Print

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

[kaijyuu]

Alright Ghills, I'll accept your points, though you'll have to qualify some.

You know, there are a lot of people who like the fact that DF is a simulator, and they can build a fort and write stories about it.

I don't play DF so that I can have an epic adventure full of hair-raising moments.

What kind of stories DO you write, then? All the big and popular DF stories I've read are about forts that either barely survived catastrophe or failed spectacularly. The ones that live happily ever after don't often seem story worthy. If there are other story-worthy parts of DF, I'll be glad to hear them and hope to accommodate them.

Everything that has been suggested in this thread, with the exception of more intricate agriculture, is something that would lower the amount of fun I have with DF.  The suggestions here are all about forcing players into a particular playstyle, one that I don't find appealing and one that I suspect many other players also dislike.

And what playstyle is that?

I and others have been supporting more dangers as you dig deeper. That doesn't necessarily mean forcing every fort to have a military; creative construction could "conquer" these dangers as well. I'm not very sympathetic to not wanting obstacles to overcome, though if you're worried that these obstacles will force specific solutions (such as having a military) then that's definitely a valid concern. No obstacle here should have only one solution; creativity is the point of this game, after all.

The current treatment of (stone) walls is fairly realistic. Critters, of whatever size and stuff, simply can't tear down stone walls effectively, or at all.

I at least think that every danger should be 100% neutralizable, provided it takes some effort to do so. Tunnelers may seem counter to this at first, but if they were implemented I'm certain creative people could figure out ways to still block them out. You can't tunnel through thin air, for example...

[Waparius]

Walling off the caverns is no big deal, in my opinion. It's almost as easy to wall off the outside (minus a 5-tile-wide strip) or use a big channeled moat if you want all the space. Migrants, caravans etc can be directed through a big old trap-corridor with a drawbridge for sieges.

It's just that it's a big hassle.

All the big and popular DF stories I've read are about forts that either barely survived catastrophe or failed spectacularly.

I have a fondness for the turing-complete computer and the 500-year-fort, myself. And I had a lot of fun in 40D trying a self-imposed realistic-fort challenge, complete with airshafts, bathrooms and limited, heavily-supported/walled-and-floored soil tunneling. Just saying.

Oh, I agree. The point isn't that every site should turn out to have a portal to hell underneath it, but that there should always be something down there to find, and it shouldn't rely on getting lucky on site selection. The journey into the unknown isn't very interesting when all that's down there is rock and empty caverns that you'll wall up right away.

This. I like the idea of luck not being involved in whether you find FUN deep down, but what you find. Or at least more in the way of diversity. Sedimentary/soil layers would be more fun if there was the odd ruined city; caves should have the occasional dragon's nest. These things should have their own rewards and dangers, as opposed to just silk and nether-caps vs forgotten beasts and giant cave spiders.

[zwei]

I have big problem with "gamey" stuff:

At heart, things in DF are supposed to make sense. World that "lives and breathes". It seems that people here want pre-designed campaign style game.

If I know that something is not difficult because it is hard for objective reasons, but because it needs to be hard because of gamey-designery idea of how I am supposed to play, I am pissed because it is not real difficulty, and world was tampered with to make less sense.

Real world will not, for example, scale number of foes attacking your village so that you can kill them off fairly comfortably with small margin for error. If game sends you more or less foes based on difficulty curve settings than there actually are bandits... well, I do not need to play DF for this kind of experience, any other game will do and be more suited for it.

Part of "loosing is fun" derives from fact that real world is not fair and that stuff happening to you is not carefully metered to be beatable, but somethimes simply too much for fort to handle.

[Nil Eyeglazed]

I have big problem with "gamey" stuff:

At heart, things in DF are supposed to make sense. World that "lives and breathes". It seems that people here want pre-designed campaign style game.

If I know that something is not difficult because it is hard for objective reasons, but because it needs to be hard because of gamey-designery idea of how I am supposed to play, I am pissed because it is not real difficulty, and world was tampered with to make less sense.

Real world will not, for example, scale number of foes attacking your village so that you can kill them off fairly comfortably with small margin for error. If game sends you more or less foes based on difficulty curve settings than there actually are bandits... well, I do not need to play DF for this kind of experience, any other game will do and be more suited for it.

Part of "loosing is fun" derives from fact that real world is not fair and that stuff happening to you is not carefully metered to be beatable, but somethimes simply too much for fort to handle.

First off, I totally know what you mean.  Among other things, you don't want a game that tailors itself to you-- that backs off when you're doing poorly and pushes when you're doing well.

But I also think that it's important to realize that this is not an either/or kind of thing.  A pure simulation isn't fun; a pure game isn't fun.  It's about the balance between the two.  Ideally, you have a game that fools you into thinking it's a simulation.

It's important to keep in mind that DF is not simulating anything real.  It's simulating fantasy.  Yes, we want internally consistent fantasy.  But the fact that it's fantasy means that we (erm, Toady, I mean) can tailor the rules of the world to keep it BOTH internally consistent and yet progressively challenging in a, well, let's say gamelike manner.

For instance, let's imagine a brute simulation.  You embark.  Immediately, seventeen thousand goblins descend on you, because you're pretty much next door.  Simulation?  Yes.  Fun?  No.

Or, you're a few hundred miles away.  You keep to yourself.  Goblins that siege you never come back.  Eventually, goblins stop sieging you.  Accurate simulation?  Yes.  Fun?  No.

I can totally understand the fear of going too far the other way too.  When you kill goblins without casualties, they come back with double, until you start to receive casualties.  Gamelike?  Yes, it tailors its difficulty to your ability.  Fun?  No, it makes you feel like you have no impact on the world-- that if you succeed, you'll just get screwed harder, and if you fail, the world will forgive you.

But somewhere, between the two extremes, there's the possibility of making a world such that it is both simulation and game.  World generation is a good example of this.  Magma sea, adamantine, caverns-- none of these are necessary for simulative purposes.  They don't represent anything real.  They're pure fantasy.   Adjusting the default of how caverns or magma seas operate makes an experience that is both a simulation and a game.  It's internally consistent, because the other dwarven civs don't penetrate deeper than cavern 1 anyways, nevermind elves, goblins, or humans.  It's fun, because it challenges you progressively, rather than letting you reach the magma in season 2, making you wonder why obsidian is actually worth any more than marble (see, that part of the game is internally inconsistent, as it stands).

[zwei]

But somewhere, between the two extremes, there's the possibility of making a world such that it is both simulation and game.  World generation is a good example of this.  Magma sea, adamantine, caverns-- none of these are necessary for simulative purposes.  They don't represent anything real.  They're pure fantasy.   Adjusting the default of how caverns or magma seas operate makes an experience that is both a simulation and a game.  It's internally consistent, because the other dwarven civs don't penetrate deeper than cavern 1 anyways, nevermind elves, goblins, or humans.  It's fun, because it challenges you progressively, rather than letting you reach the magma in season 2, making you wonder why obsidian is actually worth any more than marble (see, that part of the game is internally inconsistent, as it stands).

I agree that you can pace DF without turning it to game, but lets look at root cause of this thread:

* Magma sea is too easily reached.
* Carverns are static.
* Adamantine is always present.

Cause? Gamey stuff. Toady added popular geography features to every embark in order to create endgame (mining adamantine to create powerfull weapons & releasing demons) as well as mid-game (three layers) along with interesting goal (reach magma to make fuel obsolete and speed up metal and glass industry).

This breaks aparat because caverns are easily bypassed. Hence, thread debating how caverns should be adjusted to be less ignored.

I ask: What would happen if Magma was removed from every embark and made it infrequent feature again?

Caverns would become incredibly relevant because they contain huge amount of wood which would become desired target of clearcutting efforts, so player wishing to start serious metal industry would have to breach and tame them.

Then, it start making sense again: Breach slowly, cavern by cavern. exploit what you have and if you have firm grasp on what you have, expand lower and breach next one which will have a bit nastier monsters.

[kaijyuu]

Well if you got rid of the magma sea, people would be asking for the bottom layer (whatever it would be, besides demons) to have interesting stuff added to it so they'd care to go there. Just like they're asking for caverns to have more stuff right now. If you don't want magma there, it'll need something other than adamantine.

As for wood/clearcutting, this is more of a problem with how trees grow, but it seems far easier to me to just poke a hole in the first cavern, dig out a z layer of soil, and make a tree farm. Caverns can still be utterly ignored at no cost. Fix that, and sure caverns would be an excellent wood source... though we'd still need something for people to care about caverns 2 and 3.



Concerning any exotic metals:
If any other than adamantine are added, I don't think they should be normal veins. How about coating the sides of caverns with them? That way digging them out requires vulnerability to cavern dangers (or walling off sections, which requires a bit of effort so good enough for me).

I'd still want to flesh out non-metal crafting industries before making more metals, but yeah.

[zwei]

Concerning any exotic metals:
If any other than adamantine are added, I don't think they should be normal veins. How about coating the sides of caverns with them? That way digging them out requires vulnerability to cavern dangers (or walling off sections, which requires a bit of effort so good enough for me).

I'd still want to flesh out non-metal crafting industries before making more metals, but yeah.

That was my first idea, "Mithril" metal which only appears in cavern walls and thus evey signle nugget requires cavern access.

[GreatWyrmGold]

The disagreements here are because we want to try and balance gameplay with realism. In this case, those are somewhat mutually exclusive...unless the caverns give great rewards.

I like the idea of cavern creatures and plants having exotic properties, especially if incorporated with forgotten beasts and a magic system. (Why is this leather armor so much better than that set of masterwork steel?...Oh, it's from that giant feathered slug that was killed a few years back.) Maybe fruits that heal or buff dwarves, or cursed trees whose wood can be made into beds that slowly turn dwarves into monsters (probably monsters that are much, much stronger and fiercer than dwarves), or a cave rat that can be stewed into a delicious meal but is only found near some large, dangerous beast (incentive to capture such creattures as well).

And adamantine and other super-metals? Make them into more...interesting...forms. Maybe some only exist where a blessed beast has spilt its blood (leading to farming said metals by dropping such monsters, likely forgotten beasts, into danger-room-like setups...), or only in the walls of a cave dragon's nest, or as the glowing walls of a passage leading to a plug of an even more powerful and valuable ore that leads, in a random number of tiles to...well, where cotton candy leads to currently.

Speaking of which, I want more ways to find the circus. Maybe I could have a priest summon clowns, but if I have him summon a mighty clown when said summoner is too low of skill the clown might create a portal to the circus? Or a deep pit with a cotton-candy floor that I can mine out, leading to the circus, or sending a dwarf too deep in a winding passage of...erm...whatever the stone that makes up the circus walls is called in the circus-based terminology (circus tent?) mixed in with pockets of cotton-candy-type metal, but even better than CC, or...


And, back on topic, making the surface more dangerous would help the original issue.

[Draco18s]

nerf farm plots so you need to farm a much larger area to feed your fortress

This.  By itself.  Would go a long way.

I've been campaigning to increase the difficulty of farming for three years now.

[irmo]

I've been campaigning to increase the difficulty of farming for three years now.

I'm sure you know this, but just requiring a larger area isn't enough--farming needs more labor input, and probably more infrastructure (bring back irrigation!), to be a challenge.

Here's a radical idea: What if underground crops could only grow in natural caverns? It's never made sense that you can pour water on a stone floor and produce fertile soil, so banish that. Underground crops are cave crops; they grow in cave mud. You can bring the seeds with you, sure, but you can't plant them except in a surface cave (which likely has someone unpleasant living in it) or a cavern. That, plus making the surface more dangerous (thanks, GreatWyrmGold), means using the caverns as farm chambers is generally a good plan.

I'd also suggest (once again) making mining generally more difficult, so that the cavern has the advantage of being a big empty room.

[Draco18s]

I've been campaigning to increase the difficulty of farming for three years now.

I'm sure you know this, but just requiring a larger area isn't enough--farming needs more labor input, and probably more infrastructure (bring back irrigation!), to be a challenge.

See linked thread.  I wasn't saying "just make farms bigger" I was saying "nerf farms so they have to be bigger."

[O11O1]

have something that needs magma irrigation.

THIS

[Vattic]

Forcing people to use the caverns to farm underground crops is a great idea. It makes sense that simply adding water to a tile shouldn't make it ready to farm. One thing I'd like to add is that there should be some difficult way to dig out and create new cultivatable land, perhaps through fertilisers and / or something you can only get through the caverns?

Of course this wouldn't stop people simply walling off a larger area but some creatures should be able to knock down walls with enough time and longer walls would increase the challenge.

Toady has mentioned wanting underground rivers again so perhaps going back to the Nile flood plains style farming would fit this job well.

[irmo]

Forcing people to use the caverns to farm underground crops is a great idea. It makes sense that simply adding water to a tile shouldn't make it ready to farm. One thing I'd like to add is that there should be some difficult way to dig out and create new cultivatable land, perhaps through fertilisers and / or something you can only get through the caverns?

Is that just so that the amount of cavern space isn't a hard cap on food production? Because there's a hell of a lot of space down there, and if you do run out, you can use fertilizer and high-skill growers to increase yield even further. I'd rather not compromise the rule of "underground crops grow only on natural cavern floors".

(Incidentally, hell should have its own crops, which grow only in hellish soil and make suitably rare, valuable, and/or disturbing products.)

[Vattic]

I only suggested that because some people gen worlds without caverns and because it's realistic and in line with some of the more complex farming improvement suggestions. Right now a world without caverns doesn't have any underground crops but maybe that's fitting.