Print

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

[SeiggrainHart]

So, anyone who is familiar with any of my posts, will remember that awhile ago, I attempted to start up a modded succession fort using my mod. This was partially as a test to see if I could run such a thing/to see how such a thing was done. And, as an impromptu 'ad' for my mod, which as I promised months ago, I will finally be doing weekly updates for. (For a schedule for said updates, see the mod thread, I'll be updating the first post with the update schedule.)

And again, anyone familiar with my posts, will remember this... That the game died because I got lazy and didn't post the rest of my turn for months. Well, seeing as I'll be working on my mod roughly every day now, I figured I'd try my hand at doing another succession game, but one with a twist!

So, this one will have two parts per turn. The two parts are Fortress Mode and Adventure Mode. The first part of a persons turn will be Fortress Mode, in which they'll have 2 years to build up their Fortress. And after those two years, they'll have another year to play as a random Adventurer in said world. This means, that they'll have to retire their fortress, NOT abandon, at the end of their fortress turn.

To make things interesting even more, I'll be allowing up to 10 people to have fortresses running in the world at a time. But, an unlimited number of people with Adventurers. This means, that if your fortress dies before your next turn is up, any person with an adventurer but no Fortress, will have the right to claim themselves a fortress.

This is going to be a non co-op game. This means, that it is a competition to see who's fort will last the longest, and who can survive the longest in Adventure Mode.

Who'd be interested in playing a non-co-op succession 'world'?

[Gwolfski]

fun. I'm in.

[Migrant]

I like the concept but you should clarify a few things. 1) real world time contraints  2) define a condition for fortress 'death' and 3) fair play things like "don't embark somewhere really remote so people have to spend half a year getting to your fort" and "don't booby trap your fort with a catsplosion so adventurers can't visit because of few FPS".

[Gwolfski]

I think to make forts fair, you have to retire an adventurere in the fort, or he dies.

[SeiggrainHart]

I like the concept but you should clarify a few things. 1) real world time contraints  2) define a condition for fortress 'death' and 3) fair play things like "don't embark somewhere really remote so people have to spend half a year getting to your fort" and "don't booby trap your fort with a catsplosion so adventurers can't visit because of few FPS".

One, this is just an interest thread, to check to see if people would be interested in such a succession game. That kind of stuff will be refined once I decide weather to start the actual game. And Two, the 'death' conditions are going to be the same as they are in the game itself. That is, once the fortress falls, it's dead.

I think to make forts fair, you have to retire an adventurere in the fort, or he dies.

No, that would be to hard to do.

[Fleeting Frames]

The distance can be handled by just keeping world size pocket, with no islands.

But fairness in general...Yeah is going to require rather certain set of rules, when the objective is to kill other players' characters. A trap is to be expected, a trap that kills the adventurer is the goal, but a trap that can kill any adventurer would make fortress requires long-term workarounds to even have hope of killing without reclaiming it.

Not going to play as an adventurer myself at this time, though.

[SeiggrainHart]

The distance can be handled by just keeping world size pocket, with no islands.

But fairness in general...Yeah is going to require rather certain set of rules, when the objective is to kill other players' characters. A trap is to be expected, a trap that kills the adventurer is the goal, but a trap that can kill any adventurer would make fortress requires long-term workarounds to even have hope of killing without reclaiming it.

Not going to play as an adventurer myself at this time, though.

That's the thing... I didn't say the objective was to kill other players. The objective is to see who can last the longest.

[Fleeting Frames]

...At least in world gen, if one puts their site into an untamed wilds region out of range of other civilizations it can be literally thousand of years before that site gets attacked at all by anything other than local wildlife/megabeasts.

Now, I know there's flurry of site-building post-worldgen, but there's a also bunch of wars, and I haven't heard of anybody or any group playing for more than few hundred of years in fort or adventure mode or mentioning some place getting entirely covered into dark pits/hamlets/hillocks/retreats.

[SeiggrainHart]

...At least in world gen, if one puts their site into an untamed wilds region out of range of other civilizations it can be literally thousand of years before that site gets attacked at all by anything other than local wildlife/megabeasts.

Now, I know there's flurry of site-building post-worldgen, but there's a also bunch of wars, and I haven't heard of anybody or any group playing for more than few hundred of years in fort or adventure mode or mentioning some place getting entirely covered into dark pits/hamlets/hillocks/retreats.

Well, in that case I can say that the one requirement is that there be at least one other kingdom be with in range of the fort. That way there is at least a chance that raids/wars/attacks will happen.

[Gwolfski]

I think embarking on a road gets more sieges, as armies travel faster on roads.

[Migrant]

That kind of stuff will be refined once I decide weather to start the actual game

I see no compelling reason not to discuss it now unless you aim to exclude community input but suit yourself - I am far too lazy to make my own thread.