Print

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

[Retropunch]

Interesting! However, your pictures are much too large. I suggest adding a width=800 modifier or the like to your image tags.

Definitely interesting, but please spoiler large images as well - I know it takes away a bit of the impact but it's much easier to read and is sorta standard forum etiquette for anything over a little screenshot or animation or something.

[Zsinj]

Interesting! However, your pictures are much too large. I suggest adding a width=800 modifier or the like to your image tags.

Wow, yeah, somehow didn't notice that one, thanks!

[eerr]

"one of the larger stretch goals for King under the Mountain is a mode where you play as a human wizard or necromancer, controlling a single avatar character while you use magical constructs and golems to build up your lair while you improve your knowledge and experience of spells."

"the current focus of development is having dwarves as the first playable race in King under the Mountain but they're not going to be the only ones you can play as! Next up we'll be introducing orcs and how their tribal, martial society offers a different gameplay experience."

Dude, okay, your designer doesn't understand something.
You can only make one game at a time! You Should only make one game at a time!
The thing is, a simulation takes as much as you can possibly put in it. There is no point where you should ever divert your efforts, if you still have the main goal of making a simulation. Any diversion means the original simulation takes more time, and is quite like making two games at one time.
Making a videogame is a singular purpose not to be split amoungst multiple projects.
Any time spent detailing the orcs means time not spent detailing the dwarves.
Furthermore, most DF clones I have encountered so far beg for a more detailed, in-depth system that you could only make as a singular, many-year project.

I didn't buy into the "we don't need another DF" garbage though. For one, DF won't see a proper fully refined release for possibly years at a time. Why not follow some other potentially great game, as I had my fill of 40d and such.

[Zsinj]

Dude, okay, your designer doesn't understand something.
You can only make one game at a time! You Should only make one game at a time!
The thing is, a simulation takes as much as you can possibly put in it. There is no point where you should ever divert your efforts, if you still have the main goal of making a simulation. Any diversion means the original simulation takes more time, and is quite like making two games at one time.
Making a videogame is a singular purpose not to be split amoungst multiple projects.
Any time spent detailing the orcs means time not spent detailing the dwarves.
Furthermore, most DF clones I have encountered so far beg for a more detailed, in-depth system that you could only make as a singular, many-year project.

I didn't buy into the "we don't need another DF" garbage though. For one, DF won't see a proper fully refined release for possibly years at a time. Why not follow some other potentially great game, as I had my fill of 40d and such.

I agree, this is why all the assets and gameplay actually implemented so far is only for dwarves and that's why they're the only thing being worked on right now. The goal is to build them into the game along with the simulation of the game world, and only when they're nearing feature completion moving on to something else, probably orcs afterwards as they're similar in some ways while having their own unique gameplay. The "version 1" release is planned to be dwarves, orcs and humans that will be broadly similar though with their own unique flavours, and only a long time down the line looking to expand with more unusual playstyles such as this with a wizard.

A good comparison is the Paradox games like Crusader Kings II where the base game has you playing as catholic feudal lords, then years of expansions add other playstyles such as other religions and government types, all built on the same game engine or world.

To put it another way, I'm building the best dwarf-fortress-like I can first and releasing that, but then building from there into a more diverse set of playing styles and features, rather than trying to do everything up front which would never get done.

[Zsinj]

Working on a few too many things at the same time means I've not had any visual progress for a while (quite a few things coming up shortly!) but in the meantime I've put together a roadmap of the planned features for the game to share the vision and show where we're planning to go, let me know what you think!

http://kingunderthemounta.in/roadmap/

[Mephansteras]

Looks good to me.

What about an economy within the settlement? Item/room/animal ownership? Taxes? The communistic systems used in colony sims makes for easier programming and gameplay, but isn't something that is actually very realistic in general. Especially when bringing nobility and feudalism into the mix. 

One thing you could probably do is have most dwarves work on a family ownership basis. So Urist might not care if his brother Cog borrows his axe to chop up some firewood but would object to some non-kinsman using it.

Actually, you could broaden that system and have all ownership be at group levels. The smallest group being an individual (Say, the King's Crown) then on up to Family->Guild/Temple/Military->Settlement->Public. That way you'd be able to model things like a settlement having a Weaver's Guild where all the guildmembers can practice their craft but non-guildmembers are forbidden access to the building.

Thought on nobles: In a feudalistic society nobles are very powerful locally and can get away with nearly anything (though people revolt eventually at mistreatment) but they do have some obligations to their people and to their lord in turn. While nobles are generally going to be a pain and resource drain, they should grant the ability to call in favors from the rest of the kingdom. The more powerful the noble, the more help they should be able to call in. These can be as simple as requesting military help against invaders or food supplies to attracting physicians/magic users/scholars or helping a local guild chapter get established.

You mention prestige in your notes with Nobles, maybe let that work as a 'currency' of sorts that can be spent outside the settlement for various boons.

The flip side of that being taxes and other obligations from the settlement. Failing to uphold your end of the bargain would cost prestige, and too big a debt might cause the wrath of the kingdom to come down onto your head.

[Zsinj]

I knew there would be a million things I'd forgotten

Current plan is for dwarves to be the communist system (as the "easy" beginner race) with humans starting out with a full-fledged economy to manage (essentially playing as the goverment paying for public sector work, taxing everything else) being the more advanced race to play as, to be a little different with humans compared to practically every other fantasy setting in a game.

Definitely want some kind of family/clan mechanics for the dwarves so some ownership along those lines is a great idea!

Great points on the nobles too, while the nobles of DF are useless to the point of being comical, I definitely want some gameplay reasons to want to have them in your settlement, avoiding the whole "noble removal lever" type devices.

Always a good idea to give the player the tools for their own downfall (rather than relying on random events a la Rimworld), and a revolt due to overtaxing or nobles not doing what's expected of them feels like a good route to go. Thanks for the feedback (as ever)!

[forsaken1111]

I always imagined dwarven high government being a lot of backstabbing and negotiation between old clans and family lines, with a very conservative stranglehold on any innovation.

[Zsinj]

Hah, I like it! Seeing as the implied goal is to become king, I'm sure the current monarch will be doing something to stop you (though not overtly).

[forsaken1111]

Also remember that, for dwarves, nepotism is an expected and encouraged process so inviting a noble should be a crapshoot between getting someone useful/competent and someone who is only in power because his cousin needs a loyal vassal but basically he drinks all day and is a useless fuck

[Retropunch]

Whilst I agree that everything can seem a bit communisty in these kinda games, I've always sort of accepted that it's either based on hardship (ala Rimworld) or based on clan ties (ala DF). More than that, there's nothing more frustrating from a gameplay point of view than Urist having a bucket which he refuses to give to Ulric, causing Ulric to die of thirst.

 Perhaps it'd be better to have it as a 'tithe' system - Dwarves will keep some of the stuff they craft/work towards to themselves, but the rest goes into the central pot to be traded by the player/used by others. Depending on how happy they are, the more they'll tithe (and the more they'll part with on death etc.). It'd give the player a solid incentive to keep their dwarves happy. This system also opens up all sorts of possible modifiers - a recent battle might cause a surge in tithing for instance.

[Zsinj]

Also remember that, for dwarves, nepotism is an expected and encouraged process so inviting a noble should be a crapshoot between getting someone useful/competent and someone who is only in power because his cousin needs a loyal vassal but basically he drinks all day and is a useless fuck

Brilliant, I love it. I managed to read "The Dwarves" by Markus Heitz a month or two back and it has just that kind of backstabbing politicking for the crown too. It'll probably be more along the lines of being told that you've a noble to start looking after rather than asking for one to get sent your way but I'm always open to input. Probably a noble sent by the current king to "oversee" that you're doing the right thing, or else. Perhaps something along the lines of the independence mechanic of Colonization - start off as a colony of a powerful kingdom but work your way up to independence and your own realm.

[Zsinj]

Whilst I agree that everything can seem a bit communisty in these kinda games, I've always sort of accepted that it's either based on hardship (ala Rimworld) or based on clan ties (ala DF). More than that, there's nothing more frustrating from a gameplay point of view than Urist having a bucket which he refuses to give to Ulric, causing Ulric to die of thirst.

 Perhaps it'd be better to have it as a 'tithe' system - Dwarves will keep some of the stuff they craft/work towards to themselves, but the rest goes into the central pot to be traded by the player/used by others. Depending on how happy they are, the more they'll tithe (and the more they'll part with on death etc.). It'd give the player a solid incentive to keep their dwarves happy. This system also opens up all sorts of possible modifiers - a recent battle might cause a surge in tithing for instance.

I think that's how I'm roughly seeing it, something a little like the belongings of bedrooms in Dwarf Fortress - individuals may have their own possessions of value that they covet, but the actual useful stuff of tools and resources are shared by the community/workshop. It opens up the possibility of stealing and other crimes requiring justice to be meted out, while not making it annoying when someone has a pickaxe that you need another dwarf to use. Thanks for that!

[forsaken1111]

Brilliant, I love it. I managed to read "The Dwarves" by Markus Heitz a month or two back and it has just that kind of backstabbing politicking for the crown too. It'll probably be more along the lines of being told that you've a noble to start looking after rather than asking for one to get sent your way but I'm always open to input. Probably a noble sent by the current king to "oversee" that you're doing the right thing, or else. Perhaps something along the lines of the independence mechanic of Colonization - start off as a colony of a powerful kingdom but work your way up to independence and your own realm.

That is a fantastic book series, I recommend the sequels as well when you have time. I like the way you're thinking! It would be interesting to have a political game going on in the 'background', something like a council of elder dwarves from each clan represented in your colony/city who bitch and moan and try to get their petty causes advanced or put one over on you. At first this would probably just be one or two, maybe just your own clan and a representative of the king. Later, as you grow, you might have to deal with petitions from the miner's safety authority and demands from a distant king all while appeasing the Guild of Artisanal Cheeses by relaxing quality requirements of the dairy industry some and mediating a clan feud between the Hammerfist family and the Oakheart family.

Have you considered how you'll handle labor organization? Is it a free for all sort of thing where anyone with the labors enabled will take the jobs available, or will we organize the dwarves into coherent work gangs with a foreman?

[Mephansteras]

Whilst I agree that everything can seem a bit communisty in these kinda games, I've always sort of accepted that it's either based on hardship (ala Rimworld) or based on clan ties (ala DF). More than that, there's nothing more frustrating from a gameplay point of view than Urist having a bucket which he refuses to give to Ulric, causing Ulric to die of thirst.

 Perhaps it'd be better to have it as a 'tithe' system - Dwarves will keep some of the stuff they craft/work towards to themselves, but the rest goes into the central pot to be traded by the player/used by others. Depending on how happy they are, the more they'll tithe (and the more they'll part with on death etc.). It'd give the player a solid incentive to keep their dwarves happy. This system also opens up all sorts of possible modifiers - a recent battle might cause a surge in tithing for instance.

I think that's how I'm roughly seeing it, something a little like the belongings of bedrooms in Dwarf Fortress - individuals may have their own possessions of value that they covet, but the actual useful stuff of tools and resources are shared by the community/workshop. It opens up the possibility of stealing and other crimes requiring justice to be meted out, while not making it annoying when someone has a pickaxe that you need another dwarf to use. Thanks for that!

That's kind of where I was going with the 'levels of ownership' idea. Stuff like a pickaxe would be settlement level (or miner's guild), a bucket probably the same. A fine War Axe or Sword, clothing, and other personal goods like that are probably Family owned. Really opens you up for criminal actions and feuding families and the like without having to stress over stupid things.

Although feuding families causing you headaches by refusing to let the other clan use their bucket might be fun...