Print

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

[gurra_geban]

Ok, so i got an idea from when browsing the am discussion forum.

We have lots and lots of community forts, but how about a community world? Every participant creates an RP fortress for a set amount of time and when the time comes to pass the world along the fort is abandonned.

For this project i would at least like to wait until the release of the army arc version.

So, why a community world? Well, there are some really interesting reasons.
First of all the world would really have some good spots for adventuring, secondly it would be really cool to be able to read the separate RP storys for the separate forts.

So, the biggest issue about this community world is how long each "turn" would be, as every player has different preferences on how long to play a fortress.

So, anyone interested? And what rules for the world would the participants like to see, as well as how long a turn should be?

My preferred rules would be:
Each player has 1-4 in-game years and may play these for the duration of 4 real time days, reclaims are allowed if the rest of the participants allow it.
The world size would be set to a smaller size
Goblins get [NOFEAR] and [TRAPAVOID]

Please discuss, i will keep track of peoples preferred rules here:

1: Regional prospector will probably be allowed, if noone has something to say about that
2: World size will be around small
3: Ok, no in-game limit but a real time limit of 4 days
4: Trapavoid if somebody doesn't whine their eyes out about it

Roster so far:
gurra_geban
RPharazon
PTTG??
Elitay (youre in, right?
ricemastah
Bricktop
Run Comrades
Dadamh

[ June 12, 2008: Message edited by: gurra_geban ]

[RPharazon]

It sounds like a good idea to set up an adventurer world.
I'd say that it should be big and varied. Not 257x257 to be compatible with people with slow computers, though. Regional Prospector should be allowed, and I'd say the limit is fine.

[PTTG??]

I'm getting in on this. At first I was going to say use a huge world, but I think that having it be "smaller" will give players more chance to run into something annother player has built. I would just advise: everybody should play Adventurer (named after their Forum name), so there is an in-game record of them. Also, cheats or no cheats? To build neat, explorable things in four days (or four I.G. years) would mean probably a [SPEED:1] tag or two.

Anyway, I'm in whenever you want to get started.

[Elitay]

I don't think there should be any ingame time limit. Just a real one. (Ex: 4 days... but as many in game years as you like)

[ricemastah]

Well, if you looks at this thread, that is what we are doing. But it takes a large amount of time to make these fortresses, even with a [SPEED:1]. You guys should think about joining that thread in addition to running your own. Just my suggestion.

Edit: I didn't look at the roster recently. But you can count me in on this in the foreseeable

[ May 25, 2008: Message edited by: ricemastah ]

[Elitay]

Way ahead of you   . No reason there can't be two. It would be nice to have a community pocket world. Nice and small.

[Haven]

This sounds fun.. Though I dunno about the TRAPAVOID tag. Haven't played with it before, but then, I never needed my traps after the first few forts. If this gets off the ground, I plan on making a vault of sorts.

[Duke 2.0]

Just a note: make sure the world is volcanically unstable. I notice some worlds lack interesting volcanoes.

Perhaps a small world? It has more chance of all the civ's surviving world gen then a pocket world, but is still fast.

And count me in for an adventurer or an interesting trapped fortress. I remember I made one interesting farm that had a horribly trapped underground.

[Bricktop]

I'd be happy to join in on this. I think a 4 day real-time limit would be best, with no in-game limit.

Also, how about if we just have to have someone named after our forum account? So, you could do an adventurer named after you, or you could have your expedition leader named after you, sort of thing. Either way there's a record of you in the world.

EDIT; Also, I agree with the [TRAPAVOID] thing, because trap corridors are ridiculous. However, I'm not so sure about [NOFEAR]. If I understand correctly, this would mean goblin sieges never retreat. I would prefer to have them retreating, because that way it would be the same leader that attacks your fortress each time and I think that'd be better for RP (having a long-term enemy of your fortress other than just "the goblins").

[ May 25, 2008: Message edited by: Bricktop ]

[Akroma]

I will join, but only if we do this in a 33x33 or smaller

[Torak]

Hasn't this been attempted about 6 times?

[gurra_geban]

goblins with [NOFEAR] will never try and escape when engaged in combat from my experiences, although any unengaged goblins will flee if losses are to many

[ricemastah]

WAke up call before it really dies... Guys are you gonna do this?

[Yami]

quote:Originally posted by gurra_geban:
<STRONG>
For this project i would at least like to wait until the release of the army arc version.

[ May 26, 2008: Message edited by: gurra_geban ]</STRONG>

I'm game

[gurra_geban]

quote: WAke up call before it really dies... Guys are you gonna do this?

Patience ^^

Next version is coming up soon! I will either update this thread or create a new one for when we actually start