Print

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

[Warlord255]

A simple suggestion. Some grand overtures have been made towards adding "primitive" or nomadic civilizations which would wander the world map and be cityless. However, this could require a large re-working of entities; instead, I offer this suggestion,  new "city types".

The "Nomad" city-type would, rather than establish large cities, have the civ create small "shrines" that act as stand-in cities for the purposes of influence area and the civilization's survival. Shrines could include burial grounds, worshipping places (petroglyphs?), or just water sources/other terrain features. (Imagine a wandering tribal society of magma-drinkers.) The civ would then have its collective population move in one large mass across the worldmap, much as migrants and eventually armies are intended to do. They would stay there for a brief time, then depart for the next one, continuing their circuit.

This provides some interest for Adventure mode (encountering a tribe of wandering _____) and for Fortress mode (a tribe of wandering _____ passes through much like a trade caravan, but may attack/declare war on you, especially if you are inhabiting a shrine)


Secondly, the Conquerer city type. It would function much like the Nomad city type, with notable differences; rather than constructing shrines, they would simply make a beeline for the nearest civilized settlement and try to conquer it. If they failed, they would leave and repopulate until they could attack a different settlement. Once they conquered one, they would increase their numbers and attack the next nearest city, and so on and so forth. When they hit their population cap, however, they simply abandon their earliest/farthest-from-civilization settlements and bring the new numbers to the frontlines. Conquerers with a massive population cap could be world-threatening terrors, while those with a lower cap could be barbaric nuisances like _____men.

This would be the perfect way to add threats like marauding armies of Orcs, clockwork legions, Lovecraftian horrors or the living dead, and would be a great way to provide Enemy Fodder for civilized races to ally against during worldgen, and for adventurers to fight when the dragon/ogre supply runs short.

Thoughts?

[Tellemurius]

this is a not bad idea, i dunno how u will make them travel all over.

[Capntastic]

Having city 'types' that try to do one thing- effectively 'gameplay modes' doesn't seem to mesh with the simulationist, realistic way the game works.

Certainly having these sorts of cities would be cool, but they'd need to arise from realistic cause and effect- having it be a sort of gameplay mode is sort of constricting and not that open ended.

[Warlord255]

Having city 'types' that try to do one thing- effectively 'gameplay modes' doesn't seem to mesh with the simulationist, realistic way the game works.

Certainly having these sorts of cities would be cool, but they'd need to arise from realistic cause and effect- having it be a sort of gameplay mode is sort of constricting and not that open ended.

Well, to be fair, this is applied more to general race/species themes as they exist in the game right now; as it stands for modification, there's little to be done other than make Goblin/Human clones.

That said, at some point it would be nice if such behavior types were capable of changing; a Dwarven civ devolving into barbarity, Elves becoming nomadic, or conquering Orcs settling down.

[Foa]

I keep on saying yes, damn you a good Lord 225.

And may our Forts follow along the line of Nomadic Conquerors, My Dwarves vs Everyone, THERE CAN ONLY BE ONE!!!

[Felblood]

I can see adding these types of behaviors to the existing civs, or adding new races to embody these traits, as an interesting sort of larval form for the Army Arc.

All these types of behaviors will have to exist in fortress time, before the Army and Caravan Arcs are truly complete, but I don't see any reason that they would have to wait for any other specific aspect of those arcs to be implemented. In this long-term alpha sort of development, it can be helpful to pick out portions of the game that can be installed, and then built upon in later releases. --and the sooner the marauding dead arrive at my doorstep the better.

Not knowing exactly how Toady's code is structured, we can't really make definitive statements on how easy this would be to do, or on what order the changes would be best made in, but this might make for a nice taste of things to come, if it could be implemented in a way that it wouldn't have to be completely replaced later.

So long as we're being slightly hypothetical: If you had to vote whether we get to dispatch our own armies, or get new kinds of invading armies, which would you choose?

[Mel_Vixen]

I would choose sending out armys.

The Nomads and Conquerers (sounded at first like bad pun) are interresting but i would chart that more under Civ-behavior then City types.

What i would like to see would be a opening of the Buildingtypes of civs to the community. I mean not workshops i mean only the Buildings like the Inn, Goblintowers etc.   

[Warlord255]

I would choose sending out armys.

The Nomads and Conquerers (sounded at first like bad pun) are interresting but i would chart that more under Civ-behavior then City types.

What i would like to see would be a opening of the Buildingtypes of civs to the community. I mean not workshops i mean only the Buildings like the Inn, Goblintowers etc.   

I would also choose sending out armies hands-down.

One is a more refined, lethal version of the sieges we know and love.

The other is POTENTIAL FOR WORLD DOMINATION.

That said, I only proposed the city-types as behavior modifiers to serve as a placeholder; ideally, such traits would be independant, but right now it's a bit much to conjure.

[Granite26]

I like the nomad civs, but the barbarian horde civ... just doesn't add up for me.  Can't elucidate why though...

[Silverionmox]

The normal dynamic is a coexistence of nomadic and settled peoples. The nomads serve as traders, guards, soldiers, immigrants, etc. for the city peoples. They both expand and grow richer, until the cities overexpand and become vulnerable due to some circumstance. The nomads, having a combination of excellent civilized weaponry ánd mobility are tempted to take over the civ. If they succeed, they either superimpose their dynasty and some customs/laws on the population, or they try to rule it like a nomad tribe, which doesn't work, and everything goes to hell in a handbasket.

[Neonivek]

For the most part being Nomadic is a HUGE limiter to how much resources you can carry with you.

Some of the most dangerous Nomads in history interestingly enough were Shepperds / Animal Herders. (The Mongols for example)

Nomadic existance ends when they are able to become sedentary which happens when they find a bountiful source of food.

One style of Nomad (though it hardly counts) is the use of Retreats... which is that they have two homes (a Summer and Winter) which they migrate to on a seasonal basis.

In fact it drives me NUTS that Elves have "Retreats" but basically use it as a city... It contradicts my definition of what a retreat is.

[Silverionmox]

Nomads aren't nomadic out of necessity, but out of practicality and choice. The Mongols seriously considered turning China into a grassland after they conquered it.

[Neonivek]

Nomads aren't nomadic out of necessity, but out of practicality and choice. The Mongols seriously considered turning China into a grassland after they conquered it.

Necessity and Practicality have very little seperation.

All I was saying is Nomads becoming huge Trading powers is almost silly given that they tend to carry almost exclusively what they need.

They only don't carry what they need when they become sedentary

[Silverionmox]

Yes, but they do so typically as immigrants into a nearby city or village. An entire tribe finding a nice spot and settling down is AFAIK unheard of. At the very least because they haven't got a clue about farming. In the vast, empty DF environment that would mean there are no nomad groups left in year 2 anyway.

Their role in trade is bridging difficult terrain. You can fit quite a lot on a camel or a mule. There are plenty of nomadic peoples who lugged along tea kettles, rugs and lots of jewelry in history.

[bjlong]

There were a lot of nomadic groups that would settle in a place for a little time and then move on. These were much more likely to establish trade routes than a lot of other civilizations. (See: the massive Native American trading networks over the continental US, which collapsed and reformed because of political tensions. Europeans came during a collapse.)

Nomadic and semi-nomadic groups need to be handled in general, especially groups that set up and patrol their own borders.