Print

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

[CognitiveDissonance]

I have been entertaining an idea, and wanted to throw it your guys' way. Community forts are awesome, in that you have to deal with somebody else's mess. Insanity ensues through both intentional botching and unintentional issues. But at the end of the game, we're all excellent at making our fortresses great.

So without further ado, here is my idea. There are to be TWO separate fortresses, and they are not to interact. An overseer only gets to play one side a year, alternating sides as overseers change.

This means the other side are on their own for a year. Their own booze, their own food, their own military protection. It's up to the overseer in a year's time to pick it up and go from there.

Only one rule - always outdo the other side. Be extravagant. Do everything in your power excluding straight-out sabotage.
We could potentially implement recurring voting on the best faction, with rewards such as "acquiring" a member of the other side, exclusive rights to the caravans etc.

As far as population separation, is it possible to have the dwarves be split into functionally identical, but distinguishable, castes on world gen? That would make it easier.
Any other modding suggestions for something like this?

If there is interest, I will begin preparing more thoroughly. So what do you think, are you up to the challenge?

[Firehawk45]

male dwarves, female dwarves? All the separation you need right there.

Sounds cool, question: Do catapults count as sabotage? I mean, i was aiming at the gobbos over there....

[CognitiveDissonance]

male dwarves, female dwarves? All the separation you need right there.

Sounds cool, question: Do catapults count as sabotage? I mean, i was aiming at the gobbos over there....

Not bad, but thorny. Also raises the issue of babies, which would increase resource consumption, and arrow resistance, of the female side. Still, an interesting thought...

And it only counts if the other Overseers think it's sabotage...

[chaosgear]

Sounds like oodles of fun, but I have

 Do we choose which fort we manage? Or do we simply alternate forts between turns?

[Firehawk45]

alternate, one turn (year) fort one, second turn, fort two

[CognitiveDissonance]

Sounds like oodles of fun, but I have [one question]

 Do we choose which fort we manage? Or do we simply alternate forts between turns?

Sounds like oodles of fun, but I have

 Do we choose which fort we manage? Or do we simply alternate forts between turns?

Indeed. Potentially Overseers will be able to choose which side they want to manage; or, be randomly assigned.

[Ruhn]

Do we choose which fort we manage? Or do we simply alternate forts between turns?

Indeed. Potentially Overseers will be able to choose which side they want to manage; or, be randomly assigned.

This sounds like there will be 2 waiting lists then?  That way if an overseer is skipped the next guy is guaranteed to play the fort they signed up for.

Also, would repeat-overseers be allowed to flip sides and play the other fort on the next round?  Or be forced to remain loyal?

As a concept this could work well, since the fort has been neglected for a year it should help to negate the "nothing fun happening" boredom that can set in.

[CognitiveDissonance]

Do we choose which fort we manage? Or do we simply alternate forts between turns?

Indeed. Potentially Overseers will be able to choose which side they want to manage; or, be randomly assigned.

This sounds like there will be 2 waiting lists then?  That way if an overseer is skipped the next guy is guaranteed to play the fort they signed up for.

Also, would repeat-overseers be allowed to flip sides and play the other fort on the next round?  Or be forced to remain loyal?

As a concept this could work well, since the fort has been neglected for a year it should help to negate the "nothing fun happening" boredom that can set in.

Hey, thanks for considering the mechanics! Two waiting lists makes a lot of sense. And I do think that overseers would be allowed to flip sides on repeat overseeing. This only fits the rhetoric of other forts

It looks like there is a bit of interest, I may well get started on the light modding and world gen for tomorrow.

[chaosgear]

I have an idea for separating migrant waves; don't separate them at all.

All migrants go to whichever fort is currently being managed. Migrants arrive in Fort 1s year, they all go to Fort 1, Fort 2 is left alone. This way, the unmanaged fort won't have to worry about overpopulation or supply shortage, and it will make micromanaging easier.

[CognitiveDissonance]

I have an idea for separating migrant waves; don't separate them at all.

All migrants go to whichever fort is currently being managed. Migrants arrive in Fort 1s year, they all go to Fort 1, Fort 2 is left alone. This way, the unmanaged fort won't have to worry about overpopulation or supply shortage, and it will make micromanaging easier.

That... makes sense, really. I still like the idea of coding two mostly identical castes to underline the rivalry, and justify the population split. At the same time, doing this would allow the game to remain unmodded. Hmm...

EDIT: I'm mostly concerned by narrative. It's easier to justify the competition if they are in fact opposing factions.

[chaosgear]

Having to split up migrants would be a micromanaging nightmare, unless you somehow modded it in that they would split themselves naturally. It would also be incredibly rough on each overseer at the start of their turn. A fort that has been running on it's own over maximum capacity for a year is sure to fail much easier.

And then we could divide the forts over something simple. Like a red fort and a blue for, with gates built out of fire clay and cobalite.

[CognitiveDissonance]

Having to split up migrants would be a micromanaging nightmare, unless you somehow modded it in that they would split themselves naturally. It would also be incredibly rough on each overseer at the start of their turn. A fort that has been running on it's own over maximum capacity for a year is sure to fail much easier.

And then we could divide the forts over something simple. Like a red fort and a blue for, with gates built out of fire clay and cobalite.

You make a very valid point. I'll go with that. No modding = easier to play.

[chaosgear]

Oh, I didn't see your edit.

I guess my system would be harder to narrate. But then again, so is "The other guys just stopped doing stuff for a year.

[CognitiveDissonance]

Oh, I didn't see your edit.

I guess my system would be harder to narrate. But then again, so is "The other guys just stopped doing stuff for a year.

I am thinking of presenting it kind of like a show, ala hunger games, to vent old feuds. The overseers are  the only ones with any authority to give orders, everyone else just has to obey and survive.

I'm sure I'll come up with a plot. I have a pocket writer at home

[chaosgear]

Well, good luck with that.
And sign me up for a turn.