Bay 12 Games Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Topics - FearfulJesuit

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 16
1
(New thread, after the old one fell prey to the board's poll-making system being nigh-useless...)

So I've been EU4-binging somewhat recently, but the problem with long video game sessions is that they feel like wasted time. To remedy this, I'm thinking of doing a Let's Play for EU4. I'm nowhere near guru-status, but I suspect it'll be more fun that way--mistakes are entertaining.

I'd like to incorporate input from those watching, so I'm putting a poll up. I've got all the DLC except for Third Rome and Mare Nostrum, but maybe I'll get them before starting the game? Paradox games are actually entirely reasonable at Russian prices.

We'll be playing without mods, and possibly with Ironman (which would be new for me). Instead of first-past-the-post we'll be using the random ballot method for voting in polls: a number between 1 and (# of votes) will be picked randomly, and the decision taken will correspond to which option that corresponds to in the polling results. E.g. if there are six options, 25% of 12 votes go for option 1, and the machine draws a 1, 2 or 3, then option 1 gets selected (because 1, 2 and 3 are the first quarter of votes). This means that an option nobody wants can't be selected, an option everybody wants will always be selected, but polls with split votes may have an RNG effect. We'll use the voting system, at least, to select the starting country and idea groups.

We'll start in 1444, as usual, and go to 1821. I'm hoping to post around twice a week, with each turn running about 20-30 years. Alternatively I might post once per monarch.

On the basis of my own personal preferences and general balancing, the following ten nations will be options. You may vote for three, and the deadline is whenever I feel like closing the case on Friday evening Moscow time. I've decided against Ming or Ottomans, since they're OP at start and I'd like a bit of a challenge; so this list mostly comprises regional powers who nevertheless aren't completely hegemonic in their area.

Portugal
Denmark
Lithuania
Korea
Mamluks
Burgundy
Tunis
Muscovy
Ethiopia
Hungary

Pick three, and we'll choose on, probably, Friday evening Moscow time.

2
General Discussion / Soylent- DIY recipes?
« on: June 26, 2016, 03:34:18 pm »
I'm sure there's a thread on this somewhere, but it's probably at least a year old, so fukkit. I'm looking into getting into DIY Soylent when I get back on campus- ordering the brand-name stuff is more expensive than most college student diets anyways, and the company actually has an app and discussion forums for people who are designing their own versions. There are some reasonably popular recipes such as People Chow. You can make some pretty healthy and very cheap Soylent setups, and concerns about nutrition aside...can it really be worse than what your average undergrad eats? I'm looking into creating a nice, heavy "Baltic Soylent" with buckwheat and a bit of rye flour as the protein base, with ground flaxseed for fat.

[EDIT: Seems it was last posted in last August. That's long enough.]

3
DF Suggestions / Designations for tearing up dead roots and tree saplings
« on: December 04, 2015, 08:50:11 am »
One of the problems with trying to farm outdoors is that you can't build a field over any tile but grass or bare dirt. For stone there's the (admittedly somewhat involved) process of muddying the tile, and trees can be cut down. However, if there's a tree sapling or a dead shrub, you can't do anything- live saplings have to grow into trees before they can be dealt with, and there's no solution for dead shrubs or saplings.

I think a good solution would be to add a designation that instructs dwarves (probably just any idle ones) to pull up any dead shrubs or saplings, leaving the dirt underneath. It'd be easy (at least from a UI standpoint- I can't speak to the code), it solves a somewhat obnoxious problem, and it's certainly something real farmers have done since the dawn of farming.

4
Other Games / Mini Metro- Ticket to Ride meets Sim City?
« on: November 28, 2015, 02:36:54 pm »
So I was closing down Steam this morning when a game called "Mini Metro" appeared in the sales queue. I looked at it and was intrigued, and after a couple of LP's on Youtube, I knew I had to buy it; it's downloading now.

Basically, it takes a real-world city- London, St. P, New York, Paris, São Paulo- and reduces it to a flat map with the water features. It'll then place a couple of different subway stations, indicated by different shapes- circles, triangles, squares- in the center of the city, and you have to connect them with lines. At each station, passengers will begin to queue, represented by small versions of the shape of station they want to go to. The game will give you new stations to connect as time goes on, and you can add extra lines and trains.

There's a catch, though- you can't let any station fill up too much. The standard station can hold six passengers in line before it becomes a time bomb, and stations can occasionally be upgraded to hold more passengers. When a station is over capacity, a timer starts ticking, which will then stop and reverse if a train arrives to load the excess passengers onto. If that timer reaches 0- represented by a circle around the station- you lose the game. So you really have to be good with system design, because trains can only go so fast, and hold only so many passengers. You can sometimes move trains and wagons to another line to relieve a station that's about to go kablooie, but that's a stopgap at best, and can't be relied on too much.

Also, I gotta plug the UI- it's absolutely gorgeous. It's based on the London Tube map, and has a very elegant, simple, intuitive feel- GUIs by Ikea.

Will have more to say once I've played some...

5
Play With Your Buddies / Bay 12 Civ III Succession Game (NP: Persia, 150 AD)
« on: September 17, 2015, 07:04:20 am »
So, Helgoland and I've been talking, and we'd like to see a succession game for Civ III Complete on the forums. I don't know if anyone else plays Civ III, but it's a classic, and many succession games have been played on other forums- the turn-based format makes it a good fit.

We've decided on playing at Monarch level, since it's a reasonably challenging level that isn't going to completely fuck us over (Monarch to Emperor, the next hardest level, is known among Civ players as "the Great Leap" for a reason), and on a Large or Huge map since it'll make for a nice long game. Everything else is still up in the air at this point. I'm going to set up a poll that allows you to pick up to three civilizations, and run it for a week. After that week's up, I'll run a second poll on the top vote-getters for three days, and we'll be off!

Turn List:

1. FearfulJesuit
2. Helgoland

In your posts below, please indicate if you'd like to play a turn, and choose whether you'd prefer an Archipelago, Continents or Pangaea map. For the sake of simplicity, we'll play with a low level of barbarians (Roaming), and leave climate up to the RNG so that we don't have to bicker about it.

If you've never played Civ III before, we're working with the Complete edition on Steam. Since Civ III came out more than ten years ago, it's pretty cheap- $5 on Steam right now- and it's got great replay value, so I highly recommend it. It's not too difficult to play, but I suggest you look up a few articles on worker management and acquaint yourself with the mechanics of the game (Civ IV or V players will obviously find it pretty familiar). I would really recommend looking at Ision's reviews of the individual civilizations before you vote above- although any civilization can make for an interesting game, there are better civs and worse civs.

6
Other Games / Duolingo
« on: March 21, 2015, 03:55:13 pm »
I'm starting this thread in the Other Games forum because, even though Duolingo isn't a game per se, it acts enough like a game and has a game-like community, so I think it belongs here.

For those of you (all three of you, most likely- it's gotten a lot of coverage) who aren't familiar with it, Duolingo (also available on app) is a website that teaches you foreign languages in a game-like manner, with lives, scores, and ability to compete against acquaintances. It's free- their business model is based on having people translate articles, then selling those articles to websites- and currently has nine languages available for English speakers: Spanish, French, German, Italian, Portuguese, Dutch, Swedish, Danish and Irish. A tenth, Turkish, is coming out on Monday, and there are a few others in the works. Each course teaches you about 2000 to 3000 words and most of the major grammar, mostly by having you translate sentences. It's pretty good for reading and writing; if you want to be able to speak or listen to the language well you're going to need outside sources, though.

I'm currently making my way through the Portuguese (for review- my Portuguese is pretty good, but increasingly rusty) and German trees. I've found that Duolingo doesn't test vocab retention as well as I would like, so I also have Anki decks for both of these, which has cut down on review rage immensely. (I tried getting through the German tree once before and just could not keep the vocab in after a certain point. We'll see how it goes this time.) I'm level 11 in Portuguese and 3 in German, but my German is growing by leaps and bounds because I've done much of it before.

A word to the wise: make sure you review lessons. There's nothing more infuriating than wanting to work ahead on new lessons, but having a tree full of barely-reviewed lessons. Pacing is key; it's very common for people to get through about a third of the tree, find they have to review everything they've done, and ragequit. Again, I find an outside review system (Anki is the best I've found) for vocab makes the process less painful and more productive.

So, uh, anyways, talk about Duolingo...

7
General Discussion / The Listen To An Album Thread
« on: March 13, 2015, 05:17:13 pm »
I've realized recently that I just don't listen to enough decent albums and end up listening to songs alone. I intend to remedy this, so I'm starting this thread.

The basic idea is that, starting with me, everyone posts their favorite album, with a YouTube link if there is one. (Please try and choose albums that are fairly accessible.) The next poster listens to this album and posts a review of the one before. This isn't going to go in much of an organized fashion because of how long it takes to listen to an album, but it'll be fun.

I'll start. Here's Skambankt's Eliksir, which is probably my favorite of their albums. They're a Norwegian hard rock band; this album is about 45 minutes long.

8
Roll To Dodge / RTD: American Politics Edition- NP: 1948
« on: March 11, 2015, 01:13:07 pm »
1948 Deadline: 1:00 AM GMT, Sunday, March 15, 2015.

A brief conversation in the American Politics thread over in GD has brought me to the conclusion that trying to simulate American elections using an RTD game could be a lot of fun.

We're going to start the game in 1948, with Truman vs. Dewey vs. Thurmond. Initially, I'll try and keep us within the bounds of actual history, but because of the butterfly effect and player input, we'll gradually get further and further away from it, and I'll have to do more storytelling. White House and Senate elections will both be simulated. I'll have to come up with another system for the House, though.

Here's how the presidential elections, at least, are going to work. Let's suppose we're still close enough to actual history that we can use a real election as a baseline- say, 1960. You can cast a vote for Kennedy or Nixon. You vote Nixon.

Back in my secret spreadsheet, I'll have randomly assigned you a state. (If we have less than fifty players, which is probable, I'll use the players' vote margins to weight randomly selected votes from invisible players for other states. Let's suppose, for example, that there were only twenty people who casted votes, but 12 voted Kennedy and 8 voted Nixon. This means that I'll use a weighted random number generator to cast "votes" for the other thirty states, where each "invisible" player had a 60% chance of casting a Kennedy vote and a 40% chance of casting a Nixon vote.)

Now that we have player votes, or simulated player votes, for all fifty states, I'll use the roll to dodge system with a six-sided die to create elections that deviate from the baseline. This works as follows:

Roll a 1: Your campaign backfired spectacularly. An extra 2% of voters voted for your opponent.
Roll a 2: Nothing happens; historical margins are used.
Roll a 3: Partial success. 1% of voters switch to your candidate.
Roll a 4: Success. 2% of voters switch to your candidate.
Roll a 5: Outstanding success. 4% of voters switch to your candidate.
Roll a 6: Backfiring success...7% of voters switch to your candidate, but there is an additional 10% probability that voter fraud is uncovered and the ballots are thrown out. (I know it never happens in real life that a state's ballots get thrown out this way, but it makes for a better game.)

If an incumbent president rolls 6's for himself in more than a quarter of states, Watergate happens.

I have a midterm right now. When I get back, I'll outline additional procedures for the House and Senate, and how I'm going to do voting margins for imaginary match-ups later in the game, like, say, Rockefeller vs. Wallace, or an incumbent Reagan in 1980.

You can start signing up now by posting below. The deadline for the 1948 election is going to be on Saturday night or Sunday morning, depending on where you live. You can vote Thurmond, Dewey or Truman. If you vote Thurmond, indicate a second choice (he wasn't on the ballot in all states.)

Don't worry about Congress just yet. I haven't figured out what to do with it.

9
Well, the new Congress is safely installed on Capitol Hill after the midterms, and you know what that means- presidential campaign season is just around the corner.

With that comes a new politics thread- our old one is 680 pages long and nearly two years old, and I think it's safe to say it's time to retire it.

The usual rules apply, of course. (There's really only one- don't be overly inflammatory- and I'm fairly lenient with arguments. Just don't make Toad step in.)

The last thread wandered all over the place, mainly since- to nobody's surprise- Washington spent most of the last two years mainly sitting on its ass doing nothing. While I'm not sure we can expect a whole lot better for the next two years (OK, we can hope the newly GOP-led Congress will put a few constructive proposals on the President's desk- but who are we really trying to kid?), we'll also have the spectre of the presidential election scheduled for November 8, 2016, which should provide plenty of entertainment and speculation, since neither side has an incumbent in office to nominate. The first GOP primary debate is in September, just eight months from the time of writing, and I imagine the Democrats aren't going to postpone their own infighting for too much longer. Then the actual primaries begin bright and early in January 2016, about a year from now. (I'll be gone for much of this, since I'll be spending the 2015-2016 academic year abroad, likely in the Baltic Sea region.)

Without further ado, let's meet the candidates! I've tried to compile a fairly comprehensive list on both sides of potential candidates and running mates. Since it's still quite early, some of these folks are likely to drop off the presidential radar in the next few months, while others will appear from nowhere, ascend to dizzying heights, and then vanish into the ether as quickly as they had appeared. (Anyone remember Herman Cain? Anyone? Anyone?)

In the Democratic Corner

Hillary Clinton is far and away the clearest front-runner for the Democratic nomination. First Lady during her husband's administration from 1992-2000 and then Senator from New York State for a long stretch of the Bush II years, she very narrowly lost the Democratic nomination to Obama in 2008 and then became his Secretary of State.

Pros: Guaranteed to have gobs and gobs of campaign money to spend from her PAC Ready For Hillary, which counts among its donors such luminaries as Warren Buffett. She's widely popular with the party's centrist wing and American moderates more generally, has both foreign - and domestic-policy credentials, and leads every single hypothetical GOP nominee when polls are conducted. (Of course, who knows how much they tell us this far out from the election...) If she runs, the GOP is going to have a very hard time snatching victory from her.

Cons: The Democrats' left wing find Hillary insufficiently progressive and cozy with corporate interests, and too hawkish on foreign policy- especially given her vote to go to war in Iraq in 2003.

Joe Biden is the current US Vice President, and remains somewhat popular despite a charming-to-cringey tendency towards gaffes and a job that requires him to do...not really very much of anything. 

Pros: Sitting Vice Presidents have as close to an incumbency advantage as there is in a wide-open race, and have historically done well. Definitely not a dumb guy, and likely to appeal to a wide swath of primary voters if they can be persuaded not to vote for Hillary (he's a bit further left than Hillary, but not as far left as, say, Warren.)

Cons: Biden rarely appears in the public spotlight except to put his foot in his mouth. He's also Obama's right-hand man, and Obama's disappointed (or outright aggravated) enough Americans on all sides that this could be a liability.

Elizabeth Warren, Senator from Massachusetts since 2012, is the darling of the Democrats' left wing and has been spending much of her term going after bankers who were involved in the 2008 financial crisis.

Pros: You want a fight over income inequality? Warren will deliver.

Cons: She doesn't actually seem all that interested in running- having gone so far as to say she won't if Clinton runs- and may project an image of "left-wing loony" in states that aren't Massachusetts. (There was something of an incident last year when it transpired she claimed to be part Cherokee on a college application, which turned out to be completely unsubstantiated.) Watch her carefully for a VP pick, though.

Martin O'Malley was the governor of Maryland until a few days ago when he was replaced by a successor (having been unable to run due to term limits, if I recall correctly.)

I really don't know very much about O'Malley, so I'll wait for the news stories to start running in if/when he runs, or let mainiac have his say.

Brian Schweitzer was governor of Montana from 2004-2012.

Pros: Wildly popular in his native Montana, with approval ratings consistently about 60%. Schweitzer was governor of a flyover state that hasn't voted Democrat in a presidential election since 1992, and has a fairly folksy and down-to-earth manner. If the Dems want to make inroads among working-class whites (which there's been some muttering about), he'd be a good pick. Seems to be solid on education and healthcare (having previously announced his intention to establish single-payer healthcare in Montana, which never went anywhere, alas.)

Cons: Fairly weak on environmental issues (though what did you expect- the guy's from Montana) and guns (ditto). Schweitzer's name recognition is low, and he's made a few remarks that are unlikely to endear him to more traditional liberals from the coast.

Jim Webb is a former Senator from Virginia and Secretary of the Navy under Reagan.

Pros: Has an aura of integrity that's fairly rare among modern politicians. Webb is a Vietnam vet and a professional writer, which may have something to do with it. Considered running in 2008.

Cons: May not be far left enough for the Democrats' partisan wing. (I think? It's hard to find a good rundown of his positions...)

Lincoln Chafee is a former Senator and Governor of Rhode Island.

Pros: Was basically the last Rockefeller Republican (the Maine senators excepted), then left the GOP in 2007 over its extremism, and switched to the Democrats in 2013. Known for moderate social liberalism on issues like abortion, the death penalty and same-sex marriage, and fiscally somewhat conservative, though of the old school don't-spend-what-you-can't-pay-for variety, not Reaganite supply-side nonsense.

Cons: Well, he did flip parties. I'm having trouble finding anything particularly damning other than that, honestly, other than that he probably won't make it out of the primaries because he's up against Hillary. Oh well.

And the GOP...

Jeb Bush was governor of Florida from 1998 to 2006, and this week's frontrunner for most likely GOP nominee.

Pros: Fairly moderate for a Republican, for what that's worth (someone make me a version of my avatar with Nelson weeping.) Has a lot of popularity with Hispanics in Florida, which looks good for electability, since the GOP can't afford to lose Hispanics as badly as it has been (27% of the Hispanic vote in 2012). Has marketable (if dubious) fiscal conservative and education credentials, supports immigration reform, and is the first major GOP candidate to kinda sorta give the green light to same-sex marriage, having said that the country should let the courts make the decision and abide by it.

Cons: You remember George W.? Yep, Jeb is his younger brother. Amazingly, the scion of dynasty Bush might be too liberal for GOP primary voters, too, especially since he's been heard criticizing the general direction the GOP's been moving in in the last few years. Like his older brother before the 2000 election, Jeb has nearly no foreign-policy experience, and we all know how well that turned out for George.

Like Bush, Marco Rubio is from Florida- though as Senator, since 2010- and is probably best placed in the moderate-ish wing of the party, as he's a member of the "Gang of Eight" that tried to get immigration reform passed (to no avail). Other than that, he's pretty much your standard economically-conservative/socially-conservative Republican. He's young and charismatic, though, and might be able to wiggle himself into a veep nomination if the primary voters won't choose him to head the ticket.

Rick Santorum- Senator from Pennsylvania from 1994 to 2006- is also back in the running, inexplicably, after a near defeat in 2012 at the hands of Mitt Romney.

Pros: If you want a candidate who'll tilt at the windmills of gay marriage and contraception long after the rest of the country has moved on, Rick Santorum is your man. He's also relatively reasonable on some economic issues, because his base of support as Senator was the coal-mining country of central Pennsylvania, which is historically union country.

Cons: His last name is a byword for- well, Google it. He's also spouted off a bit of racially-charged rhetoric. He might be able to win the primary if he keeps his foot out of his mouth, but the general election would be a cakewalk for pretty much any Democrat but- just maybe- Warren.

Chris Christie is the incumbent governor of New Jersey.

Pros: Has actual bipartisan credentials- a rarity in the modern political arena, especially for a Republican- and has drawn electoral support from minorities. Christie basically has a reputation as someone who'll get things done regardless of whose votes he needs to do it, and in an era when Washington can't vote on a resolution to save its life, that's surely going to be listened to.

Cons: The more uncharitable pundits would describe him as a bully, especially after last year's infamous Bridgegate scandal, in which his transportation department created a massive traffic jam near a district that stubbornly refused to vote for him. Primary voters also might not much care for bipartisan credentials when it involves compromising with Democrats.

Ted Cruz is the Senator from Texas since 2012.

Pros: Cruz is widely hailed as a hero by Tea Party Republicans for standing up to...pretty much anything Barack Obama has ever proposed, tried to pass, or so much as whispered about. Famously delivered a 21-hour filibuster in which he read "Green Eggs and Ham" during last September's government shutdown in an attempt to get Obamacare defunded, before quietly voting for the spending bill anyways. If Democrats support it, he will fight tooth and nail to kill it. Also wants to abolish the IRS for some reason.

Cons: Does anyone other than the Tea Party faithful actually want Ted Cruz to be the world's most powerful man?

Rand Paul is the current Senator from Kentucky, serving with Mitch McConnell.

Pros: Rand is basically the younger version of his father Ron- yes, that Ron Paul- and tries very hard to have a somewhat more normal reputation. He's much more in line with the GOP hardliners' agenda, except that he's not quite as much of a warhawk, but does well at not sounding quite as kooky.

Cons: His inner circle of campaign support consists mainly of his father's old supporters. He's better at not conjuring up images of Ayn Rand-reading stoners with Bitcoin rigs running in their parents' basements...but not that much better.

Mitt "Mittens" Romney is the former governor of Massachusetts.

Pros: Has money like you wouldn't believe, plus campaign infrastructure from his 2008 and 2012 campaigns.

Cons: Nobody really liked Romney- in 2008 he lost the primary to McCain, and then in 2012 he won the primary mostly because the various factions couldn't agree on anyone else to run, before losing the general election to Obama. He's got a reputation as a rich, out-of-touch, callous (Google "47%") vulture capitalist, and if people rejected him the last couple elections it's hard to see why they'll vote for him this time.

January 30th, 2015- Romney has bowed out.

Sarah Palin is the former governor of Alaska and was John McCain's running mate in 2008.

Pros: Has experience being on a presidential ticket. That's pretty much it. Her positions are fairly conservative when you can figure out what they are, and she has some residual support from the base.

Cons: It was pretty clear from the week he picked her that Palin was only going to hurt McCain's campaigning, due to her inexperience with anything not having to do with energy policy (find the 2008 vice-presidential debate on YouTube if you want a laugh), her endless (and completely obvious) attempts at avoiding questions, and her endless gaffes. She's also probably tarnished the name of Alaska for the next decade or two.

Scott Walker has been governor of Wisconsin since 2010.

Pros: Won three elections to the governorship in a state that hasn't gone red on the presidential level since 1984, including the only recall vote in American history where the governor wasn't removed from office. He's also got a reputation for getting stuff done, although much of that stuff has been cutting public-service pensions. Charismatic and good at not sounding like a nutjob despite being quite conservative.

Cons: Cuts public-service pensions. Very socially conservative, although that may be more of an issue in the general election than the primary.

  "Nobody builds walls better than me"  "Why doesn't he show his birth certificate" Donald "The American dream is dead" Trump is a multi-billionaire real estate mogul and perennial presidential candidate with a legendary level of narcissism.

Pros: Could finance an entire campaign entirely out of pocket. Mildly conservative to moderate socially.

Cons:  "Nobody builds walls better than me"  "Why doesn't he show his birth certificate" Donald "The American dream is dead" Trump's ego is notable even among politicians; he has alternated running for president with hosting reality television shows about himself and writing books with titles like "Nobody builds walls better than me"  "Why doesn't he show his birth certificate" Donald "The American dream is dead" Trump: How To Get Rich for more than a decade now. He's worse at flip-flopping than Mitt Romney, which is something of an achievement, and has made major campaign donations to everyone from George Bush to Ted Kennedy.  "Nobody builds walls better than me"  "Why doesn't he show his birth certificate" Donald "The American dream is dead" Trump spent most of Obama's first term haranguing about birth certificates and has a shady past with regard to racial issues, which didn't stop Ron Paul from forming an enduring (and endearing) cult of personality. Also an anti-vaxxer.

There are probably a dozen other GOP members who could make, if not the presidential nominee, at least the vice-presidential- these are just the main ones. There's really no telling what's going to happen- I would bet money that we'll see at least one of those mentioned above on the ticket, but not necessarily both, and not necessarily as the presidential nominee. Unlike with the Democrats, there's no clear front-runner- Jeb Bush is just the most talked-about at the time of this writing.

As always, there's space for a third-party run. In fact, I would go so far as to say 2016 might be a better-than-usual year for it- there's no incumbent running, discontentment with the two main parties is running sky-high, and political polarization (mostly on the right, but on the left, too) is alienating the country's moderates. However, nobody's popped out of the woodwork yet, though if someone starts making noise, I'll add them.

10
DF Suggestions / Temporary Labor Enabling
« on: December 21, 2014, 10:24:17 am »
Sorry for making another suggestion so soon, but since there's work being done on how dwarves handle their jobs, I thought it might be a good time to suggest it.

I recently needed to smooth some boulders on the surface of my fort, but didn't have any engravers, so I had my mechanic do it. But it took him forever, and by the time he got around to it I'd forgotten about him and that he had engraving enabled.

Would it be possible to enable a labor on a dwarf for a short period, so that the labor "expires" within, say, a week or a month?

11
DF Suggestions / Caravan Scheduling
« on: December 20, 2014, 07:42:30 pm »
Depending on when you retired or abandoned your last fortress, it's possible to set up a new fortress so that it begins in summer or even autumn. This would be fine, except that it means that by the time the first caravan arrives, you don't have anything to trade it. Maybe it would be more realistic, and better on the player, to have the first caravan arrive relative to the embark date? For example, I've just started a fortress that embarked in early summer. Maybe the dwarven caravan would arrive in winter (and, by proxy, the elves in summer and the humans in fall?) After all, merchants will make money whenever they can make money.

12
DF Dwarf Mode Discussion / Query about the new hauling setup
« on: December 20, 2014, 01:14:26 pm »
I just set up a large stone stockpile set to only take rock salt, and there's a lot lying around that I want to clear into the stockpile. However, none of my dwarves are hauling the stone, even though they're all idle (except for my mason, who's making blocks) and all have stone hauling turned on. What s up?

[EDIT]: They won't haul metal ores to that stockpile, either, or stone blocks from the mason's shop to the block stockpile, but they'll haul wood from outside.

13
This was inspired by a question posed by me in the Happy Thread: can you make a fort with a legendary gelder? I believe we can, so this succession game will attempt to take a dwarf and train it to Legendary Gelder, starting from scratch.

I'm probably going to start the game tomorrow, but consider this post a placeholder. Go ahead and sign up.

Would anybody be up for using a 3x3 embark instead of 4x4? My FPS isn't as reliable on the newer versions as it was.

Overseer List
1. FearfulJesuit
2. 4maskwolf
3. Caroline
4. flabort
5. Aseaheru
6. Orange Wizard
7. Helgoland
8. Nav
9. Deus Asmoth
10. Sheb
11. jwoodward

14
General Discussion / Russia Watch Thread/Ветка о России
« on: November 05, 2014, 10:53:37 am »
Переведите на английский, пожалуйста, что угодно вы напишите по-русски.

I will- unless something really gets screwed up- be spending the 2015-2016 academic year in St. Petersburg, so I've started to take more than a minor interest in Russian politics. This thread is specifically for Russia-watchers (as well as those areas of Eastern Europe and Asia that have business with the Bear), not Europe as a whole.

I'll start by noting that the Russian economy looks like it's starting to tank:

Russian Central Bank is pumping $1 billion a day to try and stabilize the ruble, which is crashing anyways.

...followed by a rise in the main interest rate, also to revive the ruble...

Inflation is over 8% and rising.

Combining hostile foreign policy with shoot-yourself-in-the-foot protectionism, the government has also banned iPhones. There's a ban on importing most foodstuffs, too, IIRC.

15
Other Games / Universe Sandbox
« on: October 31, 2014, 10:51:37 am »
Website is here.

I tried using the search bar to find another thread about this, but the forums didn't find anything. If there already is one, let me know.

Universe Sandbox is, well...it lets you create universes. It allows you to make solar systems, planets with moons, etc., simulates climate, does black holes, does galaxies (at a ghastly cost to FPS, to be fair), does rings, does asteroids, and does it all with amazing graphics. I was reminded to make this thread because the 12th alpha version came out today. Here's a screenshot of a solar system I did a few days ago for worldbuilding purposes:



Has anyone else tried this? You can destroy as well as construct, too...crashing two Jupiters together is always a lot of fun. You'll learn a good bit of basic astronomy, too.

Universe Sandbox is technically still in alpha, but you can get it on Steam for $25 with continuous updates and your foot in the door for when it leaves alpha. Do it. You won't regret it.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 16