Print

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

More tech tree!

36 (26.1%)

More ritual tree!

8 (5.8%)

More lore!

12 (8.7%)

More mythical weapons/armor!

22 (15.9%)

Plagues!

28 (20.3%)

More secrets!

21 (15.2%)

More mechanical constructs!

11 (8%)

Total Members Voted: 137

[narhiril]

What are the chances of a unskilled dwarf producing a masterwork?

Anyway, your mod. Just don't forget to make it clear it's a potash maker task.

Next to none, but who's to say the dwarf is unskilled?  The only way I can assure that the dwarf is unskilled is to make it require a very, very obscure labor - one that would not under any circumstances be present on a dwarf, but I also want the labor to make sense.

...  Actually, thinking about it, you gave me an idea.  Is NONE a valid labor token?  If not, can you omit the [SKILL:xxx] field to the same effect?  I'm going to plug it in and find out.  If the game takes it and provides no skill benefits for the reaction, I'm going to go with your suggestion of creating a "processed ethereal sphere."

[TehNoob]

Building a floodgate requires 'No Special Profession'. Maybe you could look into that?

If it works, include me in the credits! 

[narhiril]

Building a floodgate requires 'No Special Profession'. Maybe you could look into that?

If it works, include me in the credits! 

Labor tokens (buildings) and skill tokens (reactions) are a little bit different, but it is encouraging to know that it works for buildings.  That in mind,I tried two test builds.

[SKILL:NONE] did not work...

... but omitting the skill token entirely seems to be fine.  Because toys do not accept an adjective token, I put it in at the end of the name.  A miner took an ethereal sphere to the smelter and produced a base quality 'ethereal sphere (processed)' with no skill gain. It was worth noting that this reaction was instantaneous, since the skill used in a reaction determines its speed, but this is not something I am considering important in this case.  These new objects can be melted normally.

I am considering this problem solved for the next release.  Thank you to trees, Pan, and TehNoob for the speedy feedback here.  Those of you not already mentioned in the special thanks section of the manual are being added to it.

[TehNoob]

Anyway, do shrines have any use at all? Cuz all of the reactions for the ritual tech tree are in the altar. You should either add some shrine reactions, or maybe move the 'greater ritual of ___' rituals to their respective shrines.

[narhiril]

Anyway, do shrines have any use at all? Cuz all of the reactions for the ritual tech tree are in the altar. You should either add some shrine reactions, or maybe move the 'greater ritual of ___' rituals to their respective shrines.

I'm working on shrine reactions right now, actually.  I've got some ideas for a few more things I can pack into 0.14b.

It turns out, however, that soap is a ridiculously counter-intuitive thing to produce in a reaction.  I'm still fumbling around with the reaction raws trying to get it right.  The current soap reaction uses these lines...


   [REAGENT:tallow:1:GLOB:NONE:NONE:NONE][REACTION_CLASS:TALLOW][UNROTTEN]
      [HAS_MATERIAL_REACTION_PRODUCT:SOAP_MAT]
   [PRODUCT:100:1:BAR:NONE:GET_MATERIAL_FROM_REAGENT:tallow:SOAP_MAT]
      [PRODUCT_DIMENSION:150]

...  Which means that in order to get soap from another source, I am going to need to create a reaction for which I will need to create a new item from a new material with [MATERIAL_REACTION_PRODUCT:SOAP_MAT:(material)].  It doesn't look too complicated, but I'm sure I'll find some way to muck it up, so it might take me a day or two to get it working properly.  The good news is that the soap maker's workshop is in the raws, so I will be able to produce this special item in the ritual and then convert it into soap with a new reaction at the soap maker.

[narhiril]

About ready to go to bed, I remembered, for some reason, my days playing Warhammer Online, and how my guild used to always talk about how we wish the company would cut the "new feature" crap and fix the existing bugs first.  I rebooted my machine immediately.

So here it is, guys.  I'm cutting the crap and fixing the existing bugs first.  The new reactions will be in 0.14c.

In the meantime, here's 0.14b.  Enjoy it.


EDIT: Concept art also coming soon.

[Anathema]

You do realize that your graphical edition is about 75MB larger than it needs to be after unzipping, thanks to some unnecessary files: mainly a few bitmaps depicting DF worlds, and a gamelog.txt with more words than the entire Song of Ice and Fire series? I hate to sound overly picky (although it does slow downloading/unzipping a bit), but I notice these things in particular because I run DF off a USB drive with limited space. Which is, incidentally, very convenient if one plays on more than one pc - unlike most games DF will run directly off a USB, no installation or even copying needed.

[astianax]

in response to an earlier question about how likely it is for an unskilled laborer to make a masterwork item...that totally depends on said unskilled laborer's attributes. in an experiment i did with dwarves being able to have anywhere from the normal dwarven minimum in an attribute to 5000 (the 'max' for an attribute, just look at the memory attribute of most non dwarven races), those dwarves who had green, or high attributes of the appropriate type would almost instantly start churning out masterworks, or at least superior quality, even at dabbling in the related skill. it got pretty ridiculous, especially with weavers and unending silk farms...

[narhiril]

You do realize that your graphical edition is about 75MB larger than it needs to be after unzipping, thanks to some unnecessary files: mainly a few bitmaps depicting DF worlds, and a gamelog.txt with more words than the entire Song of Ice and Fire series? I hate to sound overly picky (although it does slow downloading/unzipping a bit), but I notice these things in particular because I run DF off a USB drive with limited space. Which is, incidentally, very convenient if one plays on more than one pc - unlike most games DF will run directly off a USB, no installation or even copying needed.

You mean a log file of every action from the last 200 test builds isn't useful to you?

I can clean that up a bit for the next release - I've literally just been packaging my test copy without the save files.  In the meantime, you can safely delete those bitmaps and the game log.

[narhiril]

Note to self - reduce the clutch size of tortoises.  I just had a shellsplosion.

[TehNoob]

I think the issue is with all sorts of egg layers.

[narhiril]

If it's alright, I'd like to bounce an idea off of you guys.  Would simplified clothing be something you'd like to see in this mod?

What I would do is leave all of the stock files, but radically alter the permissions in all of the entity files to use only one or two articles of generically-named clothing.  The old types of clothing would still exist for artifacts, but I'm thinking that this can dramatically reduce the amount of frame-eating clutter without removing much from the game's immersion factor.  The textile industry would still be viable, because you could still produce and export these few clothing items, but invaders would show up with one or two articles of clothing (plus armor) instead of the ten million that they seem to show up with now.  Flavor clothing would be preserved - the voidwalkers would use different generic clothing articles than the meowkin, and so on, but the system would be basically gutted and reworked for one to three items of clothing per race (armor not included).  I've been using dfautodestroy to get rid of most of the clutter around my fortress, but frankly, I think it might be more fun if that wasn't necessary.  You'll still get artifact socks and so on, but the average citizen will be wearing "(material) dwarven garb" and possibly a hat or two.

I am a bit concerned to go ahead and push this change for two reasons: one, it modifies the entity_default file a lot more extensively than I have before, which is not a good thing for cross-compatibility.  Two, it might have unwanted impacts on anyone who may be using LFR for adventure mode, where individual articles of clothing are a lot more significant.

Thoughts?

[thatkid]

I would not enjoy it.
I play adventure mode, and tend to mix and match mods. I understand how having simplified clothing can help for FPS, but I find it to not help as much as it could and so it's really just an unnecessary dumbing down of the game.

[Pan]

Reducing FPS is important in fortress mode. This seems like a good idea. I actually tried to do this (nothing but a 'civilian clothes', 'boots', and 'gloves') but with my limited modding skills...

However, for the people who like adventurer mode, clothing is quite a valuable trade good.

So you could make 2 versions of LFR. The 'normal' version, and the 'optional' simplified clothing version. I'd play the simplified version for my fortresses, and the normal one for those times I feel like clobbering someone to death with their hacked off limb.

[The Master]

I agree with pan. Why not just have a version WITH the simplified clothing, and one without?