Bay 12 Games Forum

Actually, Bay12 has thousands of people. It's just that running a game for hundreds of people in unfeasible if not impossible.


Because we need at least one straight man, no?

Sell Order:
5 stock for $350, splittable. Negotiate if price is unnacceptable.

I am pretty sure nuking SCP-682 has already been tried.

It hasn't. The Foundation figures that the chance of 682 escaping (or, worse, learning to duplicate nukes...) is too high for the miniscule chance it would be destroyed.

My curent plans for if I ever have a go at dealing with it involve heavy use of various SCP-294 derived additives to it's proven acid bath, including immensely strengthening the acid while slowing down time for 682 thus making it's adaptations much slower from our perspective. Hopeful end result is a fluid where each atom of it is held in an individual nanoscale cage and suspended in time - there is not much hope of permanently destroying 682, but a containment system that requires no maintenance and cannot be reversed without large amounts of specific resources and knowledge is the next best thing; if it' less likely to escape and harder to free than just creating a new one, it's for most purposes equivalent to having been destroyed. I mean, who's going to comb the entire sun for billions of diluted nanocages, then break them all open, break suspension, and reunite all the particles? Easier to just put an alligator and a Nokia 3310 in SCP-914 on Very Fine.

Worth consideration.
Might be easier to just input "Something that can kill SCP-682" in 294.

Please note that at no point will you be expected to contain SCP-682. I'm going to (attempt) to create new ones, though these may be as dangerous or even more dangerous than 682.

Oh crap, Site 12 is going to be a Keter containment unit isn't it?

I don't know what your game is by calling me Einstein

My "game" is staying up too late and getting overly annoyed over minor things. Sorry about that.

Naturally, I meant authorizing the work from the top down. It never occurred to me that you could mean we're actually building them, because that's a retarded thing for a lord to be doing. Housing ought to develop from the ground up by demand. It's our job to generate demand, not build empty houses for no reason and pray people move into them.

We're generating demand by being nice. We are highly unlikely to be able to provide for any immigrants at this time.

No, housing is something that people can build themselves.

Not so much; it needs to be ready when they get here. Few people will be willing to sleep on the cold, hard, and/or wet ground until they build a house.

We're turning from public works into private works here.

You say that as if there's a clear line between them.

Let's concentrate on large-scale infrastructure and making people want to build their own damned houses in our town, because we have added larger and more ambitious projects than mere houses.

Houses may be dull, but they're vital to a functioning community.

Also, in this era, a big military was a way of saying "your property isn't getting destroyed on our territory" and yet we've got people saying 35 men are enough.

Our entire population is 1,000 people. For reference, that would be like the US having over 10 million troops...except worse, because the US can function on 2-3% farmers with food to export, while medieval societies can't. We're approaching excessive for our current population, barring actual war breaking out. Training more of our current adults to be able to be conscripted may be justifiable; more full- or even half-time soldiers is stupid.

Quote from: Mlamlah on February 27, 2013, 12:59:45 am

Keep it clean guys, no need to get testy.
Residential housing isn't necessarily something to leave entirely to the whims of populace, some basic central planning is required, especially as towns grow. Without proper management, disorganization can abound, turning what would otherwise be a prosperous town into a collection of shanty-hovels with no rhyme or reason to placement.
Much of what was being discussed was merely to encourage the use of sturdier and higher quality building materials anyway. I don't understand why it could hurt to have a few better quality houses up for grabs by the populace either, it's not a big deal.

My completely ignored suggestion was to make quality housing for everyone in our capital city. Imagine the immigration rates when people catch wind of the fact even the peasants who work the whateveritisthatisourstapleproduce field get to live in a semi-manor. Infinite manpower.

If we can afford this, I approve.
If not...well, I shouldn't need to disapprove, but I do.

The main problem is that it breaks my immersion to have centrally planned housing. I want to imagine twisty disorganized streets in our medieval town. I really don't want to read about a socialist centrally-planned utopia in the midst of the Middle Ages.

Well, cities were often more planned that you seem to think. After all, most power was held by the central governing authorities.

The second problem is that housing doesn't actually draw anyone to live nearby. No one says, "I want to live in Detroit because it has a lot of empty housing." People want to live where there are good public works, a vibrant and successful culture, and security. If there isn't housing, they simply commission their own.

Conversely, no matter the quality of those things, no one will move in without housing. Having people commission their own houses isn't only a bad idea from a planning perspective--it's impossible for all but the wealthiest of individuals.
Oh, and we're also proposing good housing. Despite what you are implying you believe, people care about good housing.

IMO it's a bad idea to spend resources to make peasant lives too good and luxurious, it's a medieval society and that's just wrong.
Even public bath is quite generous ( and unneeded, they can use river to wash...), private brick houses for everyone are just way over the roof.

We're still a peasant at heart. I'd imagine there's some point where he said, "If I was ruling, I'd..." This is his chance to do that.
Not convinced?
1. One of our big draws for peasants is how much we care for common people.
2. It's an investment. We build better houses for people, they want to live here more.

(Oh, and I at least wasn't opposed to marriage...just not yet, for reasons ranging from "fear we're taking it too fast" to "fear the Count would try to harm us through her.")

Erebor Said:
"Tailoring (especially coloring) and the associated tannery tends to be associated with pollution downriver. Considering the Count lives there, I think not. Besides, our town is not large enough to support such an endeavour."
I think you are thinking of tanning, which is leather, not tailoring, which is working with cloth. Far less polluting. And as for our town not being big enough, that would quickly change if we put out word we are looking for skilled clothiers and the like and start buying the raw materials to set it up. The damn thing would pay for itself, earn us tonnes of money and draw migrants by the dozen.

Pretty sure he was talking about tanning. Without a quote, I can't verify that, though.

Erebor Said:
"Nope, not doing this. We have exactly 168 citizens living in our capital town. Such a factory'd probably employ several times more than that. Besides, I'm pretty sure we don't have the finances. (The mine isn't that large). Also, I think we don't have the right to produce weapons on that scale."

The whole point of an armour factory in medieval times was to reduce the human resources needed in the production of advanced armour. A medium sized armour factory would only need maybe 3 armourers/weaponsmiths/metalworkers to run it at full efficiency. And most towns in the middle ages were self sufficient in most things, including weapon production so we dont need permission. Also, the King/Duke might take favorably to having a source of good armour and weapons for their troops.

The idea was that we need a certain amount of infrastructure and population before a factory of any kind becomes viable.

Erebor Said:
"The Irish Potato famine was primarly caused by a potato disease, and the huge reliance on potatos.
TL'dr: Stop the megalomanie, think twice before commiting all our resources to a project doomed to fail."

The Irish potatoe famine had many reasons. one was the famine itself, the other was the fact that the Irish landowners hadn't enlarged infrastructure and agriculture enough to supply such a large population, let alone build up a suitable stockpile of food in case something happens. Lack of crop diversity was another reason.

Lack of crop diversity was a big reason, probably the ultimate cause. Certainly, the other things mentioned might have helped relieve the effects, but the famine itself wouldn't have been avoided.

Erebor Said:
"On the topic of a library. I highly doubt we'll be able to afford it. These are the medieval ages, books costed their weight of Gold, and often more. Besides, the only books you could reliably find, were the Bible, The Bible, and guess what, The Bible. This means prices for other books are highly inflated."
We need some way to draw intelligent people and scholars to our town to help us access the 'upper tier' ideas.

And we would find a magical wand very useful, but at the moment we've got slightly less chance of finding one than getting a good library up.

Erebor Said:
"Tl'dr:
We need to focus on the people first. It's unlikely we can rise a city from nothing, but we have to try I suppose. Or find some kind of city to steal. First things are improving agriculture, and the rest'll follow. If we want any major architectural works done, we'd need to do them now, not later."
Whilst i agree that enlarging agriculture, with more crops, better diversity and meat and dairy industries, we mustn't forget that we need other industries to earn us money.
We need to enlarge the mine, build more workshops of a whole range of professions and start growing in those areas. We cant stay a farming backwater forever.

All things in moderation.

Seriously though, I keep having to remind you guys we were going for light troops/skirmishers supported by foot archer formations. I know skirmishers aren't really as glamorous as all these other crazy ideas you guys have bouncing around, but trust me, a properly run skirmish force can be absolutely devastating to an enemy formation in preparation of a clash with regular troops, plus they complement our rangers well by also being skilled in ambush tactics. So my proposal is to crosstrain the melle troops with both spear and axe, and also have the smiths make franciscas and teach the troops to throw them. Then, we start on better bows for our archers, something along the lines of proper longbows/recurve bows(though technically recurve bows were more used in countries that were drier and had less forests, since they allowed for equivalent power with shorter bows using less wood, which isn't the case here). After that, we start with combined arms tactics on using our skirmishers and bowmen together effectively. Also, see if we can get more ranger recruits and train up the rangers more.
Also, 10ebbor, you support me right? I don't tend to have god complexes in this game...

Seriously, can people stop living in the Ancient period? Skirmishers of the likes you are talking about will get run down instantly by the light cavalry the enemy uses (and they most certainly use light cavalry). English/welsh longbowmen, Scottish bowmen and continental archers and crossbow didnt skirmish, per say. In fact, they rarely moved, instead being supported by tough melee oriented troops. Ancient style warfare went out for a reason. we will be stomped and stomped hard if we try to use outdated tactics.
There is a reason the main skirmishers in the medieval period were mounted.
[/quote]
And there's a reason that the skirmishers suggested would be supported by other troops. And would also have horses to ride.

No. This is rediculous. Making archers our front line troops without any support? Even the English, the pre-eminent archer users in Medieval Europe had Heavily armed/armoured billmen and dismounted knights who supported the archer formations.

And throwing axes would be ineffective against the armoured enemy. they belong in the dark ages. You know, when MOST PEOPLE DIDN'T WEAR ARMOUR (unlike at the present moment ingame?).

My understanding of military matters is limited, but aye.

I think that the construction of a public baths Roman-style would be very beneficial. Unlike what most people believe, medieval people did try to keep clean and knew the benefits of cleanliness. the reason they weren't clean is because they didnt have the facilities to get clean properly. They thought that cleanliness was divinity as God was said to be immaculate (aka clean,pure,unsullied).

If we set up a small soap industry and built a medium sized public bath house that drew and heated water from the river then we'd make sure we can stave off disease as well as make our people happy. If we built a church next to it we could get a double whammy happiness increase.

If we have the resources and manpower, sounds like a good idea. And a good pun.

Quote from: kaian-a-coel on February 27, 2013, 04:33:05 am

Public planning of housing was not uncommon back then, especially in large cities where there's not much place, or after disasters.

Let's delegate this to the town council. We're a lord, not a bureaucrat, and it kinda feels the opposite right now. We can ask the council to meet with the local tax-payers and raise the possibility of building a public bath, or a public school, or subsidized stone housing for tax-payers of three years standing.

While we won't be worrying about the petty details overmuch, we are not exceeding the limitations of our office by having some houses or something like that built. This isn't America; this is a place where power is held almost entirely by nobles. I'm not sure if the town council has the power to order big public constructions, and am doubtful that they'd have the guts/inspiration to ask us to OK it.

Let's spend some time of our lance skill.

If we have time, sure, but it's not too important.

Our front-line troops are... other people's infantry. The reason I want all these troops mounted is because we don't have front-line troops. I want them able to deploy quickly to the flanks of our allies and then evade any attacks launched against themselves rather than at the front-line of our allies.
The axes aren't my idea--just incorporating tryrar's francisca--but considering how few of the infantry are actually armored, I doubt axes are ineffective.

I can't imagine that throwing axes would be significantly cheaper/more accurate/whatever than a good old bow. They certainly have worse range. Why bother?

Quote from: kaian-a-coel on February 27, 2013, 12:56:02 pm

How about naginatas?
(and "it's japanese" is not a valid counter-argument, as far as we know, there is no such thing in this universe.)

It doesn't exist (in this universe) is a pretty good argument though.
Let's use Halberd's. It's the ultimate weapon. (I'm serious, it can be used as a spear, and axe, a axe on a long pole, and as a standard pole). Also, it has a build in hook to dismount riders.

It's great, but it does have disadvantages. They're probably expensive and difficult to train with, for one.

Edit: Also, the Swiss use it. (And still do, to guard the Vatican)

...Okay, I'm convinced.

One thing we can do to help in the reorganization of our military is, since we might detach the Rangers as a separate unit on the battlefield if the situation allows it, appoint our most Skilled ranger as Ranger Captain, so when they are on their own they have some leadership to look to. If our rangers are equally skilled, we can hold a contest to see who gets the honor of leading the Rangers in battle.

Aye. I'm kinda surprised we don't have a ranger captain yet.

Also, see how much we can expand the stables before winter makes building completely impossible, as to hold the as much of the new herd of horses we bought as possible(temporarily putting the rest in various barns around the fiefdom as needed). We also REALLY need horse trainers and breeders now, due to the big increase in the size of the herd.

We just exhausted our treasury (again*), so we'd need to wait a bit for that...

Another thing we can do is hold a Winter Festival and invite our friends, fiancee, and the Duke to. Depending on how much snow we have, we can have snow sports, ice skating, and the like

Maybe. Nothing too big, though.

*I'm amused and pleased by how we're always emptying our treasury. It's like Keynesian economics, but without the pre-existing economic issues or borrowing!

Feros looked upon the world and mourned inwardly at the state it was in. And he replied to Gren Garnsson:
 'Betray him? You humour me. The slayer of him who gave him strength? The slayer of that gods children? You call this man a godslayer. I name him a kinslayer. But do as you will..... If you see the error of your ways, I will be waiting.'

You tell 'em!

So far the gods been generous with their gifts

Not that it's worked that well for them. Eh, Kinslayer?

((Didn't Mutare preach to every city that he was the actual creator of everything before he got killed?))

Doesn't mean they believed him, and doesn't stop Udil's propaganda.

gman8181
You do a lot of OOC\IC mixing

Don't we all?

2) No one messed with his efforts, he had no competitors for dwarven worship

Wrong. Even ignoring Az-Sho for some inexplicable reason, there was me.
...Granted, not a terribly effective competitor, but a competitor nonetheless.

3) He had to unite population of one city, you are going to unite a quite scattered race

_{A city that wouldn't have existed if not for me...}

Quote from: GreatWyrmGold on February 27, 2013, 12:08:58 am

Quote from: Ukrainian Ranger on February 26, 2013, 11:53:44 pm

It would be quite funny if all seaspawn will become hostile to Vanida, then she'll go into "fixing her own mistake" mode

Somehow, this gave me an idea.
Udil got Neyravah's Life sphere...who got Their "Everything Backfires" sphere?

*sees next post*
Either the dragon, the wild god, or Vanida.

Aw, I like most of those...

And Udil killed all the drakes already, I think?

All fangdrakes. Clawdrakes, at least, live on (in numbers too small to sustain a breeding population, sadly), as do presumably other species thereof.

Quote from: IamanElfCollaborator on February 27, 2013, 02:38:42 am

And I doubt your kids will set drakes on him unless he goes through with a localised Armageddon to clear the jungle.

Not sure why we need the jungle to survive, I thought we had grain fields; but ah well.

Didn't I explain this?
Short form, wood and stable biosphere.

Again neither Dwarves nor the Children are in any way reliant on the Jungle. The Children tend vast fields, their own forests of that Embertree stuff and have domesticated the Whipdrakes. Dwarves have plump helmets and trade stuff with the Children...so if the jungle dies all that happens is that the Children get more farming land quicker.

1. Wood.
2. How the heck do whipdrakes, or any other kind of jungle creature, survive in plains?
3. Ecological catastrophe. And don't give me that BS about Neyravah creating an anomaly--with a Major Act (capable of creating all-new planets and biospheres), and a specialty in creating new life, he should have been able to and would have balanced out all the factors to make the whole biosphere as balanced as it ever could be.

On another note named Dwarves aren't fate-touched they are just minor characters to make the updates more interesting to read...

Not even Udil's son?

Most nutrients would be blown away, as "fertile" jungle land is usually less than an inch.

Aye. Deforestation leads to erosion. Erosion leads to nutrient loss. Nutrient loss leads to famine. Famine leads to death. Death leads to fear. Fear leads to anger. Anger leads to hate. Hate leads to suffering. And I'm pretty sure suffering leads to the Dark Side.
Point is, destroying the jungle will not end well for the dwarves. A final revenge of Neyravah for destroying Them and Their creations.

I think it should be an ecological catastrophe
Also I like it storywise... Kill nature god and face consequences. If I GM'ed I would have started quite long planmetwide infertility for some period just because Elder Goddess of Life got killed

Aye.
Also, Neyravah was a pair of gods. I imagine Them as being "plural" in gender--ie, never mentioned and always written around.

While it may very well be that the Jungle Lands may be infertile and will turn into savannahs or worse, the land around the volacnoe of az-sho will stay untouched due to the fact that volcanic ash makes land more fertile...

A bit yes, but the whole continent was fertile before now. And man cannot live by bread alone--too low protein content. No jungles means no drakes means no meat except fish...which, with the dieoff of coral and such near the Continent as detailed earlier by me and less nutrients from the land after the initial deluge of eroded soil, as well as increased demand for fish, will lead to overfishing. Which means no more fish, which ruins sources of protein and such, which leads to malnutrition and starvation--my bad, more malnutrition and starvation.

Face it, however you look at it, destroying the jungles of the Ninth Continent ain't ending well for the dwarves--no better than the various civilizations who did the same to their environments. Look at the Mayans and the Easter Islanders--and the former had less deforestation, while the latter didn't have as much forest to begin with. Both of those societies had great monuments and artifice, among the greatest of their regions. They slowly destroyed their forests, which lead to massive losses of culture and population. Now consider that the dwarves live in a massive jungle, which is being deforested to levels resembling Easter's by a combination of logging, terrible forest fires, and so forth...oh, yeah, and they rely on the (lost or being lost) fertility of the jungle* for their farms...

*Yes, jungle soils aren't too fertile; however, one can create good farmland by incorporating nutrients from the flora into the soil, and erosion will make these poor soils even worse.

And all of this is ignoring the most obvious and yet most ignored consequence of losing the jungle--no wood. This means much less furniture, no fuel except for paltry fires fed by what grasses and bushes remain (certainly not hot enough to forge metal), no paper, and no constructions that they can't make from nothing but rock (which is more restrictive than it sounds, since most scaffolding is made of wood). Oh, and no ships to try and import things from elsewhere.

In short: Actual science of ecological and sociological varieties indicate that the dwarves are fornicated.

Someone turn this game into a mod.

For what, DF?
Wait until longer has gone on...but aye.

Ardas, you already said you were going to outlaw seaspawn slavery, your coastal dwarves just aren't doing it.  Are you seriously going to let them openly defy you like that?

Yes.

Iaman, why exactly do you need to restrict yourself to old followers?  Attract young ambitious people with promises of power.  Better yet attract people who are already in positions of power with further knowledge to achieve their goals.

It's what he has. His problem is that he can't get more.

Ardas: your weapon can turn out to be catastrophic, I suggest making a less dangerous one

That's stupid advice. If Udil didn't act maliciously, unjustly, and recklessly with only the sheer luck of having happened during the 1.7 Days in Infamy bravely, he wouldn't have made it to demigod status.

You know, there are like, three continents occupied. There's Eversummer, the North, and the Dwarven one. If you take into account that the ninth is uninhabitable and that Azthor landed on another, that still leaves four empty continents for you to take.

The Ninth Continent is the dwarven one. It's uninhabitable because of the ecological devastation Udil is causing to his home.

gman8181, If you create a blatant OOC alliance, at least, please, do it via PMs

If no one acts on it until they meet IC, no harm done.
And PMing it is much, much less ethical. It leads to Celestia-esque issues...

Edit:  Now I'm curious what in game effect would happen if you tried to drive another player character insane.  Would they lose partial control over their character?

No, they'd just act like normal.

HEY GWGWWGWGWGWGWGWGWGWGWG THERE IS A SPOT OPEN FOR A MIGHTY DRAGON!

Ghaz: Is this OK? Pretty please?

Quote from: Xantalos on February 27, 2013, 06:29:43 pm

And there be my answer, Thaneos; you can belay that order to start another war now.

You do realise the implications of fighting Thaneos with your current act pool, right?

"Belay" means he won't.

Oh, and Jbg? You are, indeed, posting a lot in this thread.

There's also the violet hair.

Anyways...I vote to buy the book, take the job, and as we head out to do said job make a jibe at Melody's expense.

"That was unusually clear of you.

"Anyways, we come seeking some people who will not kill us on sight as the [derogatory adjective applying to this world's elves] elves and the [derogatory adjective applying to this world's elves] humans would. Since you haven't fired yet, I'm glad to say we seem to have made a good choice. May we speak with a representative of your leader?"