[Dev Blog] Desktop Tuesday, Update on Steam Release, Plus Exp/Leveling Feature

[Dwalus]

Just do what Dwarf Fortress does, like everything else.

[Solus]

@Dwalus

Just do what Dwarf Fortress does, like everything else.

Lol, let’s hope not. That game can be the biggest headache ever…

[Dwalus]

They seem to have made a much friendlier version of superterranean Dwarf Fortress. Basic things like immigration would carry over fine, no?

[Solus]

@Dwalus

Basic things like immigration would carry over fine, no?

That’s the hope, at least the hope I have. Time will tell I suppose?

[mrxak]

That settles it, Berrivore needs to be in the game .

[PDanford]

Firstly - very smart move to wait with early access!

Secondly - in my opinion town experience is something that is nice but only as second supporting mechanic in a classic tech tree scenario controlled by structures.

Meaning that having your first structure, the settlement flag unlocks certain other available structures to be build. The classic approach would be now to have something like when you build a workshop you unlock upgrading the flag to a small building, when you build that you unlock building a smithy and so on.
Settlement XP could additionally limit the upgrading, so only when enough XP is gained one is allowed to do certain upgrades.

Also offering a gamemaster choice (maybe controlling different gamemodes or there is another second choice for that) and allowing these to be moddable could make for very differing game experiences in community mods.

Eh but getting the core game up and running as it should is ofc much more important

[Teleros]

@Ramcat

I’m looking for “rally points and patrol paths” too but they don’t matter if you can’t replace your lost citizens at a faster pace than “migrations” allow. Without growth you have a purely defensive game with no offence capability because loses can’t be replaced.

Honestly, looking at DF this comes down to you having to play better. For example, DF migrations & invasions come in waves periodically (the former being on a fairly-strict timetable as well). So, you need to plan ahead more: “I’ve just beaten off a goblin raid, so I’ve got maybe a month or two before they return. What can be done in that time?” is how you need to think - once you get into that habit, I don’t see why you can’t continue to expand etc in the face of hostile threats.

@Ramcat

In the event that you have a goblin “breakthrough” and lose half your villagers - now you have way more food, beds, and housing than you need - your citizens should be happy, they have great wealth, but I doubt most “game masters” would consider your city happy and healthy.

I’d say the game should weigh the mass deaths considerably more than the sudden increase in living space .

@Ramcat

So now with an unhappy city you are in the spiral of death - unless - the game master then decides to “take it easy” on you. I don’t want to play a game that gets weak when I do. I want to have to build back up and fight tooth and nail to survive.

Losing Is Fun .

More seriously, try this for a solution:

1. Peaceful Mode: No bad guys spawn. All is sweetness and love and all that saccharine stuff.
2. Easy Mode: Enemy attacks are scaled, in part, to your population. If half your town is wiped out, the enemy will send proportionally fewer soldiers next time.
3. Hard Mode: Enemy attacks are not at all scaled to your population. If you have a mega-wealthy town with just 3 people in it, and they send in 20 raiders… congratulations on mis-managing your town .

Some people are going to agree with you and want a tough climb back up from disaster, and some won’t - but I don’t see why SH can’t accommodate both types of people.

@Ramcat

From a game design perspective - random migration system based on an algorithmic judgment of wealth/status forces the pace of the game to be limited to that algorithm, if you don’t meet that algorithms view you do not deserve more people. Having played Timber & Stone I know how limiting this model is.

TBH I’d be surprised if the current model is kept as the main source of new migrants. As @Dwalus says below, just copy DF (but make it cuter!) and it should be fine.

@Ramcat

Start Stonehearth with a migration model and it will be stuck with one for a very long time - if not for the life of the application. And I think it is a bad direction that will limit Stonehearth’s potential.

I disagree. Now, I think having other sources of people (eg, breeding*) is a good idea, but look at DF - the big, periodic migration model seems to work fine there, at least as long as you know how to play properly and don’t make stupid decisions.

*But then what about child deaths vis-à-vis age rating, sales, and “game over” messages etc?

[quote=“Silas, post:62, topic:7352”]Lol, let’s hope not. That game can be the biggest headache ever…
[/quote]
Only because of the UI & graphics though.

@Dwalus

hyperterranean

Superterranean surely ?

@PDanford

Secondly - in my opinion town experience is something that is nice but only as second supporting mechanic in a classic tech tree scenario controlled by structures.

Replace “structures” with “professions” and I think you’ve got the Stonehearth model .

[Dwalus]

@Teleros

Superterranean surely ?

That is entirely true. Sorry, I still can’t seem to remember certain things about English, and prefixes are one of them.