Print

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

[ronnyfire]

Minor Google searching leads me to say about 50 square feet per person, for a complete newbie to growing a veggie garden, it also suggests one could, if using the right plants and fertilizing and being a generally good farmer, use less space per person.

Just my bit of thought on the food thing

[Boingboingsplat]

Minor Google searching leads me to say about 50 square feet per person, for a complete newbie to growing a veggie garden, it also suggests one could, if using the right plants and fertilizing and being a generally good farmer, use less space per person.

Just my bit of thought on the food thing

Too bad squares in dwarf fortress don't have quantized dimensions.
But, still, for a something like a 100 dwarf fort, that's friggin 5000 sq. ft. So, yeah it shouldn't be so easy to feed your dwarves.

[Kogan Loloklam]

Minor Google searching leads me to say about 50 square feet per person, for a complete newbie to growing a veggie garden, it also suggests one could, if using the right plants and fertilizing and being a generally good farmer, use less space per person.

Just my bit of thought on the food thing

Link or it didn't happen. I've seen... significantly... larger numbers of space required to support a single individual. 50 square feet might be good to supplement someone, ensuring they don't have to buy spices, but we are talking about total replacement. I've seen figures around a quarter acre to support a person for a year.

(Edit: And the issue is that I can feed 20 in a 2x3 space.)
(Edit 2: Which happens to be the size of a human cottage holding a barrel, a table with three chairs, and a bed.)

[ronnyfire]

It may well have been not 100% of your food intake. if i find the links ill bring em back here.

I say feeding a 100-200 dwarf fort should be a LOT harder than it is right now, but also try to keep the early food production as easy as it is, aside from fixing underground soil so it no longer needs water.

Probably lower the total amount of food produced, have diminishing yields unless you fertilize your fields, have above ground crops need specific climates, as well as season as it is.

As far as trying to increase dependencies on outside sources for things, i say no. You as a player can already choose to do so if you wish, and some people have a large amount of their food imported in game. It is increasingly harder to keep up with everything if you are working on a project and you try to do every trade yourself, and keep all the mood materials you can available, i see no need or benefit for making it harder to get by without trade.

[John Keel]

Minor Google searching leads me to say about 50 square feet per person, for a complete newbie to growing a veggie garden, it also suggests one could, if using the right plants and fertilizing and being a generally good farmer, use less space per person.

Just my bit of thought on the food thing

This has been discussed many many times. Dwarf Fortress is a GAME. We don't care about realistic proportions of dwarves:land, we care about a challenge and being able to kill stuff with magma.
Thread here with a discussion on the topic, and some math about why it can get ridiculous very fast on page 26

[Kelbin]

Minor Google searching leads me to say about 50 square feet per person, for a complete newbie to growing a veggie garden, it also suggests one could, if using the right plants and fertilizing and being a generally good farmer, use less space per person.

Just my bit of thought on the food thing

This has been discussed many many times. Dwarf Fortress is a GAME. We don't care about realistic proportions of dwarves:land, we care about a challenge and being able to kill stuff with magma.
Thread here with a discussion on the topic, and some math about why it can get ridiculous very fast on page 26

This is dwarf fortress. The most realistic roguelike in the world, and your saying it doesn't need realistic?

It already has it! What other game has a combat system as complicatedly realistic as dwarf fortress as of this version?

[de5me7]

my view on these issues are guided less by realisim, and more by what is fun?

Currently (partly due to the bugs) the early game is hard enough. But after 5 or more years once youve set up your industries, dealt with the first mega beast or forgotten beast and have a sustainable method for dealing with goblin seiges, you dont really need anything.

So my view is if your going to alter food production it should not affect the fort in its early years. One idea might be to link food luxury to the length of time a dorf is occupant in a fort. So if a dorf lives in a fort for more than 5 years he or she expects to become a more privilaged citizen and there fore gets unhappy forts more regularly if he or she does not get exotic food etc.

in general i feel that the game does need more mid to late game stuff to do, but i expect the army arc will solve this issue.

as far as minerals being enmass at every site goes. Yeh there is probably abit too much gold around, but im fine with the huge amounts of iron and copper.. IMO site selection should be a bit more tactical than it is now. Isuually look for a river and a flux layer. But given that the caves contain water, i could drop the river and just go for flux. And if i want worried about steel i could go anywhere. Is there any advantage to mountains? I always go for mountains as i think its dwarfy.

I think there is also an arguement that each fortress should be different. Curenltly as there are so many resources available you tend to get forts that have a similar industry and function. However i think altering the game worlds demads may be abetter approach to making forts different than altering resources. What i mean by this is rahter than making you chosse between iron and bronze at site selection instead have the other civs force you to make decisions for trade agreements etc.

[Hyperturtle]

Besides, not only do dwarfs drink more than they eat, they are small and eat less.  And they never go to the bathroom, although they do vomit.

[Deathworks]

Hi!

I am with the faction who don't think that forcing you to trade is a really good idea. I especially do not see the plausibility of the defective culture you suggest by saying they need to be lacking important skills/resources.

I do agree that the current abundance of resources on site is a problem as it considerably takes away from the personality of the site. And given that you get metal from the humans and metal and stone from the dwarves, lacking one or more metals/stones would not pose an unbeatable obstacle, I think (especially if you take into consideration that you can increase your embark points, thus allowing you to embark with some extra goods if you need them in the first year).

Requiring more space for farming is a change I am less fond of. First of all, the real size of a tile is basically undefined - only one dwarf can stand in a tile, but dozens of dragons can lie in that same tile. Thus, the argument about relative size becomes kind of moot, especially if you look carefully at the sizes of different objects in the game (a well is one tile, as is a table and as is a chair - right along a coffin! Usually, I would expect a coffin to take up at least twice as much space as a chair, even if you give some space for shifting it).

Secondly, it can quickly make farming nearly impossible: Remember, you need a complete rectangular area of farmable tiles in order to get any crop, so you either need very much luck for getting that area, or you would have to define 200 tiny farms and set each of them for the individual crops.

Third, unless you have a very leisurely fortress, your dwarves are already quite busy. By increasing the number of farm tiles, you require more actions for planting and harvesting, which means more dwarven labor is required. So, you may end up with either a farm fortress where nearly all dwarves are just farmers all year long, or you have a trade fortress with no farming at all. Certainly a diversification if compared to a multi-talent fortress, but it hinders experimenting with mixed forms and limits player freedom.

Making plants take longer to grow, increasing the importance of fertilizing seem more reasonable options for me to make farming more difficult while not making an outright impossibility probable.

Also note that the non-seasonal nature of the surface plants makes farming very easy and also reduces the flavor of the game (there are no vegetables of the season, so to speak).

Deathworks

[Kogan Loloklam]

Secondly, it can quickly make farming nearly impossible: Remember, you need a complete rectangular area of farmable tiles in order to get any crop, so you either need very much luck for getting that area, or you would have to define 200 tiny farms and set each of them for the individual crops.

Once crops are set for the seasons, it's pretty automated. There is tons of space on the surface, and tons of space in the caverns. Getting a farm plot in a fortress that would feed 200 dwarves is more difficult, but it is a much less steep slope as your population gets smaller. Requiring more space is the perfect way to ensure small forts (such as yours) aren't affected much yet give more challenge for the large ones.

Third, unless you have a very leisurely fortress, your dwarves are already quite busy. By increasing the number of farm tiles, you require more actions for planting and harvesting, which means more dwarven labor is required. So, you may end up with either a farm fortress where nearly all dwarves are just farmers all year long, or you have a trade fortress with no farming at all. Certainly a diversification if compared to a multi-talent fortress, but it hinders experimenting with mixed forms and limits player freedom.

I've thought of this issue, which is why the farming action would have to take half the time. Like I said, same amount of time, just twice the space.

Making plants take longer to grow, increasing the importance of fertilizing seem more reasonable options for me to make farming more difficult while
not making an outright impossibility probable.

Just making them longer to grow would be enough. You'd then require more space (but not more time). That is all I think is needed when it comes to farming. It doesn't need to be "realistic", it just needs to take up a little more space.

[Turambar]

What should dwarf fortresses be bad at?

Basketball

[Rowanas]

What should dwarf fortresses be bad at?

Basketball

My firstborn shall be named for you, sir. I applaud thee.

[HatfieldCW]

Basketball, eh?  One thing I'd like to see as part of peaceful interactions with neighbors would be some kind of olympic games, maybe a friendly contest of arms, or crafting, or other stuff that makes everyone happier overall.  A happy thought for competing or observing, good/bad thoughts for winning or losing, social interaction, boosted political ties, generally good times.

As for what forts should not excel at, I'd like to see it tie more into racial traits.  Perhaps in the future, there can be a raw value for aptitudes, race-wide.  Elves get a bonus to all forms of woodworking, bowmaking and tailoring, humans excel with leather, ranching and farming, dwarves are great with brewing, metal and rock, etc.  Throw in some more sophisticated caravan controls, to the point of specific deals and orders, and you could have your trade agreements mean a lot more.  Every summer, the humans roll up with a wagonload of flour, exquisite quivers and some beef jerky and you have their order of booze, horseshoes and precious gems ready for them.

[KFK]

This is dwarf fortress. The most realistic roguelike in the world, and your saying it doesn't need realistic?

It already has it! What other game has a combat system as complicatedly realistic as dwarf fortress as of this version?

I think you're mistaking complex and highly detailed for realism.

[Soadreqm]

This is dwarf fortress. The most realistic roguelike in the world, and your saying it doesn't need realistic?
It already has it! What other game has a combat system as complicatedly realistic as dwarf fortress as of this version?

I think you're mistaking complex and highly detailed for realism.

I don't think he is. The current combat/healthcare/tissue system really is ruthlessly realistic. You have all the body's materials sorted in layered body parts, and they can interact with each other when struck in combat. You can break individual bones and get individual teeth knocked out. You can get a rib dislodged and pushed to the lungs. There is even some basic genetic simulation running to track eye color in families and things like that. It is complex and highly detailed because it tries to simulate the real world as accurately as possible.