Print

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

[KaguroDraven]

The problem with that is that the donation money is, supposedly, barely enough for him to scrape by.

[xellas84]

If the latest donation numbers were right (Looked like about 2k-2.5k/mo), then I'd buy that actually.

[Ubiq]

The mayor getting interruption is referencing the bug that you must forcibly delay meeting with trade liasons or you'll never get a baron. It's easier to just lock the mayor up with food and booze stocks in his quarters, then open the door after traders leave, but that still amounts to having to play around something that worked before and doesn't now.

That doesn't always work actually. I tried that in my last fort with my Mayor and the Diplomat began negotiations through the locked door when the Mayor wandered by it; I also noticed that my latest Expedition Leader and the Diplomat were having a meeting in my legendary dining hall without them being next to each other. I had assigned him a single chair-sized office in the hall so that he could update the stockpile records and never took it off so it's not like the Diplomat was within the office while it occured. The Diplomat remained in the same spot while the Expedition Leader stayed on his seat.

It might be that simply being within two squares of a Diplomat with the No Job status triggers Conduct Meeting regardless of obstacles between them.

[Sowelu]

It might be that simply being within two squares of a Diplomat with the No Job status triggers Conduct Meeting regardless of obstacles between them.

Correct.

[Ubiq]

So then the only way to guarantee a leader won't speak with a Diplomat until the right time comes is to lock them in a room with walls two layers or more thick and at least two rows of locked doors and pray that you didn't forget to lock both doors. That's rather excessive.

[Darkmere]

I just locked the door to the mayoral mansion's statuary hallway AND the bedroom. About a month before the caravan came. Til a month after they left.

The Liaison hung around the dining hall boozing it up until I opened the door. For reference, it was something like this:

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Two doors at the front would fix it up no problem.

[KaguroDraven]

Well here's another way of looking at it, the game is still technicly in Alpha, many commercial operations don't even begin bug fixes, unless they are game breaking, until after beta.

[Eugenitor]

I swear to Armok the next person who grossly misunderstands alpha and beta testing is going to have a dwarf named after him, armed with a training sword and an XXsilk dressXX, walled in with HFS.

[xellas84]

You know, these forums are really interesting.

I've been here about 2 weeks now, and I've already noticed something.  There's almost a civil war level split between two camps.  One says "This is alpha, all can be forgiven, Toady is a golden god, don't diss him!".  The other says "We need everything fixed now, Toady should do what we want, screw his desires/wants/ideas, or else make it open source so we can stealfix the problems ourselves".  I see very few people walking the middle line, which TBH is usually a pretty bad sign for a community.

I'm not firmly in either camp.  I'd love to see the bug fixes go in (The game scales REALLY poorly as your fortress grows, making FPS rot inevitable, which IMO is a sign of extremely bad management of data).  However, this IS Toady's code, Toady's show, and I respect Toady for what he's accomplished (albeit at a snail's pace) and I can understand why he'd want to focus on content and checking off his dev list instead of banging his head against the bugfix wall.  At the end of the day, I can walk away and go play Counterstrike and probably be just as content, so it's not a case of arm-flailing rage for me.  If it gets too bad, I'll just set a reminder on my computer calendar for 6 months from now to "Go check on Dwarf Fortress", and then I'll see if the game's made any significant strides towards end-game playability.

[KaguroDraven]

Hey I don't stand in either camp myself, I actuilly enjoy pointing out flaws in both sides of any argument. I do think the bugs should be fixed, the only thing I'm outright opposed to here is the open source. And about the misunderstanding thing, I'll be honest, I am not a programmer, I want be someday, but I'm not. I'm just working with the knowledge I have, so please don't get worked up as if I intentionily misunderstood. The only reason my arugments on this page thus far have leaned towards the 'toady is god' camp is becouse I've found more amusement for myself in counteracting what they say than the other side.

[Tsarwash]

I have read scurrilous rumours that the developer of Minecraft has over half a million dollars in his bank account. Of course I'm sure that this is just rubbish, but if it's true then there is no justice. I would support the idea that 3.16 would become the last version that is free with donations and future versions require a ten dollar / pound purchase fee. Nobody can convince me that this game is no worth ten quid of your money. I'm sure that initially nobody would switch to newer versions, but eventually as new features and bug fixes are added, many people would make the jump.

[ildamos]

Thank you kindly for reminding me. I forgot to light the candles in my shrine this morning.

Win.

an, I don't get you people. Every game in the world has bugs, there is no such thing as a bugless game.

Seconded. There are even RETAIL games that have immersion-destroying bugs that developers know about and abandoned. Cutscenes with chipmunk sounds anyone? Or Gold Edition packs not being able to patch to the latest patch?

[Tsarwash]

Yes. Just ot add that I bought a N64 game made by DMA for 35 quid once that was impossible to finish or get to the last level due to a bug. That was a cartridge console game, no patch there.

[Xirr]

You know, these forums are really interesting.

I've been here about 2 weeks now, and I've already noticed something.  There's almost a civil war level split between two camps.  One says "This is alpha, all can be forgiven, Toady is a golden god, don't diss him!".  The other says "We need everything fixed now, Toady should do what we want, screw his desires/wants/ideas, or else make it open source so we can stealfix the problems ourselves".  I see very few people walking the middle line, which TBH is usually a pretty bad sign for a community.

I'm not firmly in either camp.  I'd love to see the bug fixes go in (The game scales REALLY poorly as your fortress grows, making FPS rot inevitable, which IMO is a sign of extremely bad management of data).  However, this IS Toady's code, Toady's show, and I respect Toady for what he's accomplished (albeit at a snail's pace) and I can understand why he'd want to focus on content and checking off his dev list instead of banging his head against the bugfix wall.  At the end of the day, I can walk away and go play Counterstrike and probably be just as content, so it's not a case of arm-flailing rage for me.  If it gets too bad, I'll just set a reminder on my computer calendar for 6 months from now to "Go check on Dwarf Fortress", and then I'll see if the game's made any significant strides towards end-game playability.

Ahahaha! I have played this game since a roommate of mine introduced it to me back in 2006...Never really thought about joining the forum until just recently.

But ya..there is more than "2 camps." And those two camps you mentioned are not hard-lined.

As I player, I like his new content, but I hate to "lose" old content (my biggest qualm about 31. over .40d is the lack of nobles, those nobles would usually tear my Fortress down faster than any siege, resulting in much fun).

Most of us (if I can speak for the general "I check Dwarf Fortress's progress at least 4 times a year" group), have defaulted to making the game about as hard as you can imagine and having fun.

PS: DF doesn't scale poorly with big Forts (anymore, not for a long time actually) unless you got some big problems with your Fort in general: (1) Never, ever, embark with flowing water (streams, rivers, brooks) unless you intend them for some feat of challenge, (2) Disable sound, (3) Read the wiki, (4) keep tidy stockpiles (yes, micro-manage what they have) to limit long pathing for dwarves, (5) if its not chained, caged, or owned, kill it (see Wiki: Cats), (5) design your Fort carefully, and use traffic controls. I have had one Fort in 31. for 200 years now, with sieges and ambushes, and over 300 dwarves; FPS ranges from 35-55 all the way down to 0 for about 10 minutes if I decide to reclaim a stone dump of 14k stones.

[xellas84]

So basically if you don't follow a list of arcane rules that are never clearly stated, your FPS will go into the toilet.  Well boy, that sure sounds like great management of data to me, I'll just go ahead and retract any complaints about it since I can work around it by discarding entire sections of gameplay,  carefully micromanaging things that are supposed to work automatically, and throwing away the sound.

Dropping the sarcasm dial back a bit, sorry.  If you have to follow all those guidelines to have a fort that doesn't hit single-digit FPS within 10 ingame years, then there's already problems with the management of data.  If the only way to get decent FPS (Anything above 20 frames a second) is to micromanage everything, then the code has problems.