Print

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

No

121 (60.5%)

Yes

79 (39.5%)

Total Members Voted: 200

[Inarius]

for some reason.

Sorry, english is not my main language.

I agree with what you said ; but what i proposed is that, as a preliminary, BEFORE the succession game (which, as you said, can be both adv or fortress mode), we put some forteresses on the map to create more challenges/opportunities for the players who will come after. As the time of playing will be limited to only 2, or 3 days (or even a week) we won't have the time to build big fortress with labyrinths, creatures and treasures hidden, and organized things.
What I propose it something "out" and BEFORE the succession game, which can serve as a support for thrilling challenges. It's not at all a "segregate" playing, because during the succession game it will still be both modes.
 I hope I have been clearer. But, anyway, it's just a proposition.

[kerlc]

I know for certain that I personally won't be able to do the 48 hours limit, and support the idea of having an "When you're done, you're done, but the max time you can take is one week" approach.

On adventures and such:

I think it might be better if you allowed adventurers in at intervals, like, after every X number of
fortresses an adventurer could play, and after that adventure the next wave of story chapters is released.
Adventurers add their own special kind of FUN to the mix, and we can't leave them until the very end, because that would be boring.
I plan on adventuring, by the way, so I'd be mad if I got pushed to the back of the line just because somebody wanted to segregate gamemodes.

+1

[Yuli Vlasi]

Added mocman to the list.
I'd also prefer a timelimit of one week, although I know that it could take almost a year for everyone to be able to contribute. Even if the player has a whole week to finish his turn it he should try to do it as quickly as possible. Just add 'Think about the others waiting for you to finish your turn. Imagine what horrible things they would do to you if you didn't.' to the rules and it should be fine.
I like mastahcheese's world-forge idea. I probably imagine it completely different from what he does but it involves volcanoes, so that's fine.

On behalf of all who don't post, I welcome you to the 2013 Dwarf fortress Community world! Enjoy your stay!

part of the crew, part of the ship,part of the crew, part of the ship,part of the crew, part of the ship,....

(2) FORTRESS/ADVETURE INTERACTIONS:
...
___(C) Total uter chaos (unleashing fun)

+1

I usually don't have alot of forts in one world, so I have no idea if too many fortresses would slow the game down. Any experienced people here?
As for the worlds size, I vote for 'small'.

[Bralbaard]

The  museum succession game, (which is sort of a succession world for this version of DF) has 12 completed fortresses and has had nearly 30 adventurers, filesize is now around 700 mb, or 100 mb when zipped. For as far as I know it has no effect on in game performance. You could try and compare early saves from the succession game with later saves if you want to find out if it does.

Adventurers probably contribute as much too filesize as new fortresses do, because they explore previously ungenerated terrain, that has to be saved to disk afterwards.

Also, why start just one game if waiting times are an issue? There's enough interest to start several.

[kerlc]

Having several worlds at once could be fun. But I'd much preffer if we'd just stick to one sole world.

[mastahcheese]

Yeah, on second thought, a week would be better suitted, I was more so thinking about how long the line was when I thought of 48 hours, rather than what you could actually do with it.

(2) FORTRESS/ADVETURE INTERACTIONS:
___(A) Eighther no messing with people's stuff unless aloud
___(B) Teams/faction warfare of fortresses, adventures being "mercinaries"
___(C) Total uter chaos (unleashing fun)

I personally vote for B, but permision should should still be needed to mess with stuff too much.

'Think about the others waiting for you to finish your turn. Imagine what horrible things they would do to you if you didn't.' to the rules and it should be fine.
As for the worlds size, I vote for 'small'.

Definitly add that to the rules, and I vote small map size, as well.

Having several worlds at once could be fun. But I'd much preffer if we'd just stick to one sole world.

I agree with this, too.

[James009]

Awesome idea.

[WillowLuman]

I still don't get what he meant by World-forge.

Anyway, for adventurers, you can retire in a hamlet if you want to continue whatever quest you were on later, or you can retire to a dwarven site and wind up as a migrant for one of the fortress players. I think you could still continue your adventure after that (if you didn't die in the events of a fort) but you'd be moved possibly out of your path. Anyway, you could choose your site (human, elf, or dwarf) depending on how much you want others messing with your character.

Should we update the poll, seeing as modding probably isn't required for a player war?

[Yuli Vlasi]

Do we know for sure we can use our adventurer's items in fortress mode? If you kill and butcher a dragon and leave it's skin in a fortress, would it be possible for your dwarves to make leather from it? Or would it rot away first?

[kerlc]

Do we know for sure we can use our adventurer's items in fortress mode? If you kill and butcher a dragon and leave it's skin in a fortress, would it be possible for your dwarves to make leather from it? Or would it rot away first?

Sounds !!SCIENCE!! worthy! We shall have to test this immediately!

[wowie]

Having several worlds at once could be fun. But I'd much prefer if we'd just stick to one sole world.

WALL OF TEXT INCOMING!

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

I wrote a huge essay, which took me almost two hours to write, but then I deleted it. Here is the short version: I want multiple worlds, so we can have week-long turns, and don't have to wait forever to get into one stinking game. In fact, we probably have enough people here on this one list to start 20+ succession games at the same time. Some of these worlds could be modded, since the poll suggests that a lot of people would like to play on a modded world. Personally, I'd put myself in all of the vanilla world ques, plus also possibly attempt to be the main bookkeeper for a world or two.

[Sindain]

The list is getting ridiculously long, but sign me up anyway!

Having several worlds at once could be fun. But I'd much prefer if we'd just stick to one sole world.

WALL OF TEXT INCOMING!

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

I wrote a huge essay, which took me almost two hours to write, but then I deleted it. Here is the short version: I want multiple worlds, so we can have week-long turns, and don't have to wait forever to get into one stinking game. In fact, we probably have enough people here on this one list to start 20+ succession games at the same time. Some of these worlds could be modded, since the poll suggests that a lot of people would like to play on a modded world. Personally, I'd put myself in all of the vanilla world ques, plus also possibly attempt to be the main bookkeeper for a world or two.

Considering we have ~40 people now, multiple worlds sounds like a good idea. I don't think we should have too many, maybe one for every 10-15 players or so? If we do have multiple worlds, we should make sure to split up into different threads, of course.

[Eric Blank]

I feel that it may be best to simply start many succession games like this when the next version is released. Bralbaard and Sappho' (and Manze's)'s adventurer succession games make for an excellent model; they're fun to play, the rules are reasonable and the one-week timeframe isn't so bad (especially when they're lenient towards jerks like me who always seem to go over the limit ) I bet we'd all have more fun if there were perhaps half a dozen of us seriously interested in running such succession games and we all applied to one or two. The wait won't seem quite as long, that way.

It would be very confusing to have three or four succession games operating under the same overarching thread titles or whatever.

I also think Manze has the right idea, dating the players' turns and linking to the uploaded files in the players' usernames, and I also like Bralbaard providing links to players' posts during their turns. That's all good bookkeeping there.

Do we know for sure we can use our adventurer's items in fortress mode? If you kill and butcher a dragon and leave it's skin in a fortress, would it be possible for your dwarves to make leather from it? Or would it rot away first?

Sounds !!SCIENCE!! worthy! We shall have to test this immediately!

I can confirm that in the current version at least, food and other perishable items do not rot too rapidly. At least not between an adventurer tossing them on the ground, dying, and a fortress being founded where the adventurer left his stuff. I butchered a dragon and cooked up it's meat and hide in a fortress without problem. Well, until my dwarves spontaneously combusted, but gods only know what caused that. They were outdoors, too, standing on the embark wagon.

[BronzeAge]

I think it's too early to divide up the players into several worlds, since this probably won't be the only succession world. As soon as another pops up people will sign up for it, some will postpone their turn and some might drop out. This thread here just seems like a time to have Fun with the new release and just find out what we can do with it.

And since this is pretty much the first bit of freetime I've had what I said might not make all that much sense so:
-file-size- we'll see.
-don't divide into new worlds yet, we'll see what happens.
-have Fun.

[WillowLuman]

Personally, I think our main game should be testing the unmodded release, providing great and highly visible feedback and info for everyone.

And supporting Eric, in the current version at least, stuff doesn't tend to rot. I have personally left meat and skins in a fort from adventure mode, embarked/abandonded repeatedly causing twenty years to pass, and still found them completely unrotten. Of course, the test was to see if the baby that the human caravan left behind would grow up, which it did not, but still I found many other interesting things.

The update to continue worldgen processes could mean that items within sites get updated better, though.