Print

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

Of course not. Freedom is great.

82 (31.4%)

Heavens no! I would never deny others.

10 (3.8%)

People should be free to enjoy what they like. I'd never oppose it.

29 (11.1%)

I love denying others basic rights so I can be lazy and not edit my .init file.

55 (21.1%)

What kind of rigged poll is this? MSNBC has fairer. Also, I am pro-filth.

85 (32.6%)

Total Members Voted: 260

[NW_Kohaku]

I don't see the need nor fun in adventurer mode bathroom breaks. I can see dwarves needing to swing by the shrub or latrine once every few drinks or meals, and as always, support init.txt or worldgen disabling. I've already spilled the details in the OP, but it bears some repetition after nigh a year.

Well, in doing some searches on the subject, and rereading the start of this thread, I think Toady One sees some need to keep things consistant between modes.

[In response to a list of suggestions for livestock, including one being "fertilizer"]
4. They just drop it everywhere?  Everyone will might be doing it after a while... night soil, and so on.  But it's a dangerous door to open, especially if the room on the other side is full.  If a god turns you into a horse in adventure mode, would you suddenly start dropping the bomb?

Obviously an old quote, but it gives the idea, especially in conjunction with the Reddit one.

Toady One doesn't seem to want to make people in Fortress Mode do their dirty business, but exempt Adventure Mode from doing the same.  It means some sort of elegant sidestep of the issue (as much as this topic can retain any elegance) needs to be created if we want to ensure preventing Adventure Mode from being even more depraved than it already is doesn't stand in the way of Fortress Mode getting the benefits of waste management.

Having a "you go potty break only when you need to sleep" or "you need to use the toilet after downing a barrel of ale" function may or may not be enough.  A "you do the deed when the camera is off while using the sleep function, and theoretically also do all other hygene functions and strip out of platemail armor for bed" function makes some sense.

[Askot Bokbondeler]

eh, it doesn't really add a logistic challenge and it isn't something that consumes an item... it can easily be abstracted, it's not like you spend most of the game time zoomed in on the adventurer. time goes much faster when you sleep or are in travel mode, so it's easy to imagine this stuff happening off screen...

[PTTG??]

I don't see the need nor fun in adventurer mode bathroom breaks. I can see dwarves needing to swing by the shrub or latrine once every few drinks or meals, and as always, support init.txt or worldgen disabling. I've already spilled the details in the OP, but it bears some repetition after nigh a year.

You have my full agreement.

[Durin Stronginthearm]

I had a dream last night in which I was playing a version of DF that had excretory functions in. Then suddenly I was in a supermarket with my workmates and the cast of Battlestar Galactica throwing poop over the aisles. I woke up retching.

Sooooo, no faeces in DF, plz.

[NW_Kohaku]

I had a dream last night in which I was playing a version of DF that had excretory functions in. Then suddenly I was in a supermarket with my workmates and the cast of Battlestar Galactica throwing poop over the aisles. I woke up retching.

Sooooo, no faeces in DF, plz.

This is always the problem with these "debates"... The reason they never go anywhere is that no matter how many arguments for their use go in, there's always the response that comes down to "but if it is possible to throw poo, DF is over", without any hint that they read the arguments that came before.

You do realize that people already brag about killing creatures by throwing vomit correct?  How is poo-flinging so much worse than vomit-flinging?  Or, for that matter, flinging massive collections of fly brains or body fat melted out of people, or that mod where someone made succubi that lactate poison and attack people with their breasts, or any of the thousands of disgusting or purile things that this game already allows? 

Why is poo the one and only thing that cannot be in a game, no matter how much more sense it makes to involve fertilizer production and lant production in the game than it does to have dwarves all collectively vomit the instant they go outside?  Building sewers and composting piles and industries around lant add so much more to the game than vomit does, and frankly, I find urine quite a bit less gross than vomit, at that.

Can we make a compromise, remove vomit and put urine in?

Or does it not even matter, because you won't even read the response to your post?

[mrtspence]

I would love the idea.

Anything to add another layer of complexity to this game. It would be awesome designing working sewage systems, seeing it come to fruition, and then cunning gobbos ambushing you through the latrine pipes!

Anything to make the game I love for its complexity and depth more complex and in-depth!

[Buttery_Mess]

To be frank, I think the main reason why sewage ought to be in is that irl sewage disposal is massively important in the establishment of civilisation. You can't form big, healthy cities without sewers. Knowing where the water will eventually end up is almost as important to know where it comes from.

[Durin Stronginthearm]

Or does it not even matter, because you won't even read the response to your post?

I did a long reply to this, but deleted most of it because I can't be bothered getting into an internet pissing contest. The one thing I will say is, the part of your post I have quoted is a pretty twatty thing to say (and actually makes me less likely to read your posts, so well done for the own goal there).

I read every post that replies to me, but I'm not particularly interested in engaging with someone that can't be civil, or jumps to assumptions without actually knowing anything about me.

[NW_Kohaku]

Or does it not even matter, because you won't even read the response to your post?

I did a long reply to this, but deleted most of it because I can't be bothered getting into an internet pissing contest. The one thing I will say is, the part of your post I have quoted is a pretty twatty thing to say (and actually makes me less likely to read your posts, so well done for the own goal there).

I read every post that replies to me, but I'm not particularly interested in engaging with someone that can't be civil, or jumps to assumptions without actually knowing anything about me.

Maybe I "jumped to an assumption", but my assumption that you didn't read it was correct by your own admission.  So again, what's the point in trying to convince someone who won't bother to read the argument?

It seems to me as if you just threw your own assumptions about what people wanted to do into the thread, and when you were called out on it, were quite "uncivil" about it, yourself, blaming the one who called you out for your previous actions.

[Areyar]

I'd rather first have non-player entities eating and drinking before they start producing poop and pee. 

ps. please moderate yourself, this is not constructive. 

[Nikov]

I'd rather first have non-player entities eating and drinking before they start producing poop and pee. 

ps. please moderate yourself, this is not constructive. 

Non-player entities currently are eating in worldgen, and the suggestion isn't even to produce poop and pee. Its to create a liquid contaminant called 'filth' that dwarves in fortress mode generate a 1/7 tile of in a designated latrine zone or toilet built over a hole in the ground, once every couple of meals. This generates challenges in fortress design similar to dwarves needing water. If I may be so blunt, I suspect the people resisting this suggestion do not grasp exactly what is being suggested. To be sure, a lot of prior suggestions along this line literally amounted to dwarves hauling little globs of shit around. But this suggestion is different. It's measured and reasonable, focused on creating an engineering challenge and not random gross humor. I encourage everyone to read the OP.

[NW_Kohaku]

I'd rather first have non-player entities eating and drinking before they start producing poop and pee. 

If you mean other civs on the worldmap during worldgen, then they already have food production, hunger, and starvation.

If you mean things besides dwarves in the fortress, we just got grazing animals, and are expected to get hay and some sort of mechanics for feeding carnivorous creatures fairly soon, as well.

Talking about what should be a higher priority than another thing isn't really relevant in most suggestions threads, anyway, since the point is not that they need to be put in more than something else, but that they should be put in eventually.

Frankly, I'm not too keen on the notion that we should have actual fluids that can occupy whole tiles instead of just items or contaminants, but if we want to get a complete simulation of farming, we need to model the cycle of nutrients from soil to plant to animal to waste to decomposer back to soil.  If we want (al)chemistry, then we need chemicals.  Putting sewage into the game is going to be necessary for more advanced portions of the game to be possible.

[NW_Kohaku]

ps. please moderate yourself, this is not constructive. 

Good enough a change? 

I can't leave something like that well enough alone.

[Nikov]

Well that's where our views digress, I suppose. I think keeping track of 200 dwarves individual bi-monthly solid and liquid leavings becomes a serious CPU chore and not a lot of fun (cat poop in my hallways? NOT ON THE MICROCLINE TILE!), and given the alterative of playing with flow dynamics in sewer design, I advocate the latter. It should be possible to abstract tanning, alchemical and agricultural sewage inputs into buckets of filth rather than specifically jugs of urine or barrels of manure. I understand that you want a very advanced agriculture simulation and keeping the two seperate will be important for the nutrient cycle, but in a compromise with computing limits and player sensibilities, I think abstracting it to filth flows is the way to go.

[Kogut]

I am against it - not because people will start drowning elf caravans in their sewers.
It can be implemented as
- liquid therefore killing FPS
- item - what would be stupid without improved hauling

And I think that it would be good to implement it as it would force me to stop wasting time on DF forum .