/cgi-local/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=7&t=004238&p=4

...I'm sure if you go read the Dev pages for what toady plans to do. You will easily and quickly see that toady has a lot of stuff planned to make this game more challenging...[\quote]

The games still in alpha, these topics should not be brought up ever until at least beta....

You guys are not understanding the concept behind alpha, beta and finished...

[Dasleah]

So we should just stop making suggestions at all then, huh?

We know that DF has a lot more to add before it's even close to finished. But the point of the suggestions forums is to (gasp!) suggest things for Toady to implement. He has planned to eventually add X, Y and Z, but that doesn't mean he knows the exact little detail of everything. I'm sure he has tonnes of things to add that he doesn't know at all how to implement. That's what we're trying to do, help fill in the exact blanks of Toady's master plan.

[Neskiairti]

>.>....
ok, normally I dont flame.. no, I never really flame, some times argue... but... DAMN that was the dumbest post ive seen in ages.. >.o

read the forum name.. SUGGESTION FORUM.. meaning SUGGEST things..

tiny insignifigant things.. big huge things.. bad ideas.. good ideas.. then talk them through.. the final say about what goes in tot he program is toady's, no one elses.. and he may think that 'dumb idea' is a great one.. or he may agree its a 'dumb idea' there is ALOT to mine through in this forum.. and every single suggestion is worth the time it was taken to write.. because suggestions and discussion mean more thought going in to the game.. from more than just one person..

yeah, its in alpha, and he has a rather large roadmap ahead of him.. and behind him.. How many of those things were added from suggestions I wonder? how many will still be added?

you, need to learn what an open alpha is.. its the development and feature phase.. one where the developer EXPECTS input from the community.. Beta phase is primarily bug testing and balancing.. beta would be too be a bit late for most of the suggestions..

[mickel]

Yea, that's one thing I've reacted on. Developers release a beta and ask for suggestions. What's there for me to do with a beta? All the fundamental design choices are already made. There's nothing left for me to do but to weed out bugs. So essentially they're just asking for free debugging. Now, in an alpha, I can still do some good...

[Lightman]

quote:Originally posted by Dasleah:
<STRONG>How about this: the map generates a short list of the 'worst' (Savage, hot/freezing, no trade) and 'best' (Benign, lots of trees, no Goblins) sites for each biome and allows you to quick-select them. So you'd be able to select a Terrifying Saltwater Marsh quickly rather than having to search for one yourself.</STRONG>

That sounds like a reasonable suggestion.

I don't understand all this "playing dumb" talk, anyway. If you want to make things difficult or easy for yourself, isn't that playing smartly? If you want an exciting or insane challenge, you choose a tough place on the map... and maybe even impose certain restrictions on your play. That sounds like any good role-playing game to me - players decide a lot of the game. Why do we need the computer to give us a "hard" or "easy" start? This isn't Monopoly and nobody "wins".

If you understand and play the game, you know what to do to enjoy it. "Winning" is having fun. Most people seem to be doing that.

[ May 23, 2008: Message edited by: Lightman ]

[Neonivek]

quote: "If you want to make things difficult or easy for yourself, isn't that playing smartly?"

To my knowledge is has to do with the fact that for some people you always have to try your best.

Think of it this way... If you made your house on the side of a hill that had mudslides... would you think you were so smart? Also lets say you chose never to use stone or metal for this house... Sure when you go to the bar with your buddies they may say "Ohh, you da (Wo)man. I can't believe you did that!" but there is probably the person in the corner only saying "I can't believe you did that..." as they sigh in your immaturity.

Lets take Fable... This was a very easy game... and pathetically so having one of the easiest last bosses is gaming history... It has no difficulty settings. Yes you could make it harder by never leveling up, using the wooden sword, and/or using stat enhancement potions, making the game quite difficult. Yet the game is still considered easy despite of all this. When someone says Fable is too easy you cannot say "Well why don't you play worse?" because that is silly.

In the same way the people this topic applies to feel like they have to play "Worse" just to get some iota of challenge out of this.

This whole topic is just people brainstorming and comming up with ideas and suggestions for specifically the above.

The goal is to suggest and tweek those suggestions to create the best possible system so that a person feels like he is just increasing the difficulty rather then feeling like (s)he is intentionally making mistakes.

The best quote I can think of is: "It's not a bug, it's a feature"