|
Post by QwertyuiopThePie on Jun 3, 2015 20:49:37 GMT
DFterm is a wonderful thing. You can run Dwarf Fortress, and people can access it remotely via a web browser. You can only have one person actually controlling the game at a time, though. The alternative to this is "Succession Fort" play. Usually you agree on something like one season per person (give or take), before bundling the savegame folder off to the next person for them to continue, and perhaps you agree on general strategy (or leave to each person to work out what the previous player was working on), or just busk it. Not real-time play, but can be useful for learning new playing techniques ("oh, so that's how you set up an efficient minecart system") or introducing new dangers ("oh, so that's why all the dwarves are now being injured by minecarts")... Succession forts also make for beautiful stories, especially when people leave their levers unlabeled. I'm reminded of Boatmurdered's issues where one lever activated their siege defenses and the other flooded the meeting hall. In the words of someone whose name I forgot, "It is a fortress run not by a madman, but by a series of madmen, with each one having their own distinct kind of madness that clashes with the madness of the others". Or something like that.
|
|
Oviraptor
3000+
I smell like cabbage..
Did someone say space?
Posts: 3,693
|
Post by Oviraptor on Jun 3, 2015 21:43:52 GMT
DFterm is a wonderful thing. You can run Dwarf Fortress, and people can access it remotely via a web browser. You can only have one person actually controlling the game at a time, though. The alternative to this is "Succession Fort" play. Usually you agree on something like one season per person (give or take), before bundling the savegame folder off to the next person for them to continue, and perhaps you agree on general strategy (or leave to each person to work out what the previous player was working on), or just busk it. Not real-time play, but can be useful for learning new playing techniques ("oh, so that's how you set up an efficient minecart system") or introducing new dangers ("oh, so that's why all the dwarves are now being injured by minecarts")... Actually I'd love to do a succession fort. We'd just get a few people and pass it around in a circle and see what happens.
|
|
panicberry
7500+
Phantom of the Opera
God save the Berry!
Posts: 8,150
|
Post by panicberry on Jun 3, 2015 21:48:03 GMT
Anyone up for a succession game of CK II?
|
|
|
Post by QwertyuiopThePie on Jun 4, 2015 0:24:25 GMT
The alternative to this is "Succession Fort" play. Usually you agree on something like one season per person (give or take), before bundling the savegame folder off to the next person for them to continue, and perhaps you agree on general strategy (or leave to each person to work out what the previous player was working on), or just busk it. Not real-time play, but can be useful for learning new playing techniques ("oh, so that's how you set up an efficient minecart system") or introducing new dangers ("oh, so that's why all the dwarves are now being injured by minecarts")... Actually I'd love to do a succession fort. We'd just get a few people and pass it around in a circle and see what happens. I'd be up for one. Tried one on the last forum and someone flooded the map. How does one in-game year or one real-life week, whichever comes first, sound? Also, should it be an easier, more accessible game (For instance, a woodland full of bunnies), or a more difficult one (like a haunted permafrost where fallen arms come back to life)?
|
|
Breadknife
1500+
One confusion tends to be its direct inspiration.
Posts: 1,888
|
Post by Breadknife on Jun 4, 2015 1:17:56 GMT
I haven't really kept up with how they do it over on the bay12games forums (I assume you, as Dorfers, have at least lurked on the forums, like I currently am but mostly in the non-game and General segment anyhow), but IIRC that seemed to be the second round of collaborative questioning (after "which worldgen parameters shall we use?", the player who generates the map then presenting a few visuals of the choice embark locations to the others, or asks what Site Finder parameters to use). I tend to personally avoid biomes that feature the nastier types of syndrome-rain, or might suffer from the nasty fogs. I quite like either fairly flat or very bumpy (thought it is ages since I've successfully found a pleasing and winding river canyon, which is what I'd really want if that's the direction we're going). Decent soil layers are nice (easier for farming). I don't tend to take notice of neighbouring civilisations (or things like Dark Towers) but it is a bit troublesome if you get a siege of undead before we've actually gotten ourselves properly prepared. But part of the fun could be in the dealing with all these things. As well as all the other dangers (if we don't turn off invasions, temperature effects, etc, etc, in our respective INI files, by common consent). Remember: "Losing is fun!" As long as, in a succession fort, it's not lost during your turn.
|
|
|
Post by QwertyuiopThePie on Jun 4, 2015 3:37:19 GMT
The fun comes regardless of whether you have the really deadly biomes, but since most of the people here aren't exactly experts at DF (I know I'm not!), I think it'd be fair to go for a relatively easygoing fortress, at least with trees and no aquifer. Just the basics. Maybe somewhere near a goblin civ?
|
|
Breadknife
1500+
One confusion tends to be its direct inspiration.
Posts: 1,888
|
Post by Breadknife on Jun 4, 2015 5:22:33 GMT
First step... ...create a world. (I could do that, but I'd prefer you took the lead. Also it'd mean shuffling files from the computer I run DF on over to this one that has a network link, and then working out if I've got an appropriate file-sharing thing... if you start, I could follow your lead. Or work out if I still have a valid login to dffd.bay12games.com while you're doing this.) Option 1: Create New World! (choosing "Pocket/Smaller/Small/Medium/Large" for World Size, and a similar number of options for half a dozen other settings. Option 2: Design New World with Advanced Parameters (choosing directly from one of the default options of [Large, Medium, Small, Smaller, Pocket]x[Island, Region], or taking one of these parameter sets and fiddling with it to create something new... e.g. high vulcanism, less cavern layers, better metallicity, more/less erosion). The simplest thing might be to "Design New World with..." using the "Large Region" option but with no fine-tuning (unless you really think you ought) to generate the world. On completion of Worldgen, choose to export the map/etc (before formerly accepting the WorldGen result, but of course do accept it) and run the Compress Bitmaps batch-file so that you can make at least the "regionX-<foo>-world_map.png" available to everyone who might be interested, if not all the text outputs as well. Maybe also go into "Start Playing", select to start a Fortress (assuming you don't want an Adventurer succession game) and plug at least "Aquifer: No" into the Site Finder (if that's your preference), but ideally some other definite things (River: Yes/No; Savagery; Flux/Metal/Soil/Clay choices; whatever you think might work) and find a good (or partial match) and take note of its location (e.g. screenshot at the right time to get the "X" currently flashed-on on the World/Region-scale maps, so you can find the right Local map and manually position the area again) and any details you think relevant from the various tabbings (biome are (for each relevent F-key) and layer information, neighbours, and probably what the relative elevation and cliff indicator sub-screens show)... either with screenshots or by writing a brief description). Don't (e)mbark! Do the above a few times (different Site-Finder settings, and/or trying to zero in on alternate "matched desirables" locations for the original Finder settings), and present maybe half a dozen choices (on a standard Large Region, all but the most picky of Desirables will generally find multiple possible embarks) to those of us who want to play. Make a copy of the save\regionX folder, at some point, so that you even make test-embarks (on the copy) if someone is curious about "...exactly how canyonesque is the canyon?", or similar. But personally I'd normally like to be surprised. Then either we argue about what to do (and you get to Embark based on our arguments) or the nominated next person in the ring makes their decision upon the transferred file (I just tried a test, and 60Mb save-directory becomes 55Mb when zipped up, which even my bad connection to the outside world should be able to handle... it'll be smaller for non-Large Region saves and larger as the seasons go by and more changes are made to the saved world), based on/despite the open discussion. Either way, I suggest using the "Plan Carefully" approach, but it's up to the person who Embarks. Whichever, they'll play for a season (say), make some kind of report about progress and aspirations (e.g. "Left room for Trade Depot inside the walled enclosure, but that still needs to be built before the first traders arrive in Autumn, and the bridge access isn't completed yet so I haven't blocked the non-bridge route") and then make sure the save is made available to at least the next nominated person, but perhaps even everyone else (if they want a sneak-peak). Also, I suggest everyone involved makes sure they have [AUTOSAVE:SEASONAL], [AUTOBACKUP:YES] and [AUTOSAVE_PAUSE] in the d_init.txt file, and you (or whoever starts the game) also activates the [INITIAL_SAVE:YES] option if necessary. Even if you don't usually do this (or generally make it save-scum compatible), it makes for a sharper cut-off. (There may be things I've not thought about. All the above is from my own, solo, playing experience. Regular bay12 succession players may well have more comprehensive/compact guidelines based on hard-learnt experiences. Feel free to suggest corrections to the procedure.) Actually, before all that...Zeroeth step: As this is a (generic) "Organisation Thread", do what I have failed to do many times, over the last few days (and done it wrong, when I have!), and let us stop spamming this thread with something that might not interest more than a handful of us. Create us a new thread specifically for the Succession game (we should be able to fit both sign-up and, once it starts, playing comments... it probably won't need splitting into further threads) and leave in here a link to it (and then any future separated-threads for future games, if we haven't transitioned to forums new by that point. Ok?
|
|
|
Post by QwertyuiopThePie on Jun 4, 2015 5:48:57 GMT
Zeroeth step: As this is a (generic) "Organisation Thread", do what I have failed to do many times, over the last few days (and done it wrong, when I have!), and let us stop spamming this thread with something that might not interest more than a handful of us. Create us a new thread specifically for the Succession game (we should be able to fit both sign-up and, once it starts, playing comments... it probably won't need splitting into further threads) and leave in here a link to it (and then any future separated-threads for future games, if we haven't transitioned to forums new by that point. Ok? It has been done: thebatcavern.freeforums.net/thread/848/dwarf-fortress-succession-gameI'll generate the world after we know who'll join in.
|
|