|
Notes |
|
|
|
|
Could this be a bugged mayor left over from 0000312? Does it reproduce in other fortresses? If the answer to both is no, then it would be helpful to upload the save to http://dffd.wimbli.com/ [^] |
|
|
|
(0009312)
|
|
slink
|
|
2010-06-29 11:42
|
|
|
Fresh fortress in 31.08. Let me check on the rest and get back to you. |
|
|
|
(0009316)
|
|
hyndis
|
|
2010-06-29 13:01
|
|
I've seen this in my fortress. Gave me the option to replace the mayor once I had a baron, just like replacing a broker or manager.
I didn't actually attempt to replace him, but the option was there.
I'll give this a try tonight to see if he actually is replaceable. |
|
|
|
(0009321)
|
|
slink
|
2010-06-29 14:32
(edited on: 2010-06-29 14:35) |
|
I generated a new world and started a new fortress. It would have let me replace the Expedition Leader, so I am guessing that the bug is reproducible for Mayors; especially since hyndis has also seen it. ;)
If I did the replacement of the Mayor while the Dwarven Liaison was still trying to speak to the him, the diplomat left unhappy from being stymied. This says that the position really was being altered. Replacing the Mayor after the Liaison left resulted in the normal sort of arrangement where the Mayoral rooms had to be re-assigned. The new Mayor showed up on the nobles list. The old Mayor retained his mandate in his description, as the losers of the elections used to in earlier 31 versions. This is not surprising since the Mayor changed by a non-expected mechanism. :P :D
Edit: I did not yet have a Baron in my first fortress. In fact, I have never seen a Baron in a 31 version. I am working on getting the King, but have never been offered the chance of getting any other noble.
|
|
|
|
|
Ouch -- I had my mayor changed on me (elected I presume), and was unhappy with the result (overly ambitious broker), and was pleasantly surprised to find I could replace her and put the old one in. So I did and didn't think of it until reading this.
I'm in year 8, with 4.6 mil created wealth and 200k imported and exported wealth, and I still haven't seen a Baron. I've also found and mined adamantine, though I'm not sure if that's still relevant to nobles in this version. But it does seem like the Barony is taking a long time to arrive. I got a Baron on my previous fortress, but not on this one (started in .06). |
|
|
|
(0009345)
|
|
slink
|
|
2010-06-29 18:55
|
|
|
That was why I was tempted to replace my Mayor. The one elected had a preference for slade! I did check my 31.03 fortresses and the Mayor cannot be replaced in those. I never got a Baron, ever, in any 31 version even when I was working on getting the King, so replacing the Mayor isn't the cause of not getting a Baron. |
|
|
|
|
Well, I can confirm that barons sometimes arrive in .31 versions, as that last fortress (or the one before, can't remember) was .03-.04, and I've never played on any version before that.
As a side note, come to think of it, I haven't seen diplomats from the elves or humans in this game, either. I wonder if the fact that I had an early (and extended) goblin siege on year 2 have something to do with it.
But I'm now pushing 160 pop, almost 5 mil and have yet to see a peep on the royalty thing. |
|
|
|
(0009663)
|
|
oliver
|
|
2010-07-05 17:47
|
|
|
Along the same lines, you can (r)eplace the expedition leader (which does make a bit more sense, but is a possibly unintentional change from 40d) |
|
|
|
|
|
I can replace both expedition leader and later mayor in 0.31.10. |
|
|
|
|
this continues in 31.16. not sure if it's a bug.
when you get up to baron, it's back to 40d behaviour, no (direct) replacement allowed. |
|
|
|
|
|
I just got a baron in 31.25, and I can still directly replace the expedition leader from the nobles screen. |
|
|
|
|
|
I suspect Quazar meant that you cannot replace the baron, not that the arrival of the baron prevents replacing the expedition leader or mayor. |
|
|
|
|
|
Just to confirm that in 34.02 I've still got the option to replace my mayor. Replaced him with someone who likes shields and copper which, whilst beneficial to my learning armorsmith, isn't how I remember it used to be. |
|
|
|
(0021797)
|
|
slink
|
|
2012-03-27 14:03
|
|
|
I actually like it this way after all, given the frequency with which vampires get elected in 34.x |
|
|
|
|
|
Still possible in 44.02. Like everyone else has said, not sure whether this is a bug, since mayor is a more minor and flexible position than other nobles that can't be replaced, but figured I should bump this anyway just in case it is. |
|
|
|
(0037265)
|
|
Kvall
|
|
2017-12-07 23:40
|
|
|
This isn't really a bug. It's been this way for nearly the whole history of the game. Like Jessie says, it's the most minor of positions besides expedition leader. |
|
|
|
|
|
I was gonna say, given how annoying mayors can be depending on what they want to mandate, I'd call this a feature. |
|
|
|
|
Still in 0.47.05 and removing the leader can lead to 0011559.
Given that in adventurer mode leaders and other nobles hav the conversation option to offer their position to some one else, I agree that this is intentional. |
|