40d Talk:Exploit - Revision history

LucienSadi: Removing my stale discussion.

2022-01-17T04:00:40Z

Removing my stale discussion.

Quietust at 21:41, 20 April 2011

2011-04-20T21:41:58Z

68.203.8.98 at 05:13, 17 April 2010

2010-04-17T05:13:09Z

Todestool: /* Deadly bridges */

2010-04-05T15:58:02Z

Deadly bridges

76.185.59.253: /* Ideological point of views */

2010-03-21T17:25:44Z

Ideological point of views

QuietBot: moved Talk:Broken/40d\x3aExploit to 40d Talk:Exploit: Fixing talk page name (229/738)

2010-03-08T21:45:25Z

moved Talk:Broken/40d\x3aExploit to 40d Talk:Exploit: Fixing talk page name (229/738)

Briess: moved Talk:Exploit to Talk:40d:Exploit: 40d namespace migration

2010-03-08T01:53:20Z

moved Talk:Exploit to [[Talk:40d:Exploit]]: 40d namespace migration

EvilTwin: /* Deadly bridges */

2010-02-09T14:19:31Z

Deadly bridges

EvilTwin: /* Deadly bridges */

2010-02-09T14:17:16Z

Deadly bridges

Arcalane: /* Deadly bridges */

2010-02-09T10:49:42Z

Deadly bridges

@@ Line 91: / Line 91: @@
 ::''Why'' does any of this matter?  Perpetual motion can be done, we document it.  Make use of it if you like, don't if you don't.--[[User:Maximus|Maximus]] 23:47, 17 December 2008 (EST)
 ::::<em>Not included in the scope of the wiki??</em>  Guilty conscience much?  Rest at ease, the exploit page isn't finger-wagging as much an instruction manual XD   Of <em>course</em> it's relevant, there's things even Toady considers an exploit(and plans to remove).  As for mushrooms, that's obviously as Toady intended it, not an unintended side-effect of something else gone wrong.  <em>That</em> is what makes things an exploit or not, a game with dwarves and dragons is fairly fantastic in the first place.  Sheesh. --[[User:Corona688|Corona688]] 09:57, 18 December 2008 (EST)
 :::Of course it's included in the scope of the wiki. Look at the title of the talk page. Talk:Exploit. If it's an exploit, we include it on the exploit page. If it's not, we include it somewhere else. In any case, it shows up somewhere. Don't get so excited over little things :) [[User:VengefulDonut|VengefulDonut]] 06:27, 18 December 2008 (EST)

@@ Line 103: / Line 103: @@
 ::Ah - I think i see how it would work - assuming he wants 3 stones, 1 is tasked. Now I unforbid 5 other present stones at once and they will all be tasked? If it should work like that, i probably haven't tried that. --[[User:Höhlenschreck|Höhlenschreck]] 18:03, 20 June 2009 (UTC)
 :The retasking is done only when the moody dwarf picks up or delivers new materials. In your example the first three stones that he picked up would be retasked, but the fourth and fifth would not because he already has three stones that were before them. So he would use a total of 4 stones. If you wanted him to use all of them you need to unforbid the latest three, wait for them to get tasked, then unforbid the first two.
-The example is one I generated in {{version|0.28.181.40d}}. It shouldn't be any different in d# versions, though, since there aren't any logic updates. Mayday, on the other hand; I have no clue how far his changes have reached. [[User:VengefulDonut|VengefulDonut]] 18:08, 20 June 2009 (UTC)
+The example is one I generated in 0.28.181.40d. It shouldn't be any different in d# versions, though, since there aren't any logic updates. Mayday, on the other hand; I have no clue how far his changes have reached. [[User:VengefulDonut|VengefulDonut]] 18:08, 20 June 2009 (UTC)
 :::So does this only work if the dwarf requires more than one item of a type? --[[User:Höhlenschreck|Höhlenschreck]] 12:46, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
 ::::You can pull it off if they only want one, but it will be a lot more work on your part. [[User:VengefulDonut|VengefulDonut]] 13:50, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 05:13, 17 April 2010
Line 140:		Line 140:
	::Good, now I know that I've been right in refusing to let my cooks cook alcohol on my fortresses. I always tend to have too much food and not enough alcohol. However, it is fun to read descriptions of alcohol food and notice that dwarves have discovered a means by which to mince alcohol in its drink form! [[User:Shardok\|Shardok]] 19:04, 8 August 2009 (UTC)		::Good, now I know that I've been right in refusing to let my cooks cook alcohol on my fortresses. I always tend to have too much food and not enough alcohol. However, it is fun to read descriptions of alcohol food and notice that dwarves have discovered a means by which to mince alcohol in its drink form! [[User:Shardok\|Shardok]] 19:04, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
	I think you still should be able to "cook" alcohol, but not by it's self. When I think of a lavish meal, I see an appetizer a main course and a drink.[[User:Derekiv\|Derekiv]]10:10, 27 November 2009		I think you still should be able to "cook" alcohol, but not by it's self. When I think of a lavish meal, I see an appetizer a main course and a drink.[[User:Derekiv\|Derekiv]]10:10, 27 November 2009
		+
		+	== Bolts In v0.31 ==
		+	Does the melting bolts trick still work in v0.31?

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:58, 5 April 2010
Line 8:		Line 8:

	:::That's right, a bridge can smash things that way, too... Forgetting this fact caused me to kill a peasant in my current fort. --[[User:EvilTwin\|EvilTwin]] 14:19, 9 February 2010 (UTC)		:::That's right, a bridge can smash things that way, too... Forgetting this fact caused me to kill a peasant in my current fort. --[[User:EvilTwin\|EvilTwin]] 14:19, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
		+
		+	I noticed we have this atom smasher section here and also the [[40d:Dwarven atom smasher\|atom smasher page]]. Should that content be moved here, or should we just provide a link? [[User:Todestool\|Todestool]] 15:58, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

	== Quantum stockpiles ==		== Quantum stockpiles ==

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:25, 21 March 2010
Line 50:		Line 50:

	::My attitude toward such things generally revolves around what I imagine the creators of the game intended. In Stronghold 2, for example. I am certain that the creators did not intend players to create gigantic stacks of siege engines coexisting ipon a single point, but last I saw it was the 'best' strategy. That upset me. But it doesn't upset me when someone exploits DF or 'mangles' it with modding. There is very little a player can do to subvert Toady's intent with this game, even with modding, because it's more than just a fuedal economy/fortress defense simulation. I'm all for rules and restrictions in bloodline games, though--cheating and exploitation can be fun, but they almost always ruin stories and make the game less challenging. --[[User:Navian\|Navian]] 15:36, 13 November 2008 (EST)		::My attitude toward such things generally revolves around what I imagine the creators of the game intended. In Stronghold 2, for example. I am certain that the creators did not intend players to create gigantic stacks of siege engines coexisting ipon a single point, but last I saw it was the 'best' strategy. That upset me. But it doesn't upset me when someone exploits DF or 'mangles' it with modding. There is very little a player can do to subvert Toady's intent with this game, even with modding, because it's more than just a fuedal economy/fortress defense simulation. I'm all for rules and restrictions in bloodline games, though--cheating and exploitation can be fun, but they almost always ruin stories and make the game less challenging. --[[User:Navian\|Navian]] 15:36, 13 November 2008 (EST)
		+
		+	:It's not possible to cheat in a single-player game. Who would be the cheated party? The only thing that changes is what game you're actually playing. [[Special:Contributions/76.185.59.253\|76.185.59.253]] 17:25, 21 March 2010 (UTC)

	== Legendary Wrestler (Adventure) ==		== Legendary Wrestler (Adventure) ==

@@ Line 7: / Line 7: @@
 ::I ''think'' I accidentally atomsmashed an [[Elf]] who was standing in one of the squares the bridge ''occupies'' when it's "up". Can anyone else verify? I'll test it again with a few useless dwarves later. --[[User:Arcalane|Arcalane]] 10:49, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
-:::That's right, a bridge can smash things that way, too... Forgetting this fact caused me to kill a peasant in my current fort.
+:::That's right, a bridge can smash things that way, too... Forgetting this fact caused me to kill a peasant in my current fort. --[[User:EvilTwin|EvilTwin]] 14:19, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
 == Quantum stockpiles ==

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:17, 9 February 2010
Line 6:		Line 6:

	::I ''think'' I accidentally atomsmashed an [[Elf]] who was standing in one of the squares the bridge ''occupies'' when it's "up". Can anyone else verify? I'll test it again with a few useless dwarves later. --[[User:Arcalane\|Arcalane]] 10:49, 9 February 2010 (UTC)		::I ''think'' I accidentally atomsmashed an [[Elf]] who was standing in one of the squares the bridge ''occupies'' when it's "up". Can anyone else verify? I'll test it again with a few useless dwarves later. --[[User:Arcalane\|Arcalane]] 10:49, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
		+
		+	:::That's right, a bridge can smash things that way, too... Forgetting this fact caused me to kill a peasant in my current fort.

	== Quantum stockpiles ==		== Quantum stockpiles ==

@@ Line 4: / Line 4: @@
 :Also I often hear that demons are not affected by the bridge and that it is destroyed if it lowers on top of them. We need some verification on this.--[[User:Richards|Richards]] 00:57, 21 April 2008 (EDT)
 == Quantum stockpiles ==
 [[User:GreyMario|GreyMario]] wrote an exploit about Siege engines that doesn't makes much sense. We need someone to expand it.--[[User:Richards|Richards]] 01:09, 21 April 2008 (EDT)