Print

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

[NW_Kohaku]

What the OP writes about has been true ever since the site rewrites back in 2012. In fact, it's been true for as long as there have been world map sites, although the winner was generally the first nation to capture an elven retreat and stuff their ranks with elves that breed like rabbits without the penalty from wooden weapons, like Cacame. (Goblins usually were severely hemmed in by a coalition of humans, dwarves, and elves, since snatching made all of them hate goblins.  Goblins only survived if they were far enough removed to allow themselves to build up in peace large enough to smash into a single empire at full strength, or if they were totally isolated on a glacier or something.)

The largest problem is that dwarves don't breed due to fortresses != cities, so they're always small, and prefer not to fight because the AI waits until getting large to start wars. Max^TM shows exactly what putting dwarves in cities does; They level the playing field where dwarven steel outmatches human iron.

The other major problem is that worldgen is heavily weighted to advantage attackers.  (Reminds me of Shogun 2 Total War - all the named historical daimyo that aren't ambitious die to random nobodies who are, because ambition is the only trait that matters.) This game as yet has little of that Crusader Kings goodness where nations that suffer an offensive loss can be destroyed from internal strife as soon as the army isn't large enough to crush an ambitious noble (although rebellions exist).  If aggressive leaders created Pyrrhic Victories that crumble their whole empire, defensive generals would have a survival edge.  There's nothing we can do about that besides suggestion thread Toady on mechanics to make internal strife more interesting.

[TheFlame52]

It seems like dwarves win more in the long term. I'm going camping this weekend so results will probably be on Monday.

[Untrustedlife]

...
The largest problem is that dwarves don't breed due to fortresses != cities, so they're always small, and prefer not to fight because the AI waits until getting large to start wars. Max^TM shows exactly what putting dwarves in cities does; They level the playing field where dwarven steel outmatches human iron.
...

They breed, they just dont breed as much. Which is why we still get worldgen dwarven families in dwarven civilizations.

[Neonivek]

While I do think World Gen can be fixed up in terms of military... and for the Elves to have some breeding limits.

I don't think Dwarves losing out is a bad thing. As it stems from their society.

They don't serve a metafictional role like say Goblins do.

[NW_Kohaku]

They breed, they just dont breed as much. Which is why we still get worldgen dwarven families in dwarven civilizations.

Yes, yes, I meant it figuratively.  They wouldn't survive worldgen at all without some breeding. 

While I do think World Gen can be fixed up in terms of military... and for the Elves to have some breeding limits.

I don't think Dwarves losing out is a bad thing. As it stems from their society.

They don't serve a metafictional role like say Goblins do.

What the game really needs is more reasons why a voracious expansionist can cause the doom of their empire.  If there are no consequences for a lost attack besides having to sit back and wait for your civilians to breed more warriors, then even the most drooling idiot leading rank recruits can eventually conquer empires unless they face a similarly expansionist foe.  (This is why elves tend to do very well right now.)

If there were more ways for internal strife to destroy an empire from within as soon as a tyrant bled out their military, or if empires crumbled when their great unifying leaders died and were succeeded by less capable heirs the way the Mongol Empire went out, then expansionist powers would have natural cycles of expansion and contraction that would not favor them so heavily, and give defensive civilizations more capacity to outlast the upstarts.

[Untrustedlife]

If there were more ways for internal strife to destroy an empire from within as soon as a tyrant bled out their military, or if empires crumbled when their great unifying leaders died and were succeeded by less capable heirs the way the Mongol Empire went out, then expansionist powers would have natural cycles of expansion and contraction that would not favor them so heavily, and give defensive civilizations more capacity to outlast the upstarts.

That would make the world a much more interesting place for sure.

We have succession, but we don't have all the problems that come with bad succession.
I would love to see civs split off and reunify and such, but that would also take awhile for tarn to program.
Isn't this kind of thing planned though? I could have sworn I saw something about "succession struggles".

[Pvt. Pirate]

i think it could also help to allow struggling civs to plead for joining another civ of their folks.
the last dwarven fortress would send someone to their neighbor dwarven mountainhomes asking for being aligned to that civ.
upon pledging loyalty to the new leaders, they have access to supplies and even military help so they don't go extinct.

[NW_Kohaku]

Clearly, what we need to do is set up a system of "Infamy" from Europa Universalis IV, and make it so that the Pope and the Muslim Caliph will join forces against you if you start "winning too much" to keep the game from getting to the late game too early unless you take advantage of the new strategic marriages system...

Oh, no, wait, I'm thinking of the last update of Crusader Kings II.

[paShadoWn]

Dorves are doomed to extinction as any civ wasting effort on massive doodads is. Take Egyptians, for example. Instead of concentrating on military research they spammed pyramids and got owned by Alexander.

[Shonai_Dweller]

Dorves are doomed to extinction as any civ wasting effort on massive doodads is. Take Egyptians, for example. Instead of concentrating on military research they spammed pyramids and got owned by Alexander.

So, if players just left the dorfs alone, they'd do pretty well?
Humans seem to be the only race making elaborate mummy infested tombs, labyrinths and dungeons just for kicks in worldgen.

[TheFlame52]

500 year results are in.

World 1
 - 33283 humans
 - 21758 goblins
 - 11124 dwarves
 - 23 elves
Notes: 3/3 elven nations gone

World 2
 - 40122 goblins
 - 19753 humans
 - 7163 elves
 - 6004 dwarves
Notes: 2/3 dwarven nations gone, 1/3 elven nations gone
Had two gods of the same name with the same spheres worshiped by different nations

World 3
 - 26207 humans
 - 23046 goblins
 - 5960 dwarves
 - 3578 elves
Notes: 3/4 elven nations gone, 2/4 goblin nations gone, 1/4 human nations gone
Only one dwarven nation

World 4
 - 18401 dwarves
 - 13899 goblins
 - 7909 humans
 - 6904 elves
Notes: 1/3 elven nations gone, 1/3 human nations gone
A male human vampire became the queen of the elves, then laid oppressive laws on them. There was also a 500 year old vampire who had never killed anyone.

World 5
 - 46970 humans
 - 16151 goblins
 - 9834 dwarves
 - 7916 elves
Notes: 2/3 dwarven nations gone, 2/3 elven nations gone, 1/3 goblin nations gone
Had a female monkey demon that wanted to fall in love but died (there was also a male)

World 6
 - 34824 goblins
 - 20857 humans
 - 2854 elves
 - 0 dwarves
Notes: 1/1 dwarven nations gone, 3/4 elven nations gone, 2/4 goblin nations gone, 1/4 human nations gone

World 7
 - 35903 humans
 - 15489 goblins
 - 12430 dwarves
 - 4312 elves
Notes: 1/3 dwarven nations gone, 2/3 elven nations gone, 1/3 goblin nations gone,

World 8
 - 16905 dwarves
 - 12441 goblins
 - 10027 humans
 - 9562 elves
Notes: 2/3 elven nations gone, 1/3 goblin nations gone, 2/3 human nations gone
The humans were conquered by the elves, who were conquered by the goblins, who were conquered by the humans

World 9
 - 22935 goblins
 - 21140 humans
 - 4801 elves
 - 2097 dwarves
Notes: 2/3 dwarven nations gone, 2/3 elven nations gone

World 10
 - 32286 humans
 - 13031 dwarves
 - 10676 goblins
 - 1086 elves
Notes: 1/3 dwarven nations gone, 3/3 elven nations gone, 1/3 goblin nations gone

Average places:
humans - 1.7
goblins - 1.8
dwarves - 2.8
elves - 3.3

It seems dwarves beat elves in the long term. Humans and goblins are so close I figure they're the same. Again, dwarves only win if everyone kills each other. Goblins seem to accelerate when they hit the long stretch, probably because they live forever.

[NW_Kohaku]

Dorves are doomed to extinction as any civ wasting effort on massive doodads is. Take Egyptians, for example. Instead of concentrating on military research they spammed pyramids and got owned by Alexander.

There are so many things wrong with this way of reading history, I don't even know where to begin...

OK, for a start, you DO realize that the Egyptians stopped building pyramids somewhere around 1500 years before Alexander the Great was even born, right?

... Oh, and for that matter, that Greek civilization basically started as a result of importing Egyptian culture and learning because the Greeks were barbarian tribes until they imported civilization from the Middle East...

... And clearly, what made the Roman Empire fall was that they started trying to make "massive doodads" like aqueducts or roadways or giant, well-disciplined armies and centers of trade.  Clearly, if they just focused upon the enslaving 90% of their population, crashing their economy and general debauchery that BUILT that empire of theirs, Rome would have lasted forever!

[Dozebôm Lolumzalìs]

I think he's either a troll or just a really grumpy goblin.

[BlackBronze]

Well, think about it this way: when you rev up the old' world generator, the Dwarves are in need of leadership for someone to better guide them. That's when you, the player, comes in to save their way of life and fight back.

In the majority of my worlds genned, Dwarves were always losing. generally, I always pick the current losing team: their's always one particular Dwarf civ who's culture is on the brink of extinction. Either they had bad luck and lost the majority of their forts early on from FBs, or they were driven from their homeland by some enemy. What I always try to do is try to construct a fort that can preserve their way of life, if only for a few years. However, all forts fall eventually...

That's where adventure mode comes into play. The Dwarves are in need of a hero, someone that can rise up from the masses and fight for them. As you mentioned before, it is in their nature to be defensive, however a player-controlled unit can (once skilled enough) take on entire armies and slay entire cities. What to the eyes of Humans, Elves, and Goblins is perceived as a Monster would be a Savior in the eyes of the humble Dwarves, a knight in shining armor that slayed the FBs and opressive forces that dared to lay waste to the forts.

[sirvente]

There are so many things wrong with this way of reading history, I don't even know where to begin...

That's clearly a civilization joke