Print

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

[Akroma]

I am also experiencing difficulties opening your saves

well, ths is the first time I tried importing a save file, so whatever

[Riemann]

Eh, I really hate the nobles rooms in my fort. They look terrible because of all the engravings on the floor and needless statues. But the rules were only Royal quality counts so it was that or nothing. Same goes for the massive basement full of tombs.

[Sowelu]

Abyss, I'd say send it in anyway.  Losing is fun.  And if you kept a backup save from just before the ambush (seasonal backups yay!), you could send that in, instead...But we'd love to see how bad your negative score is!

You're essentially guaranteed a spot!  Everyone should turn in what they've got, really!

Personally, I'm hoping for some radically different scoring systems in the next rounds.  I like systems that are objective--like, say, worth-based or skill-based ones--but seeing something where scoring is more heavily based on number of weapons, or number of unique legendary skills, or one point per *ten* drinks would totally change the dynamics.

If we're going to have more dropouts, then it might be worth considering making every round a simple elimination.  First round, up to 12 people can advance, second round up to 6, third round only 3 can advance, etc.  That way, if less people than expected end up playing, nobody gets a free win over a missing opponent.

[ April 29, 2008: Message edited by: Sowelu ]

[Jamini]

You *can* turn engravings off and have them look like simple stone tiles while maintaining their value. I find that the walls of my noble rooms look a lot nicer if I toggle off all engravings but a few important or good looking ones.

Tiger, are you planning to follow the arbitrary score system you posted when we embarked, or can us folks who deliberatly play to win get very mad at you for misleading us. I was under the impression that the jury would design the score card and determine the awards like "best 3-D model" and "Best Mosaic" while the raw points of a fortress would be counted just as they are. If that is not the case and it's a total decisive vote by the jury... well... I would have played my fortress significantly differently.

On savefiles:

1. Tilesets do not make saves unplayable. I use a different tileset than the people both before me and after me in Roariron did without issue between saves.
2. Are you directly saving the folder in the data/saves directory? try and give it a unique name, if you extract it right you should see it on the list.
3. Correct version. It's a silly qustion, but incompatability can be an issue if you have an older version.

Edit: Kagus, please don't take my comments as an attack on you. I highly appreciate you giving comments on my fort as well as to that of others. However, I'm also very aware that the two take very different approaches to DF (again, Roarirons) and thus I know there will often be incorrateble differences in opinion when we look at or run the same fortress.

[ April 30, 2008: Message edited by: Jamini ]

[Kagus]

If I were to take comments on my ratings as an attack...  I don't really know the word for that.  It's not quite hypocritical, but it's close.

And I am aware of turning off engravings, but that still results in a floor tile that has a grey background instead of the black background everything else has.  When a dwarf (or cat, dog, elephant, toad or anything else) walks over it, the background switches from grey to black to grey again like the creature is slogging through an incredibly dense fog.  Floor engravings in areas where nobody ever walks on them, or where there's no furniture to break it up, then they look fine.  Otherwise, it just grates on me a bit.

I'm not really sure what Tigerbunny is doing with the points system.  But then again, I don't really know what I'm doing.  I picked up and reviewed the submitted fortress since I thought that's what I was supposed to do.  Looking back on the first post I don't actually see anything regarding a juror actually rating a fort.

[Tigerbunny]

quote:Originally posted by Jamini:
<STRONG>Tiger, are you planning to follow the arbitrary score system you posted when we embarked, or can us folks who deliberatly play to win get very mad at you for misleading us. I was under the impression that the jury would design the score card and determine the awards like "best 3-D model" and "Best Mosaic" while the raw points of a fortress would be counted just as they are. If that is not the case and it's a total decisive vote by the jury... well... I would have played my fortress significantly differently.
</STRONG>

Yeah, well, let me take a breath.
As you surely have noticed I was a bit short on words, that was because I was short on time too though. This have changed now and I plan to be quite more present here  

My initial idea was a two-roads-system, where we would have been able to check the mathematical side of the game, and evaluate a score by counting stuff to get an idea of the effectiveness.
The other road, the creativeness, the grade of the OCD, all the impressive ideas and dramaticly situations can't be counted in points, thats why we need a jury.
The result is a mixture, but no decicive vote of the jury  
The score is not written in stone, if this is the case, we would haven't need any jurors. If only the word of the jury counts, I would not have made me so much work, to develop a system that fits  
On the other hand I do now see where are some problems in the arbitrary score system which need to be changed, but I would like to stay with it mostly as it is.
Problems are: Architecture and "other", need a raise, otherwise all other categories are completely useless.
Military and Nobles need a bit lower points, while booze and food need a bit higher one.

It's really difficult to make this small table with some points work, because there aren't two not differing playstyles here.
Kagus did just spice the contest up, I pleased with this, so I can handle the mathematics.
I'm sitting here for four hours now calculating and looking at your savefiles, and I'm impressed. It will surely take more time, I do have most numbers now, but I'm not finished watching the forts.
So I will release a patched scoresystem next weekend, but it will not differ completely.

Some notices:
If dead goblins would count, Berent would be the sure winner, he has by far the most dead greens, and his deadscore is higher than his alive  
I presume some carps may be the reason for this
One of his dwarfs needs to has a dirty sense of humor, because he created this:
Delethulol Ngalaktishis, Polishedlast the abyssal spiral, a chyropras cage
the name fits.

Jamini got over 1,5 bilion points in Architecture, that 2,5 times higher than the arch.score of the second, Berent with about 600k.

Toaster built up an army without water.
2/3 of his military is dead, but hey he got about a dozen of acceptable soldiers. Additionally he found the answer  

Boksi is the only person with a big working pumping system.

General Valter is the second best in the category furniture
The Baron is pleased, he got a dozen of cats.

Somebody got more than 6000 units of prepared food

if I don't mention you, dont be angry, it juist means I did not completely inspected your fort until now.
And Abyss, would be cool if you send your fort in, its after deadline, but I think nobody does have a prob with this.

At the Jurors:
Would be cool if you check the fortresses too until friday/saturday.
It's better if more people calulate, especially the startlocations.
I would suggest a discussion on saturday, probably in IRC? Everybody okay with this?

By the way: If nothing changes, next weekend we will have 8 contestants,
Berent, Boksi, General Valter, Jamini, Sowelu, Toaster, Torak and Riemann, (probably Abyss).
This means we will have 4 Matches, or as suggested a second eliminationround.
What do you prefer? Map will be given this time, special tasks too.

[I3erent]

I am teh carp master, those were gobbos deaths lmao maybe 1 or 2 carp related if that!

The deaths crippled my ability to finish the fort but hey, losing is fun!

Look forward to being given a start location....

[ April 30, 2008: Message edited by: I3erent ]

[Boksi]

I'm already plott- er, planning.

I'm also playing the museum game and making a tileset. Multitasking FTW.

[Lemnx]

Still having issues with the file depot. I'll have to waive my point tally for this round.

[Jamini]

quote:Originally posted by Tigerbunny:
<STRONG>

My initial idea was a two-roads-system, where we would have been able to check the mathematical side of the game, and evaluate a score by counting stuff to get an idea of the effectiveness.
The other road, the creativeness, the grade of the OCD, all the impressive ideas and dramatically situations can't be counted in points, thats why we need a jury.
The result is a mixture, but no decisive vote of the jury    
The score is not written in stone, if this is the case, we would haven't need any jurors. If only the word of the jury counts, I would not have made me so much work, to develop a system that fits    
On the other hand I do now see where are some problems in the arbitrary score system which need to be changed, but I would like to stay with it mostly as it is.
Problems are: Architecture and "other", need a raise, otherwise all other categories are completely useless.
Military and Nobles need a bit lower points, while booze and food need a bit higher one.
</STRONG>

Since from this point on it's a head to head tourny, why not just have a number of categories out of which the judges determine who has the better setup? Points are awarded out of a maximum in multiple categories, the higher overall total wins. This system doesn't promote single focus forts (much like my own. After all, I wanted to make a point with it.    :p), instead forcing a player to create a well-rounded fortress.

My Example:

Scoring categories:

Architecture and Design - points are earned for good fortress organization and pleasing aesthetic view. 20p (Total)
Subcategories:
-Walls and floors - Smoothed walls are better than rough, engraved walls are better than smoothed.(More valuable and give happy thoughts. yes they look ugly if you don't toggle engravings.) 5p
-Layout: 15p - Efficiency, smoothness, cleanliness of design all play into this category. Knowing where wide corredors are needed, and when a small, space-saving corridor is enough. Bedrooms for dwarves near remote workstations, workshop/stockpile placement. And OCD Stone removed from the floor all play into this category.

Creativity - Whichever of the contestants has the better artistic creation (be it a mosaic, or a 3-D model) wins a point in this category. Participants are recommended to direct the jury towards any particular art pieces. (In the case of massive sculptures) - 5p

Economy - This pertains to basic needs of your dwarves. Clothing, food, beds, work supply, free time, health care system. 35p
-Food and Drink - Can you make it, can you make more in an emergency, current stockpiles. 5p
-Bedrooms - do your workers have appropriate rooms, especially for when economy is turned on? 5p
-Work supply - Are there many idlers? Can your dwarves make money in an economy? 5p
- Population - Significant losses and injuries can hurt a population. Is your population at full strength, or have you made mistakes that have cost dwarven lives? 5p

-Health Care - Can your wounded be taken care of in a timely manner? or at all? 5p

-Trade Goods - Number and ability to make trade goods for a caravan? 10p

Military Strength - I think this is fairly obvious. 30p
-Traps - Traps are integral to defending your fortress, no matter what some say. 10p
-Marksmen and Fortifications - How well is your enterance protected, and do you use ranged defenders? 10p
-Melee and Gaurds - Is your military outfitted with weapons, armor, and training? Do you have a Royal Guard or Fortress Guard? Is said Guard full? 10p

Nobility - Are your nobility happy? They don't all demand Royal Rooms (in fact, the Count and Countess get very upset if a lesser has a Royal bedroom, even if he or she has one themselves) 10p
-------
Total Scorecard:
Architecture 20p
*Walls 5p
*Design 15p

Creativity 5p

Economy 35p
*Food 5p
*Rooms 5p
*Work 5p
*Population 5p
*Health Care 5p
*Trade 10p

Military 30p
*Traps 10p
*Fortifications and Archers 10p
*Guards and Melee Squads 10p

Nobility 10p

Total possible points: 100


-----

Edit: Also, I prefer we get started with the matches. Enough with eliminations.

[ April 30, 2008: Message edited by: Jamini ]

[Lemnx]

I have a suggestion...

How about a really simple 10 point system? It would work better than anything out there, because of building 1000's of the same thing you just work towards the most impressive fort.

10 points Design (How the structures work with the dwarfs)
10 points Function (How well the structures work)
10 points Aesthetics (How well the structure looks)
10 points Originality (Unusual yet effective design goes towards this)

The average of each judge's score is taken. Whoever has the highest total score of all judge's averages combined wins.

[Sowelu]

Eh, I only got into this because it was largely objective, not judged.  I really like the objective scoring.

[I3erent]

A combination of both makes sense, due to the random nature of the game, other factors should be taken into account.  If you beat a guy by 10 points wtf is that?
Other factors should play into it thus the objective part.

[Kagus]

I think we should also take to using a pregenerated map with a specific fortress location.  That way, the location has less effect on the score than what the player manages to do with that location.  Early on we could pick maps with all the basic survival needs, and have it be a round of creative design and architecture, since there's less to worry about from the surrounding area.

From there you move up to harsher and harsher survival maps, where the player's ability to cope with adverse terrain and circumstances is shown.  The last round would probably have to have an objective, but I feel the map should be on a haunted glacier with a magma vent.  The vent just gives players the ability to choose their method of getting water, rather than having it forced on them.

In other words, in the competitive rounds, the only thing differing between fortresses should be the players.  The embark location, embark size, and starting civ should all be the same.  Starting items can still be chosen by the players.

[GeneralValter]

I second Kagus's motion. No two DF players have the exact same fortress style, so I think it would be interesting to see how different people interpret the same area.