Print

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

[njero]

I like the idea of an option for channels and one for holes, the holes being channels without ramps, but couldn't you guys just make your channels, uh..
Wider?

Turning:

Code: [Select]

^
^
^
^into:

Code: [Select]

^^^^
^..^
^..^
^^^^What exactly does that accomplish?

[Felblood]

I, personally, don't really like it all that much, but it simulates channels more realistically, have any of you ever tried to mine a straight hole with a pickaxe? Nether have I, but a pickaxe is round, so unless your dwarf can bend down and yet not fall in, it makes more sense to have ramps.

As a matter of fact, I have.

The old way was far more intuitive to anyone who has ever dug a square channel.

You swing parallel to the wall when digging the bottom edges. I prefer an adze, pulaski or a hoe-dad and a post hole digger(it's much easier to cut the earth away and lift it out in a single stroke with a wider blade), if you want really square corners in your channel, but the job can be done with a pick, or if you are really creative, and the channel is wide enough a shovel.

The sides will be a little rough, if you don't get in there and smooth them, but we already have something for that, don't we?

Granted, it's much faster to dig a channel if you can stand in it, but that means channeling should take a little longer than tunneling, or maybe even slower than digging a ditch and then cutting the ramps out of it, not be completely replaced with this ditch system.

Realism aside, the biggest problem we have here is that the dwarven AI is not up to dealing with ditches that contain hazardous fluids. If the ditches themselves aren't a bug, the way dwarves run through them is.

The ditch thing has got to be a bug--Unless this is all Toady's April Fools joke, and we're all fools. 

[Baron Of Hell]

Put me in with liking the old way better. I just hope we get word if this is a bug or feature.

Oddly enough I wasn't able to get channels dug until I assigned ramps under the spots I wanted channeled.  I also couldn't get ramps dug until I had assigned channels above them. This was outside my fort above ground. Inside my fort ramps worked like normal and I didn't try channels inside.

[njero]

Realism aside, the biggest problem we have here is that the dwarven AI is not up to dealing with ditches that contain hazardous fluids. If the ditches themselves aren't a bug, the way dwarves run through them is.

The ditch thing has got to be a bug--Unless this is all Toady's April Fools joke, and we're all fools. 

Yeah, that aquifer situation I mentioned? I reclaimed and lost all seven almost immediately. Only two were assigned to my attempt to salvage the dig area with pumps, the rest were just running around picking up reclaim objects. Definitely a hazardous terrain bug regardless of the channelling issue.

[cdawg]

i think if we keep this new method, it should be it's own option; otherwise, we should go back to the old method.  of course what really would make the most sense is this

Here's what makes it stupid.

Code: [Select]

As it would have been in 40d, . is open space:
+++++
+...+
+...+
+...+
+++++

As it is now:
+++++
+▲▲▲+
+▲▲▲+
+▲▲▲+
+++++That shouldn't even be possible! The central ramp should collapse because it is not supported by walls from any direction.

The central ramp does collapse (disappear, rather), just as it would have if you mass-designated a bunch of ramps in the old version.

^^^Quoted for emphasis.

Code: [Select]

Furthermore, to illustrate what the current version would ACTUALLY look like:
+++++
+▼▼▼+
+▼.▼+
+▼▼▼+
+++++

or if that's not clear enough, in the case of a larger pit:
++++++++
+▼▼▼▼▼▼+
+▼....▼+
+▼....▼+
+▼....▼+
+▼▼▼▼▼▼+
++++++++

Or from the side:
¯\______/¯
Which, really, does sorta make sense.

[Treason]

Going along with the general..oddness of the change, has anyone else found odd pathing errors with their miners and other dwarfs when using the ramps created by the channels as, well..ramps for accessing different levels?

My miners constantly get stuck if I am doing that.  They'll quit their jobs with designations right in front of them, won't go near them despite completely open space and accessibility to the area they need to go to.

[njero]

Going along with the general..oddness of the change, has anyone else found odd pathing errors with their miners and other dwarfs when using the ramps created by the channels as, well..ramps for accessing different levels?

My miners constantly get stuck if I am doing that.  They'll quit their jobs with designations right in front of them, won't go near them despite completely open space and accessibility to the area they need to go to.

I'm not sure that's strictly related to the channelling, as I've had similar issues when using stair combinations to dig shafts. It may (or may not  ) be part of the larger pathing issues with this early release.

Just in case Toady's watching this thread, I'd like to say that despite my significant dislike of the way channelling is working, I love this release as a whole, and am fully aware that it will be buggy for some time yet. I can live with that, but I'll still campaign for a channelling fix.

[Lehawk]

I really like this method the best. The old way should really have been considered a bug anyways. Having to remove the ramps afterword makes sense from a construction point of view. I also find that the miners are making much fewer mistakes that before (yeah I know now about upwards ramps ).

Just two bugs to fix. Make sure miners don't cause a floor with no wall underneath to collapse by channeling in a safer order (one floor tile can break through 6 floors? ), and auto cleanup the ramps that get left behind in the middle of large pits.

Once ropes for climbing is in, then creating inescapable pits are possible (isn't there a hack in there now to work around this with construction of stairs?). A backhoe would work too. Or leaving in a peasant to finish removing ramps and then flood it with magma.

[njero]

I really like this method the best. The old way should really have been considered a bug anyways. Having to remove the ramps afterword makes sense from a construction point of view. I also find that the miners are making much fewer mistakes that before (yeah I know now about upwards ramps ).

You know, I've dealt with dozens of excavators on the homes I've built, and maybe dwarves are exceptionally stupid, but I've never met a guy who couldn't dig a straight-walled pit too tall to jump out of with the help of some basic equipment. Exit ramps are only there for granting machinery access, something our Dwarfs don't generally have to worry about.

Forcing the player to think ahead for digging massive chasms is one thing, but removing the abstraction that allows us to dig shallow pits without first making a rope ladder from pigtail fibre rope and wood, then constructing it over a 1z pit so that last miner can get out? That's not fun, that's tedious. While I agree that a top-based ascent method like rope ladders would at least solve the problem, tedious or not, the fact is that they aren't in the game yet and unless you have a massive soapmaker population, you're pretty limited in how many pits you can clean out with magma.

Njero cancels moat burning, Urist McSacrifice wielding iron pick.

[Lord Darkstar]

I've for the old system of channelling as well.

I've dug several pits before, and it is trivial (in intelligence required) for one man to dig a pit without a ramp. If you don't mind leaving some minor indentations, you can even make hand and footholds for you to get out, and not need a rope or ladder or a helping hand getting out of something much deeper than you are tall.

Aesthetically, I'd prefer not to have ramps where I breach magma or water to fill a new moat, irrigation, or other system. Unless we are going to be able to build coffer dams, pump out the interface, breach the flow path, then remove the coffer dams (mostly safely), I don't see the point of changing the channel system.

Until we start having our bookkeepers need paper or engraver skills and stones to record on, I think arguing "it's more realistic" is barking up the wrong elf loved tree.

[CaptApollo12]

Lol really as said before the gameplay is not any better. What has happend was toady basically duplicated a feature and got rid of a different one. And a good percentage of people shake their heads because they have been playing the game for forever and they have a bunch of little tricks to make their fort the way they want it to. So what im saying is I would be happy if it were back.

[ItchyBeard]

Lol really as said before the gameplay is not any better. What has happend was toady basically duplicated a feature and got rid of a different one.

You're basically saying you want my dwarves killed by falling ninja trees. What are you, an elf loving traitor?

I like the new system. It requires a lot less micromanagement for channelling out large areas. No more dwarves dying to falling objects. No more dwarves getting stuck on islands and staving to death. No more having to dig out one edge at a time. No more digging stairs everywhere before channelling.

That said, I would support a "Dig Pit" (old functionality) vs. "Dig Channel" (new functionality). I think the aquifer and magma issues are the real unintended side effects here.

[zilpin]

That said, I would support a "Dig Pit" (old functionality) vs. "Dig Channel" (new functionality).

That's completely backwards.
The old channel makes sense more sense as "dig channel".
The new channel is "dig pit".

If I want to make a 2x20 long channel, the old functionality is perfect, and the new nonfunctionality is worthless.

If I want to excavate a 10x10 large pit the old channel sucks (wrong tool to use), and the new functionality is a convenience (but you could already do it before, unintuitively using ramps).


The old behaviour makes more sense with the name "channel", unless I'm confusing my English.
But so long as I can dig real channels like before, I don't care if its called "worship Toady's furry feet"

[njero]

No more having to dig out one edge at a time. No more digging stairs everywhere before channelling.

The only time I ever had to dig out one edge at a time was if I was channeling over an already mined-out area. You still have to do that if you don't want your dwarves surfing floor down to the next level.

I agree that the new channel method is more intuitive that than the ramb system is for digging large pits from above, but I dug upwards with ramps nearly as often as downwards. It's still redundant, and removes overall functionality.

[Beerscholar]

I have to agree that the old channels are better than the new system. To make sure both sides in this are happy just have two designations. What's the harm?  Menus a little more cluttered? Toady has already cleaned up the labour menus, he can do the same for this.

As for digging 'square' channels, you have have to be very skilled to get a perfectly square corner on a channel, or spend more time on it. Why does it have to be a perfectly square bottomed trench? Getting it perfect is almost an impossibility, dwarves aren't perfect, neither are we. Surely the bottom can be sligthly sloped or have rounded corners that can't be depicted in an ASCII game?

Realism is the worst argument to have about the 'ramping' of channels. Take a general look at Dwarf Fortress; does it seem very realistic? Dwarves for a start, they are part of fantasy (just kidding, they're real ) and I have never heard of people channeling lava to create moats, power 'magma forges' and the like.

It is only human nature that makes us comfortable with what we know works well, and to shun away things that are new, but I support Toady's decision to change the mechanics of the game; it is his after all. If he sees fit to revert the changes, have both or just keep the new system, the piece of advice that I give him is; Listen to the audience of your game and don't alienate long time followers with a single decision, try and make both sides happy.