Print

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

[Owlbread]

I was mostly trying to point out that using the fun of Oregon trail to "prove" that a caravan-following-system would be fun for DF doesn't work.

But I think we could work out a caravan-following-system for DF that would be fun. What would it have to be like to be fun?

[therahedwig]

How about looking at this differently:



Maybe in adventure mode you can choose to lead an expedition team to a suitable place. As you do, there's options being opened up in Dwarf Mode to embark with these expeditions.

Otherwise, you'll have to do with play now-type of embarks.

That way, you have some choices, yet if you really want a very specific place to go to you'll have to look it up in adventure mode, and your succes as adventurer will allow for the quality of the embark.

[Owlbread]

How about looking at this differently:



Maybe in adventure mode you can choose to lead an expedition team to a suitable place. As you do, there's options being opened up in Dwarf Mode to embark with these expeditions.

Otherwise, you'll have to do with play now-type of embarks.

That way, you have some choices, yet if you really want a very specific place to go to you'll have to look it up in adventure mode, and your succes as adventurer will allow for the quality of the embark.

I thought about that, but my concern was that it forces people who really want a specific site to use the journey/adventure expedition system.

[therahedwig]

Actually, I meant you can play everywhere (and use 'play now') or choose of a set of embarks that have a background story.

By escorting expeditions in adventure mode, you increase the list of embarks with background story.

[GreatWyrmGold]

I was mostly trying to point out that using the fun of Oregon trail to "prove" that a caravan-following-system would be fun for DF doesn't work.

But I think we could work out a caravan-following-system for DF that would be fun. What would it have to be like to be fun?

Not distracting me from my fortress? That would be a good start.

Adventure mode escorting could be fun.

[Owlbread]

I was mostly trying to point out that using the fun of Oregon trail to "prove" that a caravan-following-system would be fun for DF doesn't work.

But I think we could work out a caravan-following-system for DF that would be fun. What would it have to be like to be fun?

Not distracting me from my fortress? That would be a good start.

Adventure mode escorting could be fun.

It certainly wouldn't distract you from your fortress. How would it?

[GreatWyrmGold]

I was mostly trying to point out that using the fun of Oregon trail to "prove" that a caravan-following-system would be fun for DF doesn't work.

But I think we could work out a caravan-following-system for DF that would be fun. What would it have to be like to be fun?

Not distracting me from my fortress? That would be a good start.

Adventure mode escorting could be fun.

It certainly wouldn't distract you from your fortress. How would it?

Which, escorting in AM or following in DM?

[Owlbread]

I was mostly trying to point out that using the fun of Oregon trail to "prove" that a caravan-following-system would be fun for DF doesn't work.

But I think we could work out a caravan-following-system for DF that would be fun. What would it have to be like to be fun?

Not distracting me from my fortress? That would be a good start.

Adventure mode escorting could be fun.

It certainly wouldn't distract you from your fortress. How would it?

Which, escorting in AM or following in DM?

To be honest, my idea of caravan following would work a lot more like adventure mode. I wouldn't even call it following, I'd say guiding. But either, really. How would either distract you?

[GreatWyrmGold]

I was mostly trying to point out that using the fun of Oregon trail to "prove" that a caravan-following-system would be fun for DF doesn't work.

But I think we could work out a caravan-following-system for DF that would be fun. What would it have to be like to be fun?

Not distracting me from my fortress? That would be a good start.

Adventure mode escorting could be fun.

It certainly wouldn't distract you from your fortress. How would it?

Which, escorting in AM or following in DM?

To be honest, my idea of caravan following would work a lot more like adventure mode. I wouldn't even call it following, I'd say guiding. But either, really. How would either distract you?

Time I spend IRL watching a caravan cross the wilderness is time not spent watching my outpost bloom into a fortress.

[Owlbread]

Time I spend IRL watching a caravan cross the wilderness is time not spent watching my outpost bloom into a fortress.

But, I don't see the point of what you're saying. It's not like you would just watch the caravan move from A to B, you would be given messages like "Your caravan is crossing through the Forests of Aching. This forest reeks of death and vile torture. You see a blah blah blah". The journey could happen off-screen. Eventually, there would be a situation when you have to cross a river or fight a bear Jeremiah Johnson style or other such wild traveller things, or maybe an ambush or whatever. One of your party could become sick and you have to hunt for medicine for them, who knows. If you don't want it, you'd have a choice because it's an optional feature, just... don't choose to follow the journey. It's not like you have to. The fact that it's optional means that there's no point in complaining about it using up your time.

[GreatWyrmGold]

Time I spend IRL watching a caravan cross the wilderness is time not spent watching my outpost bloom into a fortress.

But, I don't see the point of what you're saying. It's not like you would just watch the caravan move from A to B, you would be given messages like "Your caravan is crossing through the Forests of Aching. This forest reeks of death and vile torture. You see a blah blah blah". The journey could happen off-screen. Eventually, there would be a situation when you have to cross a river or fight a bear Jeremiah Johnson style or other such wild traveller things, or maybe an ambush or whatever. One of your party could become sick and you have to hunt for medicine for them, who knows. If you don't want it, you'd have a choice because it's an optional feature, just... don't choose to follow the journey. It's not like you have to. The fact that it's optional means that there's no point in complaining about it using up your time.

I missed the optional part.
Now let's get into better detail. IIRC, Toady said that the player is supposed to represent the leadership of the fortress or somesuch. What could the player, in that position, do to affect the caravan or even know about it?

[Owlbread]

Time I spend IRL watching a caravan cross the wilderness is time not spent watching my outpost bloom into a fortress.

But, I don't see the point of what you're saying. It's not like you would just watch the caravan move from A to B, you would be given messages like "Your caravan is crossing through the Forests of Aching. This forest reeks of death and vile torture. You see a blah blah blah". The journey could happen off-screen. Eventually, there would be a situation when you have to cross a river or fight a bear Jeremiah Johnson style or other such wild traveller things, or maybe an ambush or whatever. One of your party could become sick and you have to hunt for medicine for them, who knows. If you don't want it, you'd have a choice because it's an optional feature, just... don't choose to follow the journey. It's not like you have to. The fact that it's optional means that there's no point in complaining about it using up your time.

I missed the optional part.
Now let's get into better detail. IIRC, Toady said that the player is supposed to represent the leadership of the fortress or somesuch. What could the player, in that position, do to affect the caravan or even know about it?

That contradicts with what Toady has said about his ambition (as far as I know) to seamlessly integrate adventure mode and fortress mode together. I would also like to hear exactly what he said about what the player represents, because that's the first I've ever heard about that.

It is also quite simple, if what you say is the situation. The leadership of the people taking the journey to build your fortress are the same as the leadership of the people who run your fortress - quite literally so, considering the expedition leader of the caravan is the same guy as the expedition leader of your fort.

[GreatWyrmGold]

Time I spend IRL watching a caravan cross the wilderness is time not spent watching my outpost bloom into a fortress.

But, I don't see the point of what you're saying. It's not like you would just watch the caravan move from A to B, you would be given messages like "Your caravan is crossing through the Forests of Aching. This forest reeks of death and vile torture. You see a blah blah blah". The journey could happen off-screen. Eventually, there would be a situation when you have to cross a river or fight a bear Jeremiah Johnson style or other such wild traveller things, or maybe an ambush or whatever. One of your party could become sick and you have to hunt for medicine for them, who knows. If you don't want it, you'd have a choice because it's an optional feature, just... don't choose to follow the journey. It's not like you have to. The fact that it's optional means that there's no point in complaining about it using up your time.

I missed the optional part.
Now let's get into better detail. IIRC, Toady said that the player is supposed to represent the leadership of the fortress or somesuch. What could the player, in that position, do to affect the caravan or even know about it?

That contradicts with what Toady has said about his ambition (as far as I know) to seamlessly integrate adventure mode and fortress mode together. I would also like to hear exactly what he said about what the player represents, because that's the first I've ever heard about that.

I assume that, as an adventurer, you'll be able to lead an expedition to a new fortress and issue orders from there. And I sadly can't remember the exact link, but I'm 90% sure it was some FotF thread reply.

It is also quite simple, if what you say is the situation. The leadership of the people taking the journey to build your fortress are the same as the leadership of the people who run your fortress - quite literally so, considering the expedition leader of the caravan is the same guy as the expedition leader of your fort.

Oh, I thought we were talking about caravans being sent to our fortress.

[Revanchist]

Couldn't it then tie into the planned kingdom mode as well? Dwarven Civ X wants to settle in the mountains across from them because of their resources, and trekking there out if the blue would be expensive and time consuming, be unsafe, and deter possible migrants.
However, said kingdom could build a road between the two ranges, greatly enhancing the travel speeds, safety and general ease of getting there, resulting in more migrants (hopefully not too many), cheaper tradegoods, and a more bountiful start.

[5asdffdsa5]

how about having the option of choosing to leed immigrants with the benefit of having them be more numerous and arrive faster, thus having it be a choise that effects your fortress, without haviing it be that leading the immigrants and the journey effecting them as one thing to turn on or off.