Print

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

[Marconius]

May seem like a trivial thing, but I tend to make my fortresses very three-dimensional.

Sometimes I notice people just kinda spread their fortress out horizontally and only make it a few levels deep. I tend to place only a few functions on one level and make the fortress more like and underground tower. For example, the way I usually build workshops is that I have one level for masons/carpenters/craftsdwarves/mechanics, another level for cooks/brewers/butchers/plant processing/tailors/leatherworkers and I place a large storage chamber on one of the levels between them. This way, the workshops are neatly separated based on function, yet they're the same distance from the storage room.

I also tend to build everything around a central staircase (may change that to ramps in the future). This allows relatively swift transportation of goods and dwarves can get back to their room or to the dining hall without much hassle.

Another thing I sometimes do is link certain buildings with certain stockpiles or other rooms. For example, I'd have one level with a dining hall and a large food stockpile. This food stockpile would be linked directly to the kitchens via a direct staircase, allowing faster transportation of food, without clogging up the main staircase.

[Eric Blank]

I always build around a central staircase, usually not too far out either. I really should switch to a spiral ramp passage but I haven't wanted to perform the extra designations (Yes, I'm THAT lazy) and such to make sure there are no accidents that end up ruining the thing. Staircases are just easier to set up. make staircase, dig out area around staircase, all the walls can go, don't have to worry about them disappearing... Ramps are easier to defend...

Anyway, the biggest recurring architectural theme for me is that everything is laid out in odd numbers, I often even measure the halls, setting 1x breaks along their length at 5- or 11-tile intervals on 3x halls which serve as a sort of defense, I only have to build 1 wall to seal off that section. This was originally because of the threat of fire snakes in the magma forges in 40d, but i haven't seen them in 31.# yet, I would make 3 parallel 3x halls of 5x3 rooms with doors connecting each room to it's orthogonal sisters, so that when i got the message that a metal smith was going to rest his/her injuries I could zoom over and lock them in whatever room they were in. Sucks to be you, but it doesn't suck to be the rest of us. (it does actually  )

[breadbocks]

Ramps are easier to defend...

I'd just like to point out that IRL defending from the bottom of the ramp, or even the top of one is much more dangerous than stairs. If you are at the bottom, the enemy has the high ground, and thus, an advantage. You don't want them to have an advantage.

[IronValley]

Not really some great revelation, but I tend to get annoyed by my own tendency to want to place things on the same level. In theory, the optimal 3D shape of your fortress should be a cube, with some kind of central staircase. Too often I see people (myself included) build fortresses which are more cuboid in shape, with a bias towards more x and y tiles than z tiles.

I'm pretty sure, based on my limited geometric knowledge, that the best shape would be more like an octahedron (as in a square pyramid on top of an upside-down square pyramid), assuming your goal is to minimize the maximum distance between points. Also, this assumes the use of the central shaft you mentioned. Thinking about it with more complex vertical movement options makes my head hurt, even though I don't think they affect the optimal shape very much.

Technically the most efficient shape should really be a sphere, since the surface of a sphere is equidistant from the center and all. But if you look at the way DF deals with diagonals (namely saying a diagonal step is the same distance as an orthogonal step), three tiles in any direction turns out to be a square. Which means in DF circles are square. And that circles tessellate. Oh, and that cubes are spherical.

This was tested, and disproved. Diagonal steps takes 1.4142 (Sqrt(2)) times the normal time of a orthogonal step.

Atleast that is what my memory tells me... I'll probably have to test this...

[Cotes]

Not really some great revelation, but I tend to get annoyed by my own tendency to want to place things on the same level. In theory, the optimal 3D shape of your fortress should be a cube, with some kind of central staircase. Too often I see people (myself included) build fortresses which are more cuboid in shape, with a bias towards more x and y tiles than z tiles.

I'm pretty sure, based on my limited geometric knowledge, that the best shape would be more like an octahedron (as in a square pyramid on top of an upside-down square pyramid), assuming your goal is to minimize the maximum distance between points. Also, this assumes the use of the central shaft you mentioned. Thinking about it with more complex vertical movement options makes my head hurt, even though I don't think they affect the optimal shape very much.

Technically the most efficient shape should really be a sphere, since the surface of a sphere is equidistant from the center and all. But if you look at the way DF deals with diagonals (namely saying a diagonal step is the same distance as an orthogonal step), three tiles in any direction turns out to be a square. Which means in DF circles are square. And that circles tessellate. Oh, and that cubes are spherical.

I though DF did in fact multiply the time it takes to move diagonally by square root of 2.

[Osmosis Jones]

Wasn't it rounded off to 1.4? Ahhh well, if anyone is really interested, go search the pathfinder thread.

[Oneir]

Oh. It's the first I've heard of it, but I took sort of a gigantic break from the forums, never posted much anyway, etc. That's disappointing...though that does mean some pages in the Wiki need to be updated (some the design pages talk about diagonals being more efficient, I think).

[Aspgren]

I always make detailed plans for constructions, so that my fortress can be kept clean and efficient.

The reason? Because EVERY SINGLE OVERSIGHT gets abused by the game. For instance, my current above/below ground fortress has a wall surrounding it. The wall had ONE oversight: it is possible to fire arrows over it from one particular hill. but I just figured it's a stretch ... well ... five marksgoblins later I made the wall twice as tall.

[andrei901]

Two off topic points first:
1) I've heard about fire snakes being an issue in 40d, but I have never actually seen them do anything in the year and a half I played it. What exactly did they do?
2) If diagonal steps are sqrt(2) longer in the game, wouldn't octagons/cubes with the corners cut off to be 3D octagon~ish (if anyone remembers what its called off the top of their head, correct me) be the most efficient?

On topic:
I've always been confused by people who have lots of rooms for storage. I tend to make a central storage on the top floor, half devoted to food and half to everything else. Also, I have been using one housing/workshop design in every fortress I've built since last October.

[Cotes]

Two off topic points first:
1) I've heard about fire snakes being an issue in 40d, but I have never actually seen them do anything in the year and a half I played it. What exactly did they do?
2) If diagonal steps are sqrt(2) longer in the game, wouldn't octagons/cubes with the corners cut off to be 3D octagon~ish (if anyone remembers what its called off the top of their head, correct me) be the most efficient?

On topic:
I've always been confused by people who have lots of rooms for storage. I tend to make a central storage on the top floor, half devoted to food and half to everything else. Also, I have been using one housing/workshop design in every fortress I've built since last October.

The thing about fire snakes is that they are made of fire. This can prove to be a problem if one, say, finds its way to your booze stockpile.

As for why bother making multiple stockpiles, the first reason is that it makes it easy and quick to see how much of stuff you have. But also because it's just far more efficient to keep seeds stored next to your farms, gems next to jewelries, leather next to leather workers... You get the idea.
It's much smoother when your dwarves need to take only a few steps between workshop jobs to storing and retrieving material.

[Fenwah]

Whenever i build a reservois for some project I always make it expandable. Just build a door into a wall somewhere before you fill it. That way if you ever want to use the magma/water for something else, you just have to dig out the other side of the door and hook it up to a lever, and you get a safe way to control the flow to your new area.

[leftycook]

Build doors  on every room, corridor, or meeting place. that way, when a goblin ambush occurs and you lose a dorf, your fifty smelly little buggers wont trip over eachother falling onto the gobbos swords trying to get it if you can just lock two of the front doors. I dont use burrows so i dont know if thats easier

[cdrcjsn]

Ramps are easier to defend...

I'd just like to point out that IRL defending from the bottom of the ramp, or even the top of one is much more dangerous than stairs. If you are at the bottom, the enemy has the high ground, and thus, an advantage. You don't want them to have an advantage.

This only matters if you're a Jedi.

[cameron1124]

are you denying the existence of lightsaber swinging dwarfs?

[Cotes]

are you denying the existence of lightsaber swinging dwarfs?

...

...Hold on a moment, I'll edit the raws...