Print

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

[stavi]

Hi guys,

I'm wanted to play a froozen- high evil world this time I found a build on dwarf wiki "GLACIAL" which is great, however when I embark I always have z-levels only in the range about 100-250 and I want to have many more z-levels below surface like -100 to 200 however  I cannot change the min max elevation because glaciers must be between 100-300 and the world is rejected is there a way around it? I want a glacier(or other freezing) fortress without trees, maximal evil, a volcano and with many z-lvls below surface

[Starver]

Hi guys,

I'm wanted to play a froozen- high evil world this time I found a build on dwarf wiki "GLACIAL" which is great, however when I embark I always have z-levels only in the range about 100-250 and I want to have many more z-levels below surface like -100 to 200 however  I cannot change the min max elevation because glaciers must be between 100-300 and the world is rejected is there a way around it? I want a glacier(or other freezing) fortress with many z-lvls below surface

Technically, there are many Z-levels below 'surface' (i.e. ground height), and you can increase the cavern-spacing to get an awful lot more.  But are you actually looking for either the glacier (or its substrate) to go from (say) absolute Z-level 200 down to absolute Z-level minus-something-or-other or to have the glacier actually start at 'zero' and go down?

(Not quite sure I've understood the question, though.)

[stavi]

Well I want it to be freezing, with high evil, volcano and have z-lvls in a range about -100 to 200. Something like that, whether it is called a glacier or sth else does not really matter I simply want a hard start and many z levels to dig in, and the build I used is almost perfect only there is always only about 100 z-levels to dig in

[stavi]

Ok I enlarged the space between caverns and it worked thanks

[Starver]

Ah, good.  Sorry, I didn't realise how late it was when I made my initial response, and wasn't around for a few hours to pick up your response in turn.

[aaOzymandias]

Maybe a stupid question, but how do I know if an embar area has a volcano? I have not yet seen it (in my admittedly short DF time)

[NecroRebel]

On the embark map, if there's a dark red double-~ mark (like water, except red), there's a volcano in that tile. After embark, volcanoes will be visible.

Note that magma pools, which are like volcanoes but terminate in one of the caverns instead of the surface, aren't visible prior to actually spotting them after embark.

[Starver]

(Going purely from memory, here, please correct/add as appropriate.)

On the three-pane embarkation chooser, the world map (extreme right) has ^ where volcanoes are.  Centre in on one of those locations and (assuming it isn't all mountains, and thus unembarkable) look around in the sub-region and local site maps for a ~ that indicates surface magma.  (A double-~ indicates a red-sand desert, though, so ignore them.  Unless you happen to have a volcano within such a geological/climatological area.)

Sub-surface but cavern-intruding magma pipes (outstanding from the magma sea) are not so easy to find, but I think you're looking for the full-blown surface type, right?

(Ninjed, on both counts.  Hoy, NecroRebel, are you looking over my shoulder and (successfully!) summarising me?)

[aaOzymandias]

Thanks guys

[ral]

From what I've read, I *think* that the number of overall z-levels is per local embark map (per whole local map on the left of the embark screen, not just your site selection block) and is determined by the difference between the highest and lowest points on the whole embark map. So if you up the variance and get really low and high places on the same embark map then it should create more regions with more zlevels, but then like you say you have the issue with glaciers.

So basically if you have an ocean shore and a mountain peak on the same local map then that would do it, but raising the z-levels between caverns is perfectly reasonable as well.

Note that you can pretty much always solve rejection problems by zeroing out the filtering parameters (like max number of whatever biome squares) and then just see what you get and manually reject whatever doesn't look good.