Print

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

[Tres]

When using kindergarten mortality among children goes down to practically zero, meaning one third of population in my fort is useless kids. Magma accidents at infant school are one solution, though we could use a more dwarvitarian one.


PS. @down

I guess you're right, not native speaker.

[weenog]

I think the word you're looking for is contraception.

And a dwarfitarian solution isn't going to look like a humanitarian one, dwarves aren't humans.  They're short, sturdy creatures fond of drink and industry.  A truly dwarfitarian solution to too many useless children would be to find a way to put them to work, or find a way to turn them into booze.

[Neowulf]

Proper lighting in bedrooms so the dwarves can actually see eachother?

[Escapism]

Meh. Rather make childhood mortality a lot higher.

[loose nut]

Sometimes I just wish I could spay the fuckers.

[Fortress Calling]

Female dwarfs should have less chance to have babies as they get older. I have a 120 years old dwarf who had 3 children from before and still got 2 more in a 2 year span that's ridiculous.

[dray]

Who says that a venerable lady-dwarf can't be a badass baby-maker? I'd have thought that her (potentially) wrinkled, beardy glory would make her insanely attractive as an object of fecundity for other dwarves!

Adding the ability to lose the capability of reproducing by accident (or, say to spay catsplosions before they happen, in the case of neutering animal populations) might be interesting... but I get the impression that dwarves get the impression that they're all about to die -- having as many babies as possible is the only way to propel their numbers into the future versus sieges and beasts and their own stupidity. I don't really get a sense of contraception being an issue for them, as much as being alerted to every single baby's appearance can be an issue for players. (And... I'm sure there's a way to turn those announcements off, but I'm still too new to the game to have found it!)

[Di]

I'm sure there's a way to turn those announcements off

It's in data\init\announcements.txt
Remove P and R after BIRTH_CITIZEN

As for the suggestion, I guess it's period of growing up being longer than average fortress lifespan that makes children being viewed as food consuming tantrum-hazardous pests. I'm currently playing with [CHILD:8] and still tantruming buggers killed more workers than they will be able to replace next year.

[Facekillz058]

Why don't we just get some way to push a pregnant dwarf down the stairs?

[_Ivan_]

My mayor has 43 children....


There's a reason she got elected.

[dwarfhoplite]

what a Beast.

[dray]

Wow, Lolor, that's an epic feat. O_O She must have the hardiest reproductive system in all of history.

[pisskop]

Shame she wasn't a warrior...

[Malecus]

This feature already exists.

In the d_init file, down near the bottom, there is an option for changing how many babies and children can exist in your fort:  [BABY_CHILD_CAP:100:1000]
(The first number is the absolute cap; the second is the percentage compared to the number of adults in your fort, wherein you can have up to 10 babies/children per adult dwarf; the lower of these two is the effective cap and does not factor in migrant children or twins)

Change this to:  [BABY_CHILD_CAP:0:0]
And no more pregnancies (although already pregnant dwarves will still eventually give birth).

[GreatWyrmGold]

Meh. Rather make childhood mortality a lot higher.

This. Historically, large numbers of children were the norm for peasants, but large numbers of SURVIVING children were not. C'mon, game; get kids deathly ill, knocked off towers by apathetic and starving citizens, lose their bread to stronger kids or beggars, or impaled by their own curiosity! Don't make US do the large mortality rate FOR you!