Dwarf Fortress Wiki - User contributions [en]

40d Talk:Starting location

2009-01-18T20:52:23Z

The Wanderer: /* "Invaluable" vs. "Unnecessary" */

Trees do not only grow on the lowest Z-Level. I have trees growing on multiple Z-Levels. --[[User:Tracker|Tracker]] 02:46, 1 November 2007 (EDT)

Hmm. Maybe only up to a certain height? My first map--while initially pretty decent (sand, water, trees, rock, variety of minerals) had trees only in the most lower left hand corner (one screen's worth), which also happened to be the lowest surface level I had. But you are right, my current fort (nice entrance, there was a pocket by a river tributary that I turned into my entrance gateway, but no sand) has trees on two levels, the lowest surface, and the second lowest. Still, it's something to be aware of.
--[[User:Draco18s|Draco18s]] 03:26, 1 November 2007 (EDT)

Absolutely - that's why I changed it to say "lower" instead of lowest. --[[User:Tracker|Tracker]] 03:35, 1 November 2007 (EDT)

So I noticed. :)
--[[User:Draco18s|Draco18s]] 03:26, 1 November 2007 (EDT)

== Towns ==

Any benefit of building in towns? Other than mining under the elves and dropping them into pits? --[[User:Ikkonoishi|Ikkonoishi]] 19:35, 3 November 2007 (EDT)
:Yes there is. Humans are more than happy to share their stuff with you, and won't be at all upset if you rob them blind it seems. --[[User:Ikkonoishi|Ikkonoishi]] 22:11, 3 November 2007 (EDT)
::Think this'll ever get changed? Seems kind of unrealistic to me...--[[User:Tarsier|Tarsier]] 19:56, 5 November 2007 (EST)

== Mountain tiles guarantee certain features. ==

As per my addition, for each mountain square in the 2nd zoom view, you're guaranteed pits, a chasm, and an underground river. I have confirmed this myself using the reveal tool, and Today has confirmed at least part of it: http://www.bay12games.com/cgi-local/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=2&t=001176 - [[User:Kjoery|Kjoery]] 16:49, 6 November 2007 (EST)

:Confirmed this too.--[[User:Richards|Richards]] 03:20, 21 April 2008 (EDT)

== Towns Revert ==

Any reason why that edit was unacceptable to you Savok? I'm not going to revert, but I would like an explanation. --[[User:Ikkonoishi|Ikkonoishi]] 12:06, 12 November 2007 (EST)

== Errors in PNG? ==

Contrary to the text in the attached PNG, I've had fortresses with pockets of sand sufficient for glassworking even when sand doesn't show up in the embark screen. [[User:Kidinnu|Kidinnu]] 09:25, 28 November 2007 (EST)

Yes, all maps I've ever had have had at least a few squares of sand. Is it guaranteed? --[[User:Penguinofhonor|Penguinofhonor]] 22:18, 30 November 2007 (EST)
:I have never seen any pockets of sand. --[[User:Strangething|Strangething]] 16:27, 11 July 2008 (EDT)

Another error is that magma and volcanoes now appear on the map [[User:MikeWulf|MikeWulf]] 23:41, 6 March 2008 (EST)
:Note that underground magma is hidden. Only lava on the surface is shown on the map --[[User:Strangething|Strangething]] 16:27, 11 July 2008 (EDT)

== Layers ==

The paragraph about layers is not explicit enough for newbies. For instance, 'igneous intrusive' never shows up on the embark screen. What I would like to see is something like
* red sand - useful for glass making
* gabbro - in this layer you may find chalk, a flux
* felsite - in this layer you may find copper ore
etc. (Caveat: the data I gave as example is most likely false and/or incomplete).

This way, by comparing the embark screen to this page, the reader would immediately find out what (s)he may find in the site.
--[[User:Aykavil|Aykavil]] 09:51, 10 July 2008 (EDT)

:I added a link to [[stone layers]]. There's a lot more in-depth info there. --[[User:Strangething|Strangething]] 16:32, 11 July 2008 (EDT)

== Fun starting locations ==

A starting location that looks pretty good from the readouts can turn out to be as boring as hell once you arrive at it. Are there any tips for finding ''interesting'' locations? --[[User:Theory|Theory]] 16:46, 10 August 2008 (EDT)

: Define "interesting"? Anything with a [[chasm]] or in a [[terrifying]] biome could be 'interesting', I'm sure! Personally I often like completely flat land, so I can make the area interesting with my own constructions! That said, I'm considering next building a settlement on the side/s of a steep canyon or river valley! --[[User:Raumkraut|Raumkraut]] 17:51, 10 August 2008 (EDT)

== Magma ==

Regarding finding Magma, this page reads: "look for darker igneous rocks like basalt, obsidian, gabbro" -- is this accurate? Basalt and obsidian are igneous extrusive, while gabbro is igneous intrusive. Only the igneous extrusive page calls out that magma is commonly found there. --[[User:Sev|Sev]] 20:41, 13 September 2008 (EDT)

== Mode:Civilisation==
I just noticed, when starting a new fort and choosing which dwarf civ I was from, a symbol I hadn't seen before. Normally dwarve homelands are just blue omegas, this time I saw an omega and also 2 blue {{Tile|î|#ff0|#000}}s. Anyone else seen this/know if this has any significance? --[[User:Juckto|Juckto]] 05:25, 20 November 2008 (EST)

:I've had this happen to human civs and one dwarf civ- it means they somehow acquired forest sites during worldgen. [[User:Random832|Random832]] 08:42, 20 November 2008 (EST)

::The flipside of humans conquering forest retreats and building towns on them is that you can end up with elves living with them who wear metal armour. I had an 'elven diplomat' show up to discuss human diplomacy, and many 'human' merchants and guards were also elves. That could get scary in the event of a siege! --[[User:Navian|Navian]] 09:41, 20 November 2008 (EST)

:::Not five minutes ago I had a goblin ambush that was mostly made up of Elves. They all had goblin-esque second names, so presumably they were kidnap-ees, although it seems that you can have large families of elves/humans/whatever who are all descended from kidnapped children and now happily evil.--[[User:Quil|Quil]] 14:32, 20 November 2008 (EST)

== Elevation changes and inaccessibility ==

I have my doubts about this being true. I'm on a huge mountain map and the wagons have traveled over its peak without a care, since they can go up ramps without a problem. I believe trees and boulders are what causes problems, not elevation.--[[User:Maximus|Maximus]] 17:25, 10 December 2008 (EST)

:Hmm, ok. I've just cured some accessibility problems on a fairly mountainous map myself, and it seems the problems were right outside my fortress. There's an elevation change only 3-4 squares below (i.e. to the south of) my entrance ramp, and when I used the "upward ramp" designation on the area, my Dwarves dug away at the 3x5 area I'd marked, and -hey presto- the next caravan could suddenly get the big wagons into my trade depot (the smaller ones could get there fine anyway). I admit I was felling trees in the area as well, for timber, but I'd been doing this for the past two game years and it didn't seem to make any difference to accessibility. Ah well, maybe some more testing is required! [[User:Saiph|Saiph]] 21:01, 10 December 2008 (EST)

== "Invaluable" vs. "Unnecessary" ==

Okay, rather than a revert war, could we have opinions on which form of the sentence (if either) is a problem?

I for one certainly did not misunderstand the original form as trying to say that magma was worthless, and I would be likely to interpret the current form as trying to say that magma is unnecessary.

If enough other people do/did see the original form as being misleading (i.e. were misled by it), then I will withdraw my objections, but I do very much think that the original form is both the more correct and the less subject to misinterpretation. It would be possible to rephrase further to avoid the "misinterpretable" part (e.g. change "it" to either "that" or "doing so"), but I think the end result would not be as good as the original form before this change was made. --[[User:The Wanderer|The Wanderer]] 16:03, 17 January 2009 (EST)

:"invaluable" according to [http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/invaluable Merriam-Webster]: "valuable beyond estimation, priceless <providing invaluable assistance>"<br>I say you're wrong. --[[User:GreyMario|GreyMaria]] 16:15, 17 January 2009 (EST)

::Yes, I know it means that. That's exactly my point; magma is invaluable, not unnecessary.
::The original form said that magma is invaluable, meaning "valuable beyond estimation" exactly as you say. The current form says that magma is unnecessary. The people who edited it into the current form apparently didn't mean it to say that, but that's what it says; the antecedent for the "it" in that part of the sentence is the magma, not the burning of charcoal.
::I could go into considerably more detail if you want, analyzing possible alternate forms of the sentence and alternate interpretations of those forms, but I hope it wouldn't be necessary... --[[User:The Wanderer|The Wanderer]] 17:01, 17 January 2009 (EST)

:::My interpretation was that the convenience of magma made wood-burning for charcoal unnecessary. Unnecessary is being applied to the main subject of the sentence (charcoal). Talking about wood-burning under magma though is a bit confusing. "Magma is invaluable for fueling your smithies, making it unnecessary to burn wood for charcoal fuel." A bit wordier but a bit clearer? And this way we get to use both "invaluable" AND "unnecessary"! --[[User:Torasin|Torasin]] 17:28, 17 January 2009 (EST)

::::That would work in theory, but it's not necessarily the best way of phrasing it in that context. Still, I don't think I'd object to it; I still don't think there was anything wrong with the original form (my primary evidence for that, aside from grammar, being the fact that I was not even slightly confused by it), but the form you suggest would be better than the IMO misleading current form. --[[User:The Wanderer|The Wanderer]] 18:36, 17 January 2009 (EST)

:::Yeah, the antecedent for "it" is "the burning of charcoal". Fuck you too, English Language. --[[User:GreyMario|GreyMaria]] 19:34, 17 January 2009 (EST)

::::At least in English you can figure it out, as opposed to, say, Latin, where you can order the words any damn way you please and its supposed to mean the same thing. (Fucking Roman poets) --[[User:Squirrelloid|Squirrelloid]] 19:42, 17 January 2009 (EST)

:::I can see how it could be reasonably read that way, but as I've said (or tried to say) at least once, I find the current form to be considerably more open to the opposite interpretation than the previous one was. Some third form would probably be better than either, at least potentially, but I'd rather not leave it as it stands... --[[User:The Wanderer|The Wanderer]] 20:32, 17 January 2009 (EST)

::::As a more productive contribution, the current version reads just fine. I don't understand how there can be any confusion whatsoever. There is nothing unusual about that sentence structure, and I can't imagine the average 5th grader would have much problem with it, much less adults savvy enough to play a game whose graphics are rendered mostly in text with a byzantine user interface. In short, there is no 'other way' to read the sentence. Grey Mario has it right - there is exactly one way to interpret that. --[[User:Squirrelloid|Squirrelloid]] 23:00, 17 January 2009 (EST)

:::::The thing is, I would have said exactly the same thing about the original form, and I do see the current form as being at least as easily misinterpreted as the original form.
:::::I suppose I am, at least partly, arguing from a position of "there was nothing wrong with the original so it shouldn't have been changed so we should change it back", which isn't a very defensible position if there's nothing wrong with the current form either. I *do* think that there's more wrong with the current form than was wrong with the original, but I don't have very much to back that up besides the simple fact that I was not tripped up even slightly by the original form whereas I did find the current form to read strangely when it was first changed.
::::I quite literally had difficulty figuring out what the commit message was talking about; the only conclusion I could arrive at was that the person who made the edit (you, if I'm not mistaken) had misunderstood the sentence.
::::If the commit message had said e.g. something about a grammatical fix, and had made the exact same edit, I probably wouldn't have said anything. However, since the commit message seemed to be based on the assumption that the original writer had misunderstood the meaning of "invaluable", it seemed obvious to me that the edit had been based on an incorrect premise and therefore was itself incorrect; I therefore reverted it with what seemed to me at the time to be an explanation of (or at least pointer to) the fact that the original form had not involved a misusage of "invaluable" but had simply been using it in a different correct manner. At this point I don't necessarily object so much to the current form (though, as I've said repeatedly, I do think the original was better) as to the notion that the original form was that kind of bad.
--[[User:The Wanderer|The Wanderer]] 15:52, 18 January 2009 (EST)

40d Talk:Starting location

2009-01-18T01:32:09Z

The Wanderer: /* "Invaluable" vs. "Unnecessary" */

Trees do not only grow on the lowest Z-Level. I have trees growing on multiple Z-Levels. --[[User:Tracker|Tracker]] 02:46, 1 November 2007 (EDT)

Hmm. Maybe only up to a certain height? My first map--while initially pretty decent (sand, water, trees, rock, variety of minerals) had trees only in the most lower left hand corner (one screen's worth), which also happened to be the lowest surface level I had. But you are right, my current fort (nice entrance, there was a pocket by a river tributary that I turned into my entrance gateway, but no sand) has trees on two levels, the lowest surface, and the second lowest. Still, it's something to be aware of.
--[[User:Draco18s|Draco18s]] 03:26, 1 November 2007 (EDT)

Absolutely - that's why I changed it to say "lower" instead of lowest. --[[User:Tracker|Tracker]] 03:35, 1 November 2007 (EDT)

So I noticed. :)
--[[User:Draco18s|Draco18s]] 03:26, 1 November 2007 (EDT)

== Towns ==

Any benefit of building in towns? Other than mining under the elves and dropping them into pits? --[[User:Ikkonoishi|Ikkonoishi]] 19:35, 3 November 2007 (EDT)
:Yes there is. Humans are more than happy to share their stuff with you, and won't be at all upset if you rob them blind it seems. --[[User:Ikkonoishi|Ikkonoishi]] 22:11, 3 November 2007 (EDT)
::Think this'll ever get changed? Seems kind of unrealistic to me...--[[User:Tarsier|Tarsier]] 19:56, 5 November 2007 (EST)

== Mountain tiles guarantee certain features. ==

As per my addition, for each mountain square in the 2nd zoom view, you're guaranteed pits, a chasm, and an underground river. I have confirmed this myself using the reveal tool, and Today has confirmed at least part of it: http://www.bay12games.com/cgi-local/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=2&t=001176 - [[User:Kjoery|Kjoery]] 16:49, 6 November 2007 (EST)

:Confirmed this too.--[[User:Richards|Richards]] 03:20, 21 April 2008 (EDT)

== Towns Revert ==

Any reason why that edit was unacceptable to you Savok? I'm not going to revert, but I would like an explanation. --[[User:Ikkonoishi|Ikkonoishi]] 12:06, 12 November 2007 (EST)

== Errors in PNG? ==

Contrary to the text in the attached PNG, I've had fortresses with pockets of sand sufficient for glassworking even when sand doesn't show up in the embark screen. [[User:Kidinnu|Kidinnu]] 09:25, 28 November 2007 (EST)

Yes, all maps I've ever had have had at least a few squares of sand. Is it guaranteed? --[[User:Penguinofhonor|Penguinofhonor]] 22:18, 30 November 2007 (EST)
:I have never seen any pockets of sand. --[[User:Strangething|Strangething]] 16:27, 11 July 2008 (EDT)

Another error is that magma and volcanoes now appear on the map [[User:MikeWulf|MikeWulf]] 23:41, 6 March 2008 (EST)
:Note that underground magma is hidden. Only lava on the surface is shown on the map --[[User:Strangething|Strangething]] 16:27, 11 July 2008 (EDT)

== Layers ==

The paragraph about layers is not explicit enough for newbies. For instance, 'igneous intrusive' never shows up on the embark screen. What I would like to see is something like
* red sand - useful for glass making
* gabbro - in this layer you may find chalk, a flux
* felsite - in this layer you may find copper ore
etc. (Caveat: the data I gave as example is most likely false and/or incomplete).

This way, by comparing the embark screen to this page, the reader would immediately find out what (s)he may find in the site.
--[[User:Aykavil|Aykavil]] 09:51, 10 July 2008 (EDT)

:I added a link to [[stone layers]]. There's a lot more in-depth info there. --[[User:Strangething|Strangething]] 16:32, 11 July 2008 (EDT)

== Fun starting locations ==

A starting location that looks pretty good from the readouts can turn out to be as boring as hell once you arrive at it. Are there any tips for finding ''interesting'' locations? --[[User:Theory|Theory]] 16:46, 10 August 2008 (EDT)

: Define "interesting"? Anything with a [[chasm]] or in a [[terrifying]] biome could be 'interesting', I'm sure! Personally I often like completely flat land, so I can make the area interesting with my own constructions! That said, I'm considering next building a settlement on the side/s of a steep canyon or river valley! --[[User:Raumkraut|Raumkraut]] 17:51, 10 August 2008 (EDT)

== Magma ==

Regarding finding Magma, this page reads: "look for darker igneous rocks like basalt, obsidian, gabbro" -- is this accurate? Basalt and obsidian are igneous extrusive, while gabbro is igneous intrusive. Only the igneous extrusive page calls out that magma is commonly found there. --[[User:Sev|Sev]] 20:41, 13 September 2008 (EDT)

== Mode:Civilisation==
I just noticed, when starting a new fort and choosing which dwarf civ I was from, a symbol I hadn't seen before. Normally dwarve homelands are just blue omegas, this time I saw an omega and also 2 blue {{Tile|î|#ff0|#000}}s. Anyone else seen this/know if this has any significance? --[[User:Juckto|Juckto]] 05:25, 20 November 2008 (EST)

:I've had this happen to human civs and one dwarf civ- it means they somehow acquired forest sites during worldgen. [[User:Random832|Random832]] 08:42, 20 November 2008 (EST)

::The flipside of humans conquering forest retreats and building towns on them is that you can end up with elves living with them who wear metal armour. I had an 'elven diplomat' show up to discuss human diplomacy, and many 'human' merchants and guards were also elves. That could get scary in the event of a siege! --[[User:Navian|Navian]] 09:41, 20 November 2008 (EST)

:::Not five minutes ago I had a goblin ambush that was mostly made up of Elves. They all had goblin-esque second names, so presumably they were kidnap-ees, although it seems that you can have large families of elves/humans/whatever who are all descended from kidnapped children and now happily evil.--[[User:Quil|Quil]] 14:32, 20 November 2008 (EST)

== Elevation changes and inaccessibility ==

I have my doubts about this being true. I'm on a huge mountain map and the wagons have traveled over its peak without a care, since they can go up ramps without a problem. I believe trees and boulders are what causes problems, not elevation.--[[User:Maximus|Maximus]] 17:25, 10 December 2008 (EST)

:Hmm, ok. I've just cured some accessibility problems on a fairly mountainous map myself, and it seems the problems were right outside my fortress. There's an elevation change only 3-4 squares below (i.e. to the south of) my entrance ramp, and when I used the "upward ramp" designation on the area, my Dwarves dug away at the 3x5 area I'd marked, and -hey presto- the next caravan could suddenly get the big wagons into my trade depot (the smaller ones could get there fine anyway). I admit I was felling trees in the area as well, for timber, but I'd been doing this for the past two game years and it didn't seem to make any difference to accessibility. Ah well, maybe some more testing is required! [[User:Saiph|Saiph]] 21:01, 10 December 2008 (EST)

== "Invaluable" vs. "Unnecessary" ==

Okay, rather than a revert war, could we have opinions on which form of the sentence (if either) is a problem?

I for one certainly did not misunderstand the original form as trying to say that magma was worthless, and I would be likely to interpret the current form as trying to say that magma is unnecessary.

If enough other people do/did see the original form as being misleading (i.e. were misled by it), then I will withdraw my objections, but I do very much think that the original form is both the more correct and the less subject to misinterpretation. It would be possible to rephrase further to avoid the "misinterpretable" part (e.g. change "it" to either "that" or "doing so"), but I think the end result would not be as good as the original form before this change was made. --[[User:The Wanderer|The Wanderer]] 16:03, 17 January 2009 (EST)

:"invaluable" according to [http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/invaluable Merriam-Webster]: "valuable beyond estimation, priceless <providing invaluable assistance>"<br>I say you're wrong. --[[User:GreyMario|GreyMaria]] 16:15, 17 January 2009 (EST)

::Yes, I know it means that. That's exactly my point; magma is invaluable, not unnecessary.
::The original form said that magma is invaluable, meaning "valuable beyond estimation" exactly as you say. The current form says that magma is unnecessary. The people who edited it into the current form apparently didn't mean it to say that, but that's what it says; the antecedent for the "it" in that part of the sentence is the magma, not the burning of charcoal.
::I could go into considerably more detail if you want, analyzing possible alternate forms of the sentence and alternate interpretations of those forms, but I hope it wouldn't be necessary... --[[User:The Wanderer|The Wanderer]] 17:01, 17 January 2009 (EST)

:::My interpretation was that the convenience of magma made wood-burning for charcoal unnecessary. Unnecessary is being applied to the main subject of the sentence (charcoal). Talking about wood-burning under magma though is a bit confusing. "Magma is invaluable for fueling your smithies, making it unnecessary to burn wood for charcoal fuel." A bit wordier but a bit clearer? And this way we get to use both "invaluable" AND "unnecessary"! --[[User:Torasin|Torasin]] 17:28, 17 January 2009 (EST)

::::That would work in theory, but it's not necessarily the best way of phrasing it in that context. Still, I don't think I'd object to it; I still don't think there was anything wrong with the original form (my primary evidence for that, aside from grammar, being the fact that I was not even slightly confused by it), but the form you suggest would be better than the IMO misleading current form. --[[User:The Wanderer|The Wanderer]] 18:36, 17 January 2009 (EST)

:::Yeah, the antecedent for "it" is "the burning of charcoal". Fuck you too, English Language. --[[User:GreyMario|GreyMaria]] 19:34, 17 January 2009 (EST)

::::At least in English you can figure it out, as opposed to, say, Latin, where you can order the words any damn way you please and its supposed to mean the same thing. (Fucking Roman poets) --[[User:Squirrelloid|Squirrelloid]] 19:42, 17 January 2009 (EST)
:::I can see how it could be reasonably read that way, but as I've said (or tried to say) at least once, I find the current form to be considerably more open to the opposite interpretation than the previous one was. Some third form would probably be better than either, at least potentially, but I'd rather not leave it as it stands... --[[User:The Wanderer|The Wanderer]] 20:32, 17 January 2009 (EST)

40d Talk:Starting location

2009-01-17T23:36:44Z

The Wanderer: /* "Invaluable" vs. "Unnecessary" */

Trees do not only grow on the lowest Z-Level. I have trees growing on multiple Z-Levels. --[[User:Tracker|Tracker]] 02:46, 1 November 2007 (EDT)

Hmm. Maybe only up to a certain height? My first map--while initially pretty decent (sand, water, trees, rock, variety of minerals) had trees only in the most lower left hand corner (one screen's worth), which also happened to be the lowest surface level I had. But you are right, my current fort (nice entrance, there was a pocket by a river tributary that I turned into my entrance gateway, but no sand) has trees on two levels, the lowest surface, and the second lowest. Still, it's something to be aware of.
--[[User:Draco18s|Draco18s]] 03:26, 1 November 2007 (EDT)

Absolutely - that's why I changed it to say "lower" instead of lowest. --[[User:Tracker|Tracker]] 03:35, 1 November 2007 (EDT)

So I noticed. :)
--[[User:Draco18s|Draco18s]] 03:26, 1 November 2007 (EDT)

== Towns ==

Any benefit of building in towns? Other than mining under the elves and dropping them into pits? --[[User:Ikkonoishi|Ikkonoishi]] 19:35, 3 November 2007 (EDT)
:Yes there is. Humans are more than happy to share their stuff with you, and won't be at all upset if you rob them blind it seems. --[[User:Ikkonoishi|Ikkonoishi]] 22:11, 3 November 2007 (EDT)
::Think this'll ever get changed? Seems kind of unrealistic to me...--[[User:Tarsier|Tarsier]] 19:56, 5 November 2007 (EST)

== Mountain tiles guarantee certain features. ==

As per my addition, for each mountain square in the 2nd zoom view, you're guaranteed pits, a chasm, and an underground river. I have confirmed this myself using the reveal tool, and Today has confirmed at least part of it: http://www.bay12games.com/cgi-local/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=2&t=001176 - [[User:Kjoery|Kjoery]] 16:49, 6 November 2007 (EST)

:Confirmed this too.--[[User:Richards|Richards]] 03:20, 21 April 2008 (EDT)

== Towns Revert ==

Any reason why that edit was unacceptable to you Savok? I'm not going to revert, but I would like an explanation. --[[User:Ikkonoishi|Ikkonoishi]] 12:06, 12 November 2007 (EST)

== Errors in PNG? ==

Contrary to the text in the attached PNG, I've had fortresses with pockets of sand sufficient for glassworking even when sand doesn't show up in the embark screen. [[User:Kidinnu|Kidinnu]] 09:25, 28 November 2007 (EST)

Yes, all maps I've ever had have had at least a few squares of sand. Is it guaranteed? --[[User:Penguinofhonor|Penguinofhonor]] 22:18, 30 November 2007 (EST)
:I have never seen any pockets of sand. --[[User:Strangething|Strangething]] 16:27, 11 July 2008 (EDT)

Another error is that magma and volcanoes now appear on the map [[User:MikeWulf|MikeWulf]] 23:41, 6 March 2008 (EST)
:Note that underground magma is hidden. Only lava on the surface is shown on the map --[[User:Strangething|Strangething]] 16:27, 11 July 2008 (EDT)

== Layers ==

The paragraph about layers is not explicit enough for newbies. For instance, 'igneous intrusive' never shows up on the embark screen. What I would like to see is something like
* red sand - useful for glass making
* gabbro - in this layer you may find chalk, a flux
* felsite - in this layer you may find copper ore
etc. (Caveat: the data I gave as example is most likely false and/or incomplete).

This way, by comparing the embark screen to this page, the reader would immediately find out what (s)he may find in the site.
--[[User:Aykavil|Aykavil]] 09:51, 10 July 2008 (EDT)

:I added a link to [[stone layers]]. There's a lot more in-depth info there. --[[User:Strangething|Strangething]] 16:32, 11 July 2008 (EDT)

== Fun starting locations ==

A starting location that looks pretty good from the readouts can turn out to be as boring as hell once you arrive at it. Are there any tips for finding ''interesting'' locations? --[[User:Theory|Theory]] 16:46, 10 August 2008 (EDT)

: Define "interesting"? Anything with a [[chasm]] or in a [[terrifying]] biome could be 'interesting', I'm sure! Personally I often like completely flat land, so I can make the area interesting with my own constructions! That said, I'm considering next building a settlement on the side/s of a steep canyon or river valley! --[[User:Raumkraut|Raumkraut]] 17:51, 10 August 2008 (EDT)

== Magma ==

Regarding finding Magma, this page reads: "look for darker igneous rocks like basalt, obsidian, gabbro" -- is this accurate? Basalt and obsidian are igneous extrusive, while gabbro is igneous intrusive. Only the igneous extrusive page calls out that magma is commonly found there. --[[User:Sev|Sev]] 20:41, 13 September 2008 (EDT)

== Mode:Civilisation==
I just noticed, when starting a new fort and choosing which dwarf civ I was from, a symbol I hadn't seen before. Normally dwarve homelands are just blue omegas, this time I saw an omega and also 2 blue {{Tile|î|#ff0|#000}}s. Anyone else seen this/know if this has any significance? --[[User:Juckto|Juckto]] 05:25, 20 November 2008 (EST)

:I've had this happen to human civs and one dwarf civ- it means they somehow acquired forest sites during worldgen. [[User:Random832|Random832]] 08:42, 20 November 2008 (EST)

::The flipside of humans conquering forest retreats and building towns on them is that you can end up with elves living with them who wear metal armour. I had an 'elven diplomat' show up to discuss human diplomacy, and many 'human' merchants and guards were also elves. That could get scary in the event of a siege! --[[User:Navian|Navian]] 09:41, 20 November 2008 (EST)

:::Not five minutes ago I had a goblin ambush that was mostly made up of Elves. They all had goblin-esque second names, so presumably they were kidnap-ees, although it seems that you can have large families of elves/humans/whatever who are all descended from kidnapped children and now happily evil.--[[User:Quil|Quil]] 14:32, 20 November 2008 (EST)

== Elevation changes and inaccessibility ==

I have my doubts about this being true. I'm on a huge mountain map and the wagons have traveled over its peak without a care, since they can go up ramps without a problem. I believe trees and boulders are what causes problems, not elevation.--[[User:Maximus|Maximus]] 17:25, 10 December 2008 (EST)

:Hmm, ok. I've just cured some accessibility problems on a fairly mountainous map myself, and it seems the problems were right outside my fortress. There's an elevation change only 3-4 squares below (i.e. to the south of) my entrance ramp, and when I used the "upward ramp" designation on the area, my Dwarves dug away at the 3x5 area I'd marked, and -hey presto- the next caravan could suddenly get the big wagons into my trade depot (the smaller ones could get there fine anyway). I admit I was felling trees in the area as well, for timber, but I'd been doing this for the past two game years and it didn't seem to make any difference to accessibility. Ah well, maybe some more testing is required! [[User:Saiph|Saiph]] 21:01, 10 December 2008 (EST)

== "Invaluable" vs. "Unnecessary" ==

Okay, rather than a revert war, could we have opinions on which form of the sentence (if either) is a problem?

I for one certainly did not misunderstand the original form as trying to say that magma was worthless, and I would be likely to interpret the current form as trying to say that magma is unnecessary.

If enough other people do/did see the original form as being misleading (i.e. were misled by it), then I will withdraw my objections, but I do very much think that the original form is both the more correct and the less subject to misinterpretation. It would be possible to rephrase further to avoid the "misinterpretable" part (e.g. change "it" to either "that" or "doing so"), but I think the end result would not be as good as the original form before this change was made. --[[User:The Wanderer|The Wanderer]] 16:03, 17 January 2009 (EST)

:"invaluable" according to [http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/invaluable Merriam-Webster]: "valuable beyond estimation, priceless <providing invaluable assistance>"<br>I say you're wrong. --[[User:GreyMario|GreyMaria]] 16:15, 17 January 2009 (EST)

::Yes, I know it means that. That's exactly my point; magma is invaluable, not unnecessary.
::The original form said that magma is invaluable, meaning "valuable beyond estimation" exactly as you say. The currenf form says that magma is unnecessary. The people who edited it into the current form apparently didn't mean it to say that, but that's what it says; the antecedent for the "it" in that part of the sentence is the magma, not the burning of charcoal.
::I could go into considerably more detail if you want, analyzing possible alternate forms of the sentence and alternate interpretations of those forms, but I hope it wouldn't be necessary... --[[User:The Wanderer|The Wanderer]] 17:01, 17 January 2009 (EST)

:::My interpretation was that the convenience of magma made wood-burning for charcoal unnecessary. Unnecessary is being applied to the main subject of the sentence (charcoal). Talking about wood-burning under magma though is a bit confusing. "Magma is invaluable for fueling your smithies, making it unnecessary to burn wood for charcoal fuel." A bit wordier but a bit clearer? And this way we get to use both "invaluable" AND "unnecessary"! --[[User:Torasin|Torasin]] 17:28, 17 January 2009 (EST)

::::That would work in theory, but it's not necessarily the best way of phrasing it in that context. Still, I don't think I'd object to it; I still don't think there was anything wrong with the original form (my primary evidence for that, aside from grammar, being the fact that I was not even slightly confused by it), but the form you suggest would be better than the IMO misleading current form. --[[User:The Wanderer|The Wanderer]] 18:36, 17 January 2009 (EST)

40d Talk:Starting location

2009-01-17T22:01:26Z

The Wanderer: /* "Invaluable" vs. "Unnecessary" */ I don't disagree with that

40d Talk:Starting location

2009-01-17T21:03:15Z

The Wanderer: Invaluable vs. unnecessary

40d:Starting location

2009-01-17T12:37:43Z

The Wanderer: /* Magma */ Magma isn't unnecessary, it's invaluable

A '''starting location''' (also called a ''starting site'') is a group of map tiles where a [[dwarf|dwarven]] settlement is located. Starting out in the right location is crucial to not [[fun|losing]]. Beginning players have several things to keep in mind when selecting a site.

== Choosing sites ==

[[Image:Embark_info.PNG|thumb|right|The Choose Fortress Location screen.]] When starting [[dwarf fortress mode]], the "Choose Fortress Location" screen allows you to choose your site. The right-hand pane shows its location within the entire generated [[world]]; the middle pane ("[[Region]]") shows the general [[biome|terrain]] types and [[civilization]]s in the area; and the left-hand pane shows the "Local" map. The {{k|u}}{{k|m}}{{k|k}}{{k|h}} and {{k|U}}{{k|M}}{{k|K}}{{k|H}} keys allow you to change the placement and size of your starting site within the region map -- any rectangular shape from 2x2 tiles up to the entire local area (16x16 tiles). The site you choose must contain at least one non-[[mountain]]/[[river]] square to be accessible to travelers as well as your settlers.

The far-right pane displays text information about the map tiles you have selected. Sites will usually span more than one [[biome]] type; to see the information on each biome, press the function keys ({{k|F1}} through {{k|F8}}, depending on how many biomes are contained in your site). Each biome will be home to different [[creatures]] as well as different types of rock and [[stone|rock layers]].

Pressing {{k|tab}} will show other location information as well:
* What civilizations can reach the site (remote sites such as [[glacier]]s and [[island]]s are often accessible only to dwarven [[immigrant]]s and [[trade]]rs; all other locations are usually accessible to dwarves, [[elves]], [[humans]], and [[goblins]]).
* What dwarven civilization you want your settlers to be from. Depending on whether you chose a civilization from the north, the middle or the south, you will get a combination of [[muskox]]es, [[mule]]s, [[horse]]s or [[camel]]s with your [[wagon]]. More importantly, when you select your starting equipment or make a trade agreement with the dwarven [[Trading|traders]] later you will only be able to select stones that are available at the locations of the other fortresses of your civilization. If you want to later import [[flux]] stone, [[bituminous coal]] or [[bauxite]], you need to chose wisely. You can see what items you civilization has access to on the embark screen. If you are not satisfied, you can abort the game at that stage and start the same map again, on the same location, but choosing a different dwarven civilization. This might similarly determine what kind of [[metal]]s and [[meat]] you can buy.

* The "relative elevation" of the site (useful for seeing how mountainous the terrain is)
* A "cliff indicator" (useful for the same reason)

It is recommended to choose the smallest site possible that still contains all the map features you want ([[river]], [[magma]], [[trees]], etc.) Sites larger than about 6x6 (36 tiles) will run slowly on all but the newest/fastest computers, and even a 6x6 site will probably not run at maximum speed (100 FPS) on a fast computer once several dwarves [[immigration|immigrate]] to the site (see [[maximizing framerate]] for more details).

The utility [[Utilities#Regional Prospector|Regional Prospector]] is very useful in identifying what kind of map features exist underground ([[chasm]]s, [[pits]], [[magma]], [[lake]]s, etc.) This makes good starting sites much easier to find, although it takes away the "surprise" of stumbling upon these features on your own (which may be good or bad, depending on your play style).

Once you have chosen the tiles you want for your site, press {{k|e}} to have your settlers embark on their journey. You will then be prompted to choose what [[starting builds|starting equipment and skills]] you want them to have (you can also choose to have them start with the default equipment and skills).

The [[pregenerated worlds]] page contains several pre-scouted sites (some downloadable), with descriptions of what kinds of resources are available in each.

== Surroundings ==

It's probably a good idea to avoid [[Haunted]], [[Sinister]], and [[Terrifying]] biomes, as well as extremes of cold and heat. Fortunately that still leaves you with a lot of options most of the time. Make sure you've got at least some [[trees]] and vegetation.

Make sure you at least have [[contact]] with [[Dwarves]]; [[Humans]] are also good [[trading]] partners. If you get those two, you'll probably be around [[Elves]] and [[Goblins]] too. Elves will trade some things, but are picky about what they'll accept; Goblins will just lay siege to your fortress every so often once they get angry enough about your presence.

== Terrain ==

[[Mountain]] squares will contain certain features, and each world map [[mountain]] tile is guaranteed an [[underground river]], a [[chasm]], and [[pits]] somewhere in the mountain tiles of the local view. Also, mountainous areas are worth looking into for the [[stone]] and greater probability of finding [[magma]].

[[Water]] is also a valuable commodity, for the purposes of [[farming]] and [[drinking]]. [[Ocean]] water is not drinkable. (See [[#Water |Water]] below.)

[[Forest]], [[jungle]] and [[swamp]] tiles with heavy vegetation are also beneficial for their ample supplies of [[wood]]. (See [[#Lumber |Lumber]] below.)

Some [[biomes]] will also contain unique types of fauna and flora. (See [[#Vegetation|Vegetation]] below.)

The surrounding elevation is a matter of preference. Elevation is represented in numbers from 1 to 9 and the * character for changes in elevation greater than 9. If you want an extreme landscape, with sheer cliffs and drop-offs, then pick a location with a large amount of elevation change (elevation changes of 4 or greater.) If you'd like a flatter landscape, try to settle in an area with low elevation (1's and 2's.) Remember: the more Z-levels you have on your map, the more data your computer will have to process. More Z-Levels will result in decreased performance.

== Layers ==

Pay attention to the [[layer]] types listed on the right when choosing a location. The ones listed in white are [[:Category:Sedimentary Stone Layers|sedimentary]] layers, which have the most [[iron]] [[ore]]s and are the only ones containing [[bituminous coal]]. If you plan to have [[steel]] production, you will also need a supply of [[flux]] stones. Since flux stones are almost always confined to their own layers, keep an eye out for them.

Any layer listed in brown is top[[soil]]. It can be used for farming even without water, but it only rarely contains small amounts of [[stone]] or [[ore]].

Dark gray layers are [[:Category:Igneous Extrusive Stone Layers|igneous extrusive]]. If you want valuable [[metal]]s like [[gold]] and [[aluminum]], these are your best bet.

== Water ==

[[Farming]] won't get you much in the middle of a [[desert]], though you can farm directly on [[sand]]. Try to find an area with a [[brook]] -- larger water sources can hinder [[mining]]. If the game warns you that you've selected an area with an [[aquifer]], pay attention: it's likely going to be very difficult to get through it to the stone below.

Currently a permanent source of water isn't required because farms don't dry out, this is expected to change. If your map starts with even the smallest pond you can dig under it, drain it into the room (and down again if there's that much water), and build a farm on the residual mud – water levels of 1/7 can be ignored when placing the farm plot.

== Lumber ==

The amount of [[tree]]s in the selected [[biome]] will be listed on the right hand side of your location selection screen. [[Treeless]] maps should be avoided by new players.

Trees grow on the lower surface z-levels, so make sure you have a nice large swath to chop down. Just because the biome says "heavily forested" doesn't mean you will actually have trees.

== Vegetation ==

The local flora can be a good source of [[seed]]s, [[alcohol]], and [[food]] for a just started fortress. Use the [[Gather plants]] [[designation]] to collect them for use.

=== Magma ===

Unlike in previous versions, you aren't guaranteed to find a source of [[magma]], unless you have a [[volcano]] or magma vent at your starting location. Sure, you could burn [[charcoal]] to fuel your smithies, but the convenience of magma makes it invaluable. The site selection screen can give you a good idea of whether or not you'll be able to get any: look for darker igneous rocks like [[basalt]], [[obsidian]], [[gabbro]], and so on.

=== Towns ===

Towns created by other civilizations exist only for your benefit. Humans won't mind at all if you tear apart their main pub to build your tunnel entrance. {{version|0.27.176.38c}} Also, their buildings provide plentiful [[wood]] (a small house contains 34 wood logs. Other buildings have much more.) and other useful items such as prebuilt [[furniture]] and ready to sell trade goods.

{{World}}

{{Starting FAQ}}

[[Category:Guides]]