Print

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

The new channeling is covered in awesome sauce, the old channeling smelled real bad.

113 (19.3%)

The old channeling was the best, we don't need two ways to make ramps it is just silly.

245 (41.8%)

Old channeling was the best, new channeling is also the best.  Can't we all just get along?

132 (22.5%)

You people need to get on with your lives, it's not a big deal either way.

96 (16.4%)

Total Members Voted: 583

[Another]

...Just channelling is still easier though.

I totally agree with this*, though I most likely mean different "channeling" than you. 

*Torn out of context, I know.

[Pilsu]

For all your yammering, even the "who cares" camp got more votes than you did. I guess the excuses about loud minorities backfired a bit, eh?

Dwarves running into magma or freezing themselves in the aquifer might be bugs but there's still no excuse not to revert the change seeing the pathfinding will not be fixed any time soon. The stated goal of the change was not accomplished and thus weighs nothing in the scale. If you want to be diplomatic, a new designation, let's call it sloping, might be added that makes ramps from above but either way, the channeling should be reverted. It solves the new problems without removing overall functionality. The game does not need more issues.

[Squirrelloid]

Honestly, I can't believe the first option got more than one vote.  How can you be smart enough to figure out how to play DF and too stupid to realize you could carve up ramps to achieve exactly the same thing as the new channeling?

[Ilmoran]

Honestly, I can't believe the first option got more than one vote.  How can you be smart enough to figure out how to play DF and too stupid to realize you could carve up ramps to achieve exactly the same thing as the new channeling?

You do realize there's a hundred page thread of things people learned that made there DF playing easier but they had never considered trying.  There are players who have played for over a year and are still learning things.  Not everyone thinks about things the same way, tries the same things, or has the same goals.  No need to insult people for there being a steep learning curve and a lot of things to learn in the game (and a lot of valid ways to do the same thing).

[Shades]

Honestly, I can't believe the first option got more than one vote.  How can you be are smart enough to figure out how to play DF and too stupid to so realize you could carve up ramps to achieve exactly the same thing as the new channeling?

Fixed so its not offensive?

[Lord Darkstar]

Honestly, I can't believe the first option got more than one vote.  How can you be smart enough to figure out how to play DF and too stupid to realize you could carve up ramps to achieve exactly the same thing as the new channeling?

Because designating your down ramps from the same level, rather than having to shift down a z level and designate up ramps, is easier on the players, and frankly, more intuitive.

The "dwarves in the drink won't auto-drown" isn't really a bonus, since you could always have cut that ramp or stairs in the first place. In my experience, having a stairs or ramp for access will only save a dwarf in a moat or pond IF the ramp/stairs is close enough for him to reach and get out. This means most of your dwarves knocked off in the drink are going to still die if you cut out all those ramps out and only left 1 access tile so you could get all those stones out of your moat. Of course, if your dwarves can get out safely, so can whatever else is knocked into the drink--- like ambushers and seigers.

Also, it is more logical to some people that the digger MUST be in the same square as what he is working on when digging DOWN. They think the digger stands in the square, and attacks the floor with his pick, ending up on the level below when channelling. Personally, I don't believe that is true, due to the fact that for the other forms of digging, the miner stands outside the target square, and ends with the miner still being in the square he started when done and he's mined the whole tile out. If a miner doesn't have to enter the "dig target" square he's digging sidewise to reach the far side of the tile or its far corners, then he shouldn't be required to enter a target square when he conducts the same dig command, just because it is downwards. It seems a tile should be approximately the same height of area as it is width and length (a (near) cube, rather than a taller then wide/length rectangle).

But even if the tiles are "taller than wide/lenght (ie, a tall rectangle)", when a dwarf carves a stairs down, or an up/down stairs FROM ABOVE, they don't enter the dug square itself to finish the bottom of the stairs or finish mining out the far corners of the tile. So again, if you can dig a Down or Up/Down stairs from above without ending in the target tile, I don't see why digging a channel should require you end up at the bottom of what you dug. That's a basic break in DF consistancy for a the task at that point. Or, as some have said--- it's less realistic, because you MUST be in the same square you are working, so all the other dig methods should work the same way. DF should be internally consistant at least.

[Sean Mirrsen]

Btw, I know a way in which the dig up ramp command is inferior to the new channelling, that's not just about switching Z levels. You can channel a wall and get down ramps, but you can only carve upward ramps under empty space. Tiny difference, I know, but a difference still.

I think the "dwarf channels floor from under him" is quite obviously a bug. It's an intended feature if there's nowhere else to dig and nowhere else to stand, but in all other cases it's a bug. Even the "dig up ramps" command is being done from the neighboring tile aboveground, IIRC.

And, Squirrelloid. Don't be dumb yourself. Many people have said that the new channels are easier to use than old channels. For some people, they make more sense. For some, they're more realistic. For me, they enhance the game and pave way for its further evolution. While I can consider the third option the most beneficial in the future, right now the first one is the one that matters. We* don't want the old channels back yet, we want the new channels to stay and improve so that they can completely replace the old ones.

[Kvasir]

Let me get this straight...

Channeling has been removed, and not properly replaced in order to annoy people who dig pits. So now we have no safe way to tap magma without creating a blinking ramp, and no safe way to remove unsupported tiles.

Well that's dandy.

[TKTom]

Let me get this straight...

Channeling has been removed, and not properly replaced in order to annoy people who dig pits. So now we have no safe way to tap magma without creating a blinking ramp, and no safe way to remove unsupported tiles.

Well that's dandy.

 Yh, the funny thing is that for the first time ever today I knocked out a quick trench in order to keep my guys safe from a giant scorpion and the way that I did it was nipping round with an upward ramp from below, knocking out the ramps and having a one tile ramp left on the inside edge. This style of thing:

+++++++++++++++++++++++++
...........................................+
.+++++++++++++++++++++++.+
.+++++++++++++++++++++++.+
.++++++++++++++++++++++^.+
.+++++++++++++++++++++++.+
...........................................+
+++++++++++++++++++++++++

Needless to say, it worked. My, what a project that was. I've barely used the new channels since I've found out that they work differently.

[Sean Mirrsen]

And this would've been harder to achieve with the new channelling... how? Especially compared to upward ramps?

[Silverionmox]

Honestly, I can't believe the first option got more than one vote.  How can you be smart enough to figure out how to play DF and too stupid to realize you could carve up ramps to achieve exactly the same thing as the new channeling?

Simple, there's a fifth option that lacks: "neither is sufficient, let alone better and we want further improvements". The designation system needs work (fundamental work too: removing stairs to nowhere etc.), and ultimately we'll end up with a complete set of designating all kinds of carved out stuff, to be built from up, down, north, south or any other direction the player chooses, with appropriate tool requirements if necessary.

[Squirrelloid]

Btw, I know a way in which the dig up ramp command is inferior to the new channelling, that's not just about switching Z levels. You can channel a wall and get down ramps, but you can only carve upward ramps under empty space. Tiny difference, I know, but a difference still.

Why don't you try doing it before making false claims?  You're wrong, i've carved ramps without open space above them (they remove 2 z-levels of rock if the above layer is filled).  So no, no difference.

The only people in favor of the new channeling system who have posted in this thread can't seem to avoid backing their claims with lies and half-truths.  Facts are facts: dig up ramp accomplishes everything the new channeling does, it was just designated on a different z-level.  Its the end result that matters - I could care less if they put a 'carve down ramps' designation in, but i want channeling back because there are functional uses which being forced to make a ramp first does not replace.

[Tarran]

Though, most of the people who dislike the new system often complain about small smudges in aesthetics or an easily avoidable dwarf death.

[Pilsu]

You claiming it to be easily avoidable does not make it so.

[Tarran]

You claiming it to be easily avoidable does not make it so.

I have yet to lose one miner to the introduction of a the ramp.