Print

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

[Shrugging Khan]

I'm trying to make a minimal, FPS-easy world to plant my fortress in. 17x17, pocket-sized. But since it's dwarf fortress, and dwarven civilisations start out only in mountains, I need to have mountains on the map. And somehow, that prvents me from having any terrain other than hills (and hilly forests), mountains, and oceans. There are no flatlands!

And nothing but dwarves. And humans, occasionally. I even saw a kobold civ once. But there's no goblins, and what's a fortress without some bloody splatters to be? I don't trust the humans, even if kill all their traders and diplomats, they might simply not come any more instead of bringing a siege to bear. Or will they always go to war?

Or are my problems perhaps simply an unavoidable result of playing on a pocket world? Do I need to upsize a little? Is the FPS advantage not even big enough to warrant the hassle, anyways?

Advise me, oh fortressmongers, on how to have some flatlands and war FLATLAND AND WAR! And good FPS, worldgen-wise 

[Ricky]

make a smaller, or small world instead, easier to get flatlands and all civs

[Shrugging Khan]

What's the approximate FPS difference between pocket and small? 

[Ricky]

probably not much difference, mainly on if your at a river, ect

[TomiTapio]

Umm... it's not the world size, it's the embark size that matters. Try a 2x2 embark in a large 256x256 world. Then try a 9x9 embark.

[shibdib]

Umm... it's not the world size, it's the embark size that matters. Try a 2x2 embark in a large 256x256 world. Then try a 9x9 embark.

This^^


ive noticed that 3x3 is a solid embark size, cause if u think about it.. unless u plan on building some super mega above ground castle, uve got plenty of room below ground

[Shrugging Khan]

I'm usually embarking on 2x2. Although I'm really thinking I might perhaps want to subtract about 50 z-levels and go on a 3x3 or 4x4.

So, world size makes no discernible difference? Which means that my machine just can't hack more than 30 FPS at 200 pop? 

[Ricky]

I'm usually embarking on 2x2. Although I'm really thinking I might perhaps want to subtract about 50 z-levels and go on a 3x3 or 4x4.

So, world size makes no discernible difference? Which means that my machine just can't hack more than 30 FPS at 200 pop? 

il running  6 fps, pop 204 (edited init)

[TomiTapio]

Here's some data from my quadcore 2.4 GHz Vista machine:

155 fps, 3x3 embark, 43 citizens, 0+30 animals, no caverns.
117 fps, 3x3 embark, 61 citizens, 2+34 animals, no caverns.

107 fps, 4x4 embark, 39 citizens, 2+13 animals, caverns with serpentfolk.

260 fps, 2x2 embark, 42 citizens, 0+8 animals, no caverns not much mining tunnels.

240 fps, 3x3 embark, 10 citizens, 0+1 animals, no caverns.
122 fps, 3x3 embark, 38 citizens, 0+28 animals, no caverns. 2 caravans.

[Shrugging Khan]

Here's some data from my quadcore 2.4 GHz Vista machine:

My comp and FPS at those stages are almost exactly the same (but I'm running XP), but I usually expand and grow my fortresses very quickly, it's usually ten times as many creatures and a lot more tunnels 

[Sevrun]

I have a similar problem, grow too fast to keep up with anything more than food and living quarters and then I'm lost in a sea of Dwarves and have trouble keeping up with who does what.

My system sounds similar to Tomi's and I regularly run 4x4 or 5x5 just so I don't feel cramped with no problems til I crest about 120 dwarves.  tend to keep the animals to a dull roar though, tossed in pits unless they're leashed.  Yes, my forts have leash laws damnit!