Print

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

[Kylaer]

I decided to try something new in my most recent fort. Several things new, actually, but rolled together they add up to one big principle: making a castle rather than a standard fort. The standard fort is a hole dug into the mountain; space surrounded by rock. A castle, on the other hand, is a shell defining an inside and an outside space.

I started out with three Miners, a mason, a craftsdwarf/mechanic, a maxed-skill brewer/cook, and a maxed-skill Herbalist. Took a bare minimum of food and as much alcohol as I possibly could, it's the true dwarf way. Started on a Haunted map with zombie elephants, so the first order of business was to dig in and make a shelter. From there, my miners just kept on going, trying to dig out the entire mountain.

The fort's been going on for a couple of years now and I just crossed the cave river. All rock on my side of the river has been excavated, except supports, a thin shell at the cliff face that'll be destroyed soon, and my castle. I intend to build one or two more castles between the river and chasm, and perhaps two more between chasm and magma. Everything else is going to be open space, a mountain on stilts (I know someone else already did this, but I don't believe he made castles).

The castle as it currently stands. Picture is from a reclaim I did in order to map the chasm and magma, so I can plot out my future development, so pay no attention to the dead cattle strewn around.

The castle has a lever it can pull to flood everything between a channel dug close to the cave river and a second channel near to the cliff face; thus, when trouble comes a knockin' (I'm expecting some good sieges), the dwarves can run into the castle, flood the expanse, and shell the enemy with the catapults. Once my forts between river and chasm are built, I should be able to coerce most of my population to not spend their time wandering out "front," so drowning deaths shouldn't be too severe.

As might be expected, some ore veins messed up the castle's smoothing (and blocked the firing lane of one of my catapults, so I didn't bother building it), but overall, the castle is situated fairly well.

Any thoughts? Anybody else tried doing it this way?

[Dwarmin]

Should be awesome-but Hammernuts? That sounds really painful.  

[TotalPigeon]

I've seen someone else try this somewhere... (s)he was trying to model a human town inside. Personally, I think your catapults are too exposed, and you haven't funneled the enemy along their line of fire either. Still, kudos for trying something different

[BoltsFogs]

Bravo, madam or sir, bravo. I would like to see updates on what happens within your society, historical images, sieges, events, etc please

[Kylaer]

quote:Originally posted by Dwarmin:
<STRONG>Should be awesome-but Hammernuts? That sounds really painful.   </STRONG>

Oh, come on, that's the best part of it. My previous fort was named Knotringed, which means nothing at all. It's hard to charge into battle screaming "FOR KNOTRINGED!" But "FOR HAMMERNUTS!"? Much better. And then, of course, you take your warhammer and match word with deed, and the enemy is soon in retreat.

I got some nobles and what was the first mandate I was given? To make warhammers   :cool:

The "Clapcraft" succession game on the Something Awful forum had the replica of the human town. I figure I can make a "village" also, building the smaller buildings out of locked doors. That'll give me ultimate freeform ability. Honestly, thinking more about it, I'll put the village(s) in between the river and chasm, and not bother with any more castles, since I won't be resisting massive invasions from the inside. Mountain on stilts, here I come! I'll also destroy the outer shell of the mountain. It seems like sieging armies ought to approach the castle to within the firing arcs of my catapults (once the shell is gone), since it'll be the closest spot to the dwarves; if not, I'll figure out some way to lure them closer.

Unless the chasm dwellers decide to spawn in massive numbers, of course...I might have to come up with something to deal with that. With the power of DWARF SCIENCE (stone mechanisms! What can't they do?) I shall defeat all challenges.

I haven't really had any significant historical events thus far. A few fey moods leading to some generic artifacts (no really cool stuff or weapons), a bunch of immigrants and a few caravan visits. Had a good thief raid where a kobold made it all the way to my armory before being caught by my patrolling squad and beaten to death. On another occasion, a goblin child snatcher grabbed my castle's only child and ran off with him, with a hastily-drafted miner in hot pursuit. Thankfully, the miner was Perfectly Agile, and even with the goblin's head start he caught up to him just past the outdoors river. Pickaxe sent that goblin down in a veritable lake (about a 3x4 area) of blood.

I'll be crossing the river in my next play session and I'll have a lot more room to play with, create individual houses, big dining hall, noble houses, chasm invasions   :eek:

I'll keep you all updated on the progress of glorious Hammernuts.

[Jaqie Fox]

The name means a lot, I definitely agree. My first real success fortress was named Steeldance. I had saved the world I generated just before I started it, and went back to make another Steeldance. Alas, the place was now named something totally inane. My chagrin was palpable.  You gotta admit, for an agrarian society (which I love to make - agriculture based, i always have lots of farmers and brewers) Steeldance has a nice ring to it, especially when you consider that I was eventually going to have a nice big steel facility in it.

[Solara]

Nice!

Off to copy your idea now...when left to my own devices most of my fortresses wind up just being a long hallway with a bunch of square rooms on either side.

[Slartibartfast]

quote:Originally posted by BoltsFogs:
<STRONG>Bravo, madam or sir, bravo.</STRONG>

quote:Originally posted by TotalPigeon:
<STRONG>(s)he was trying to model a human town inside.</STRONG>

What's with all the gender neutrality?
I) A month ago everyone was autoassumed to be male. At least language-wise.
II) Which is also a very acceptable assumption, statistically speaking.

Lucky for you English speakers, keeping gender neutrality is relatively easy, I'd like to see you pull this off in a language like Hebrew.
("he/she likes(male)/likes(female) constructing fortresses" "you(male)/you(female) are stupid(male)/are stupid(female)" etc.)
And I bet there are even harder languages  

[Jaqie Fox]

I tend to cause this effect on forums  

[Bas Cost Budde]

Language gender couldn't possibly be much harder than it is in hebrew--gender in nouns, adjectives and conjugations. Or it must be a language where 'I' has two forms as well.

[Slartibartfast]

quote:Originally posted by Bas Cost Budde:
<STRONG>Language gender couldn't possibly be much harder than it is in hebrew--gender in nouns, adjectives and conjugations. Or it must be a language where 'I' has two forms as well.</STRONG>

Also, the first person future and past tenses need two forms.

[Bas Cost Budde]

First person future? Does that depend on the house of verb, then? Because a form like 'eshtagea' does not contain a male/female thingy.

[BoltsFogs]

At any rate, I think this debate is best left for the birds. How is your fort coming along Kylaer? Anything interesting happen yet?

[Erasmus Darwin]

quote:Originally posted by Slartibartfast:
<STRONG>What's with all the gender neutrality?</STRONG>

I bet they've been spending too much time around the dwarves.  Just because it has a beard doesn't mean it can pee standing up.

[Asehujiko]

this language discussion is very interesting, but can we please get back to topic?