Print

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

[clockout1]

I had another idea that got buried back in the earlier pages in this thread, but I'll restate it.

Simply put, I think we should divide up the map and decide who will embark where before we start playing. This would prevent large clusters of fortresses and areas completely devoid of life, or if we wanted something like that (several fortresses in close proximity) we could plan for it ahead of time. We might also avoid potential disputes over spots that two people had both planned to embark on. After typing and reviewing this, these both seem fairly unlikely, but hey, it never hurts to have a plan.

Thoughts?

[Babylon]

I had another idea that got buried back in the earlier pages in this thread, but I'll restate it.

Simply put, I think we should divide up the map and decide who will embark where before we start playing. This would prevent large clusters of fortresses and areas completely devoid of life, or if we wanted something like that (several fortresses in close proximity) we could plan for it ahead of time. We might also avoid potential disputes over spots that two people had both planned to embark on. After typing and reviewing this, these both seem fairly unlikely, but hey, it never hurts to have a plan.

Thoughts?

I think clusters of fortresses and areas devoid of life is how a world tends to work, there is usually some wilderness and more civilized areas. 

As far as potential disputes, That seems like one of the things that goes along with having a later fortress, you get less choice as to where to embark.  I am curious about reclaiming though, is reclaiming another player's fortress something that would be allowed?

[DS]

I had another idea that got buried back in the earlier pages in this thread, but I'll restate it.

Simply put, I think we should divide up the map and decide who will embark where before we start playing. This would prevent large clusters of fortresses and areas completely devoid of life, or if we wanted something like that (several fortresses in close proximity) we could plan for it ahead of time. We might also avoid potential disputes over spots that two people had both planned to embark on. After typing and reviewing this, these both seem fairly unlikely, but hey, it never hurts to have a plan.

Thoughts?

I don't think there's an inherent problem with having more fortresses in a local area. The issue about two people desiring the same embark site seems more and more unlikely the larger the world is. If there is a contention over anything, it's likely to be volcanos, so we should just try to have as many of those as possible.

Otherwise, since the turn order will probably be first come first serve (is there any other way to do it?), people simply shouldn't plan too far ahead, lest someone else take the embark site they planned for. I suppose people could call dibs on embark sites, so long as they show exactly what spot they want.

[clockout1]

As far as potential disputes, That seems like one of the things that goes along with having a later fortress, you get less choice as to where to embark.  I am curious about reclaiming though, is reclaiming another player's fortress something that would be allowed?

I don't think so, but I can't really articulate why (my brain is asleep today).

[TomIrony]

As far as potential disputes, That seems like one of the things that goes along with having a later fortress, you get less choice as to where to embark.  I am curious about reclaiming though, is reclaiming another player's fortress something that would be allowed?

That could simply be left up to the author of the fortress. After uploading a fortress, when posting information on it, we could include whether or not we would allow reclaims. Some people might have built very specific constructions they don't want to see tampered, while others simply would not care.

[DS]

As far as potential disputes, That seems like one of the things that goes along with having a later fortress, you get less choice as to where to embark.  I am curious about reclaiming though, is reclaiming another player's fortress something that would be allowed?

I don't think so, but I can't really articulate why (my brain is asleep today).

I think, at least at first, reclaiming forts should be discouraged so that we have as many as possible to start out with. Then, attempting to reclaim particularly "historical" fortresses (these will likely emerge as the thread evolves) can be planned as a group.

That could simply be left up to the author of the fortress. After uploading a fortress, when posting information on it, we could include whether or not we would allow reclaims. Some people might have built very specific constructions they don't want to see tampered, while others simply would not care.

Or this, yeah.

[Babylon]

As far as potential disputes, That seems like one of the things that goes along with having a later fortress, you get less choice as to where to embark.  I am curious about reclaiming though, is reclaiming another player's fortress something that would be allowed?

That could simply be left up to the author of the fortress. After uploading a fortress, when posting information on it, we could include whether or not we would allow reclaims. Some people might have built very specific constructions they don't want to see tampered, while others simply would not care.

I like this approach.

[clockout1]

As far as potential disputes, That seems like one of the things that goes along with having a later fortress, you get less choice as to where to embark.  I am curious about reclaiming though, is reclaiming another player's fortress something that would be allowed?

That could simply be left up to the author of the fortress. After uploading a fortress, when posting information on it, we could include whether or not we would allow reclaims. Some people might have built very specific constructions they don't want to see tampered, while others simply would not care.

I like this approach.

Third-ed.

[Eric Blank]

Eric, those maps look fantastic. I really like the fact that there are a handful of secluded mountain valleys and lakes that are inaccessible in travel mode, as well as narrow strips of land between mountains or bodies of water. There are many possibilities for garrison-type fortresses, which intentionally block fast travel through narrow passes, as well as for deep fortresses that connect these mountain valleys to the mainland. If I could make one request however, there seems to be an abundance of mountain lakes (as opposed to non-lake valleys) - what are the chances we could get a few tiny alpine meadows?

As far as the mountain valleys go, I really can't control the amount of lakes that occupy them, because they are generated almost exclusively by DF world gen, through water erosion. However, using the just embark/embark anywhere utility, you could very conveniently start a fortress in the beautiful cliff faces adjacent to these lakes

So no idea really. I always get lakes when this occurs from a normal world-gen, and I actually rather like it. Especially since sometimes they'll have islands.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Maybe remove the aquifer tags from certain soils, leave it in others? That way aquifer amounts will be reduced, but there will still be some for those who want them.

That sounds like a great solution.

I'll vouch for this!

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

1. A single turn is 10 days.
  a) If you don't check in and download the save within 2 days of the beginning of your turn, or you fail to upload a save within 2 days of the end of your turn, you are skipped.
  b) In the event that you are skipped, but you still report for duty within 4 days of the deadline (either the beginning or end of turn), you are allowed to take your turn after the next active player in line.
2. Avoid killing historical goblin civ leaders - killing of non-goblin civ leaders is banned completely.
3. RAW tampering and use of 3rd party utilities is forbidden, except when explicitly allowed by the community.
4. Upon finishing your turn, you're encouraged to write a blurb about your fort.

And these rules.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

I had another idea that got buried back in the earlier pages in this thread, but I'll restate it.

Simply put, I think we should divide up the map and decide who will embark where before we start playing. This would prevent large clusters of fortresses and areas completely devoid of life, or if we wanted something like that (several fortresses in close proximity) we could plan for it ahead of time. We might also avoid potential disputes over spots that two people had both planned to embark on. After typing and reviewing this, these both seem fairly unlikely, but hey, it never hurts to have a plan.

Thoughts?

I think clusters of fortresses and areas devoid of life is how a world tends to work, there is usually some wilderness and more civilized areas. 

As far as potential disputes, That seems like one of the things that goes along with having a later fortress, you get less choice as to where to embark.  I am curious about reclaiming though, is reclaiming another player's fortress something that would be allowed?

As for this, I don't think action is really necessary. Sure you'll have less choice of where to embark, but the percentage of the total surface of the world a fortress takes up is unfathomably tiny. There's room, and it's not like it's really possible to choose a site just looking at the region. There's room.
Neighborly fortresses sounds great, but if there's one request I'd like to make, it's that the bigger island in the inland sea connected by the canal is left untouched. I would like to see it turned into a grand metropolis by numerous embarks, in a sort of "season finale" deal.

I fourth the suggested reclaim policy!

[Gizogin]

I have a few questions about this project:
(Note that I skipped to the end of the thread around page 6)
1) Are we waiting for the next release?
2) What mods, if any, will we use?  I'm in favor of things that improve adventurer mode, specifically Wanderer's Friend.  I like display cases as well.
3) Once we've actually created the world and started the first person's turn, will we continue in this thread, or move to a new one?
4) On that note, is there an actual turn list anywhere?

[Babylon]

As for this, I don't think action is really necessary. Sure you'll have less choice of where to embark, but the percentage of the total surface of the world a fortress takes up is unfathomably tiny. There's room, and it's not like it's really possible to choose a site just looking at the region. There's room.
Neighborly fortresses sounds great, but if there's one request I'd like to make, it's that the bigger island in the inland sea connected by the canal is left untouched. I would like to see it turned into a grand metropolis by numerous embarks, in a sort of "season finale" deal.

Are you requesting that the island be left untouched or that it have numerous embarks on it?  Or did you  want a sort of cutoff date before which nobody embarks there and after which everyone does?

[Eric Blank]

The last option. Just thought it would be exceptionally interesting to have a massive city like Goldenhold.

also;

I have a few questions about this project:
(Note that I skipped to the end of the thread around page 6)
1) Are we waiting for the next release?
2) What mods, if any, will we use?  I'm in favor of things that improve adventurer mode, specifically Wanderer's Friend.  I like display cases as well.
3) Once we've actually created the world and started the first person's turn, will we continue in this thread, or move to a new one?
4) On that note, is there an actual turn list anywhere?

1) yep.
2) Haven't decided. No consensus, lot of different opinions.
3)Move to a new one before hand. This thread is for setting this whole thing up. And it's taking a lot, with it being pretty much the first of it's kind.
4) Not yet, but I actually think I'll just go back through the thread and set up the turn list from who declared they wanted a turn in order of appearance.


 I think we can be done with the mineral scarcity poll tonight.

[Spish]

Judging by the increased emphasis on historical figures migrating to and from your fortress in the next release, I think there's a good chance the diplomat curse has been fixed.

Mods are a bit iffy, seeing as any mod we'd be using would be tuned for the current release. The Wanderer's mod adds a ton of interactions that might already be included in the next release. Feel free to debate, though.
I say enable civ-oriented goblin and kobold adventurers right from the start, because why not? Maybe even subterranean outsiders?

Think you could upload a save of that world of yours? (whenever you get around to doing a third prototype, with more civs and a later end date) I want to test out some things for myself.

[Eric Blank]

Judging by the increased emphasis on historical figures migrating to and from your fortress in the next release, I think there's a good chance the diplomat curse has been fixed.

Mods are a bit iffy, seeing as any mod we'd be using would be tuned for the current release, not the upcoming one. Feel free to suggest, though.

Think you could upload a save of that world of yours? (whenever you get around to doing a third prototype, with more civs and a later end date) I want to test out some things for myself.

Working on the third prototype right now. Adjusted the landscape and rainfall/drainage maps, added more little islands out in the sea, and set erosion cycles to 0 to prevent your hills from getting weathered down to nothing. I'll post the new prototype when I've genned and uploaed it, though.

Keep in mind that I have a lot of my own mods installed and didn't bother to change that for testing purposes (not exactly important for landscape and biome testing)
If it confuses the crap out of you, check out the thread linked in my signature for info on the two larger mods.

Here is the uploaded save: http://dffd.wimbli.com/file.php?id=5342

Use it wisely...

[starshard0]

Do we have a list of the people who are in on the idea so far? Or are we waiting to open a thread in the community forum?