Topic: Bridgedstreams: Human Fortress - (Players needed!) (Read 98485 times)

BlackFlyme · « **Reply #15 on:** October 04, 2013, 08:30:08 pm »

Dwarves don't have progress triggers, I believe, so that will need fixing if you want dwarvern merchants.

Grim Portent · « **Reply #16 on:** October 05, 2013, 09:13:13 am »

I'm starting to do some RAW tweaks to make humans playable and I'm wondering if the thread thinks I should leave migrants as is, try to reduce the available numbers or make humans flat out extinct and restrict us to embark +2 waves as our sole population.

Splint · « **Reply #17 on:** October 05, 2013, 09:23:13 am »

I'd recommend leaving them as is. Living on the surface means casualties will be a constant in trying to live on the surface until we have walls up to keep ambushes out/restricted.

Grim Portent · « **Reply #18 on:** October 05, 2013, 10:23:09 am »

My edited nobles for the human civ:

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

They are mostly just copy pasted from the dwarves and renamed. It's surprisingly annoying to look up medieval titles and territories for some reason. The only real change was the consolidation of Broker, Book keeper and Manager into one position as I feel that it makes more sense for one merchant prince style individual to handle most trade and stocktaking within the town.

EDIT: Have increased the population of several sea animals by a large margin since the only suggestion for what to do with the fort so far is a whaling village. Also increased the default population of fishable vermin.

EDIT 2: Have given humans the PROFFESSION_NAME tags, renamed DIAGNOSER skilled humans to physicians.

EDIT 3: Should I edit out some of the humans weapons? This is the only RAW change I think I have left to make other than removing some of the tools and other stuff that fort mode doesn't use.

Human current weapons are:

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

At the very least I plan to remove crossbows. If people want I'll leave the other weapons in, but it seems a bit excessive as is.

Grim Portent · « **Reply #19 on:** October 05, 2013, 12:58:06 pm »

Ignore this post.

Splint · « **Reply #20 on:** October 05, 2013, 01:41:50 pm »

Aww, so I guess my bridge building idea was as stupid as I thought? And as far as weapons I doubt we really need the scimitar and whips are for goblins who like to hurt things. Also Crossbows are the weapon of the peasant while bows are those of the nobility and huntsmen, I say leave them in. After all, crossbows are the equivalent of a matchlock: Any idiot can be quickly trained to use a crossbow, while archers need to train for years.

Kinda surprised you'd consider the town's militia as worthy of being labeled "knight," considering everyone will be of common birth unless you've done some raw modding for theme's sake (With such highborn folks learning combat skills (except marksmanship with crossbows, as that's a dirt sifting peasant's weapon no nobleman should bother with unless he fancies such unskilled implements,) faster and other skills slower. What was I talking about?

Huh. Went off track there again. Anyways, I vote the great axe, scimitar, and whip go, pikes, halberds, and flails just flip a coin on. Leave the crossbows.

Man this is making me really want to get off my ass and make my multiple human nations thing...

Grim Portent · « **Reply #21 on:** October 05, 2013, 01:58:30 pm »

It's not that the bridge town was a bad idea, it is in fact a very nice one, historically accurate as well, most settlements are built near the sea, a lake or a river. Hmm, maybe we could combine the two, a town built at the site where a river meets the sea.

I don't want to keep more than one ranged weapon simply due to the hassle it causes for hunters and archer squads. Making two types of ammo is annoying and crossbows seem less thematic to me.

I labelled the militia commander and squad as knights with the intent that they be the best soldiers in the town, none of that 3 man squads to train nonsense with no difference between militia squads that happens in most forts.. The Knight Commander and his/her men will be swordsmen of the highest caliber, veterans of battle and equipped with the highest quality of gear. That and it's knight in the more modern gaming sense of it being a rank for a high position in martial orders rather than the medieval nobility. Like Templar Knight-Commanders from Dragon Age.

EDIT: Also added the sawmill from corrosion and the wooden slab and block reactions, had to alter them slightly but I can see them being very good to have.

EDIT 2: Weapons as I currently plan to leave them are as follows

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Splint · « **Reply #22 on:** October 05, 2013, 02:40:29 pm »

I've.... Never actually considered knight as a rank for someone in a militia. After all, by definition in this case it really is just an assembly of part-time (or full time in our case I assume) personnel called up to defend a community or state, which really doesn't fit with some kind of militant order of knights or what have you. Just doesn't really seem fitting. I just went with a generic Colonel (since they're the highest ranking officers that will take to the field usually nowadays and seems fitting if the general comes to the town/fortress,) and Sergeants (because militia captain seems to... fancy.) On the other side there's always the possibility of getting to establish something to that effect when the settlement is of the appropriate standing.

I really don't know what to say on the ranged weapons honestly. Ammo management has never really be an issue, just restrict hunters to one type ( when I realized the military screen controlled what ammo hunters used I felt pretty stupid for not noticing sooner) and make sure each squad has the relevant ammo listed so they don't do something stupid like carry a bag of quarrels for a longbow or something. I get what you're saying though as far as ammo goes. Just making sure they have training ammo makes ranged troops so low a priority and unattractive (On top of them taking forever to kill someone unless it's a lucky shot) I don't bother with them for years.

As far as the militia goes, you really won't have much choice. There won't be a difference with professional squads aside from one guy being the designated leader after a while. The 3 man teams is more for practicality of getting the troops up to snuff than anything. Larger squads take a lot longer to train up to basic competency, which means disturbingly high mortality rates or suddenly useless cripples, and in the case of deaths, tantrums.

In order to have people available to work and recruits handy I'd recommend dropping the "working age" to 8. Seems fitting and if nothing else the little brats can work the fields.

I dunno why I keep prattling on about this....

Grim Portent · « **Reply #23 on:** October 05, 2013, 03:11:58 pm »

I could alter the militia squads so that militia are present at the start and one of the nobles enables a 'knight' squad later on, it would be more realistic regarding the professionalism of a military in a fledgling town and could be done to reflect the rising importance of the settlement.

So at the start we'd have

Renamed Militia Commander + Militiamen
Militia Captains + Militia Men

Then when the Baron/Count/Duke arrive/are appointed

Knight Commander + Knights

Maybe with a Royal Guard squad for when the king arrives.

There'd be no functional differences between the squads but they could be treated differently much the same way as many players wind up treating their squads of veterans. Though I train all my squads as groups that will fight together, so as many as ten training together in one squad simply because I find it a bit immersion breaking to have half a dozen 3 man squads of guys who all use the same weapon if none are patrolling or guarding anything, veterans in my forts often wind up training new recruits when they inevitably get crippled in some fashion.

As for hunters and ammo, even if they can't pick up bolts won't they still grab crossbows as their weapon of choice and then start complaining that arrows don't work with them?

Dropping the age to 8 might be practical, but unless we embark somewhere dangerous like a savage or evil biome I can't see casualties being high enough to require it.

Splint · « **Reply #24 on:** October 05, 2013, 03:31:54 pm »

Quote

I could alter the militia squads so that militia are present at the start and one of the nobles enables a 'knight' squad later on, it would be more realistic regarding the professionalism of a military in a fledgling town and could be done to reflect the rising importance of the settlement.

That's... Actually a very good idea. I must keep that in mind.

On the hunters, they should use the relevant weapon to what ammo they're permitted to use so long as the weapon in question is available. I recall several mods that have many different ranged weapons and the solution is to simply restrict what they can use. They should ditch the crossbow and bolts and grab some arrows and a bow if the kit's available. I'll have to give it a go once I finish my now new modding project to make multiple entities for various human cultures.

And I was more thinking on people being killed regularly (because goblins) until solid defenses are up and of course so they aren't sucking resources for a full decade like dwarflings do.

Also what about including some of the weaker fort defense races (and maybe one stronger one like the pandashi or badgermen) for added danger/training dummies? Dark stranglers and beak wolves make for great... Assistants, for a young militia. Just need some copper gear to deflect bites.

Grim Portent · « **Reply #25 on:** October 05, 2013, 03:42:13 pm »

Extra enemies are always welcome. Though I'm quite certain the town could be easily walled in by the end of year 1 so I doubt we'll be scrambling for people unless the military gets chewed up badly. I think that we can change the child age in an active game anyway so if it becomes a problem we can institute an emergency child labour policy by RAW editing.

Splint · « **Reply #26 on:** October 05, 2013, 03:53:24 pm »

I was just assuming we'd build out rather than up/down, hence the worry about casualties.

Grim Portent · « **Reply #27 on:** October 05, 2013, 03:56:06 pm »

You can wall in a fairly large area in very little time. We'll need to build a tavern to serve as a communal dining area quite early though since a dining room for each family would be stupidly resource intensive. Could also add a dormitory to the tavern to complete the effect and provide migrants a place to stay while homes are built for them.

Splint · « **Reply #28 on:** October 05, 2013, 04:02:07 pm »

That's usually what I did. Food stored in the basement (because it was convenient and it could be expanded easily if there was a sudden overflow of food,) a dining area (may or may not be floored,) and a dorm on the second floor. I also tended to put skilled workers above their own workshops near the needed resources, especially weaponsmiths/armorers.

Grim Portent · « **Reply #29 on:** October 05, 2013, 04:46:49 pm »

Revised military nobles

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

I tried to base them off historical positions from medieval armies. The ensign isn't necessary but I like the idea of a position that serves as a 'standard bearer'. Sadly we can't make banners and standards but [RESPONSIBILITY:BUILD_MORALE] might be a decent simulation.

News:

Poll

If we make a sequel should I let humans make steel in it?

Author Topic: Bridgedstreams: Human Fortress - (Players needed!) (Read 98485 times)

BlackFlyme

Re: Human succession fort

Grim Portent

Re: Human succession fort

Splint

Re: Human succession fort

Grim Portent

Re: Human succession fort

Grim Portent

Re: Human succession fort

Splint

Re: Human succession fort

Grim Portent

Re: Human succession fort

Splint

Re: Human succession fort

Grim Portent

Re: Human succession fort

Splint

Re: Human succession fort

Grim Portent

Re: Human succession fort

Splint

Re: Human succession fort

Grim Portent

Re: Human succession fort

Splint

Re: Human succession fort

Grim Portent

Re: Human succession fort