Print

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

[Rimbecano]

One thing I'd like to see that's sort of related is the ability to put more than 10 skill points into a dwarf by having him have "past hardships". For instance, a dwarf might be missing a leg, for which he'd get extra skill points (of which you might want to put some, but not all, into crutch-walking).

[Unfrozen Caveman]

I like this idea very much. 

[RabidAnubis]

I think pathing to the edge of the map and running sim till they're dead or across it would be best. The player's could either leave it up to the AI or try to do it themselves by sending all their dwarves to map edge burrows before abandoning.


And I forgot to mention, survivor dwarves could also show up by themselves in immigrant waves (with no unhappy thought due to it being their decision to show up).
Imagine you abandoned your fortress to Magma Fun, you sadly embark with the standard random dwarves because you didn't feel like redistributing points to make up the cost of your best dwarves, and suddenly it becomes christmas in late summer, your legendary miner in full steel armor from your previous fortress decides to grace you with his presence once again.

I like this!!!

[Thundercraft]

'Retiring' forts is a crazy popular suggestion.  Just below gunpowder and steampunk in it's perennial nature.

Yes. Similar suggestions have been made before, in other threads.

What I'd like to see is a "Successive Embark", or the option to continue the existence of a Fortress after the player tires of it or reaches a certain FPS death/breakpoint. What I mean is that instead of abandoning the Fortress or intentionally killing it off in a blaze of glory, the player can instead choose to select from among their current dwarves and resources to build a new embark party to strike the earth elsewhere, leaving the old Fortress more or less intact. I'd like to eventually be able to play a generated world from year 0 to year 500+ through successive fortress embarks and successive adventure embarks.

This could be a lot more interesting because the player could choose to bring along their prized breed of super-sized llamas, war-grizzly bears and/or hunter-giant lions to continue breeding them on their next site.

That's what I'd love to see. However, I'd be satisfied with merely another option besides Abandon that would leave the current dwarves as occupants there, leave the animals alive and which would not scatter all the items about. If we could get that much, then I suspect someone might be able to create a utility to do the embark-from-existing-dwarves-and-resources thing. (The new DFMode tool in the DFHack package hints at this, as it allows one to control a fortress dwarf while switching to Adventure Mode.)

I always wondered why the only choice given to players is to "Abandon", with no option to transfer control to the computer and embark someplace else without utterly ruining the old fort. The current system evokes such a completely distopian view - that failure is inevitable and the only option. I mean, if all dwarven outposts and colonies ended in failure so easily, dwarves would have gone extinct long before year 1 on world gen. And when one considers how few dwarf children grow to adulthood and how many immigrates die... Yeah, that does not add up.

PS: It would be cool if our fortress was the last of all dwarfkind and, through repeated embarks and founding of more and more successful mountain homes, we managed to get our dwarves flourishing again. That'd make the player's first fortress the stuff of legends that all descendants would portray in engravings, works of art, stories, etc.

[Neowulf]

PS: It would be cool if our fortress was the last of all dwarfkind and, through repeated embarks and founding of more and more successful mountain homes, we managed to get our dwarves flourishing again. That'd make the player's first fortress the stuff of legends that all descendants would portray in engravings, works of art, stories, etc.

That would be my eventual wish, the ability to completely repopulate a dwarfless world by creating a new fortress, running it till you've got a good population, then turning it over to computer control as the new mountainhome and starting another fortress.
Maybe we can get that once the post-gen world tracking stuff with the caravan arc is done.

[Thundercraft]

Maybe we can get that once the post-gen world tracking stuff with the caravan arc is done.

Unfortunately, I would not expect such features until at least the Army Arc is finished, if not later.

That said, there's been a lot of exciting talk lately on the DFHack and the DFusion threads on using the DMode tool to swap between Fortress Mode and other modes. And through hacking they've already managed to prevent some of the problems with Abandoning a fortress (such as items scattering and dwarves disappearing), though it still sounds rather buggy and unreliable.

[anon_outlaw]

i think toady mentioned doing something like retiring as overseer of a fortress and starting afresh.

i think that while !!fun!! is fun and all at a certain point your just that awesome that to start a new fortress you have to kill the old one off which is indeed kinda bullshit. though the idea of the King moving to every new successful outpost you make is really derp-derp so the option to retire should be at Duke.

[Granite26]

i think toady mentioned doing something like retiring as overseer of a fortress and starting afresh.

i think that while !!fun!! is fun and all at a certain point your just that awesome that to start a new fortress you have to kill the old one off which is indeed kinda bullshit. though the idea of the King moving to every new successful outpost you make is really derp-derp so the option to retire should be at Duke.

Or just rethink why and when the king shows up in forts in general...  It's easy for a human to make a better fort than the RNG, now, but that might change.  Also, rather than competing with the RNG for possession of the king, you'd be competed with your last fort.

[anon_outlaw]

1) RNG isn't common shorthand on this site so next time you use it say the full thing the 1st time. i myself have no idea what RNG is.
2) if you knew anything you would know it's not the human outdoing the world gen'd capital but the filling of a set of conditions.
15,000☼ wealth in Architecture
7,500☼ wealth in Roads
5,000☼ in offerings to Dwarven caravan
140 population

[iron_general]

RNG means Random Number Generator or Random Number God, in this case the computer and in the latter case it can be considered chaotic neutral.

[anon_outlaw]

weall arnt you just all facepalm.jpg

anyway RNG isn't common shorthand ANYWHERE and not relevant to the thread. if you want to be all fancy try 'procedurally generated' which is the actual term your looking for.

[Jay]

weall arnt you just all facepalm.jpg

anyway RNG isn't common shorthand ANYWHERE and not relevant to the thread. if you want to be all fancy try 'procedurally generated' which is the actual term your looking for.

Uh.

That term is used nigh-constantly around here.
http://df.magmawiki.com/index.php/Acronyms

Also, you seem to be too caught up in your semantics to realize that DF is a program.  As such, it sends binary instructions...  Everything can be traced to a 0 or a 1.  A random number generator is responsible for a large portion of those numbers.
In other words, your "procedural generation" is random number generation, albeit in a much grander scale.

As far as this thread: Tracking populations is part of the Caravan Arc.  This behavior will come alongside, surely, and has been planned for quite a while.

[anon_outlaw]

weall arnt you just all facepalm.jpg

anyway RNG isn't common shorthand ANYWHERE and not relevant to the thread. if you want to be all fancy try 'procedurally generated' which is the actual term your looking for.

Uh.

That term is used nigh-constantly around here.
http://df.magmawiki.com/index.php/Acronyms

Also, you seem to be too caught up in your semantics to realize that DF is a program.  As such, it sends binary instructions...  Everything can be traced to a 0 or a 1.  A random number generator is responsible for a large portion of those numbers.
In other words, your "procedural generation" is random number generation, albeit in a much grander scale.

As far as this thread: Tracking populations is part of the Caravan Arc.  This behavior will come alongside, surely, and has been planned for quite a while.

this argument is getting intolerably pretentious so this will be my last post wasted on it.

i didn't say RNG isn't a term, i just said it's not common short hand ie, you cant expect people to just know what it means also the link you posted says it can also mean 'random name generator' making it doubly strange you would think we can assume/know the meaning out of the blue. saying anything in dwarf fortress is form a RNG is overly simplistic on a very drastic level, DF is a program indeed and your a fucking glob of hydrogen, carbon and oxygen but i don't really bring it up unless we are talking about chemistry. in the end this is all you trying to be smarty-pants and failing hard, going into detail to justify yourself is worthless as my criticism isn't about correctness so much as courtesy. just try and avoid people needing to ask you for clarification on your posts, the meaning should be apparent first time, every time.

[Zalminen]

1) RNG isn't common shorthand on this site so next time you use it say the full thing the 1st time.

Not common?

I just tried a forum search using the term RNG. There were 33 pages of results. I'd classify that as common 

[anon_outlaw]

not incredibly common, this place sees alot of traffic and the search system stops after 34 pages. still i admit it's more used then i thought but that dosn't change the fact of my argument:

just post the full length of an acronym for simplicity sake,

ie, blah blah blah RNG (random number generator) and a blah blah blah RNG again.