 | | | | | | |
| |
|
I don't know if this has already been thought of by Pawel or anyone else, but
I'll say it anyway. On Pawel's "Castle-World" website, he says that he needs
to know the dimensions of the universe. I think distances should still be
measured in LUs. As an example, instead of being 950 miles across the world,
it could be 10,000x10,000 LU. If we did the measurements in miles and feet,
watch what could happen.
My Dark Grey Castle is probably one third as large as Strombrachter. Pawel
says Strombrachter is 500 feet by 500 feet. I want my castle to be bigger,
but instead of adding on to it to make it bigger than Strombrachter, I just
say that my castle is 900 feet by 900 feet.
So, in order to keep everything realistic, we must first make a large map of
the Castle World (let's say it's 10,000 by 10,000 LU.) We then divide the map
into 500x500 LU squares on a grid. Everyone gets their very own 500x500 LU
section to do what they please with. I have a 96x96 castle. This leaves
about 404x404 LU worth of space in my square. Does this mean parts of this
square are given to other people? No. BUT I cannot get any more squares
unless I add onn another 404x404 LU worth of creations. After the LU of your
creations surpasses the 500x500 square, you are given another square to work
with. This square can be anywhere you want as long as the square you want is
not owned by someone else, so you can start a new colony in a new place.
What I think would also be nice would be if you could invade other people's
squares once in awhile and conquer them. The defeated person would be given a
new square somewhere while the successful invader could build things in his
new square. Let's look at an example. I have my 96x96 castle, so I can't get
a new square. But, I decide to summon up my army of 400 soldiers and lay
siege to Pawel's square***. If I win, I get to have that square, no matter if
my creations do not exceed 500x500 or not.
I think this would be an organized way of dividing land, and would prevent
many conflicts and sloppiness.
***On a final note, if we really want this to be realistic, when my soldiers
destroyed Pawel's square, he would get a new one. Let's say Pawel's square
contained the Gryphon's Nest and the Devil's Keep. He could not just
reconstruct these two structures out of nowhere in his new square. Instead,
he would have to scan in a picture of the structures being built and then be
able to display the Nest and the Keep again. People may disagree with this,
but it's the only way to be chronogically correct. When Rome was destroyed,
did it suddenly pop up again in, say, Austria? No. Rome would have to
rebuild itself in Austria.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
I like your ideas, but a few questions:
-What units are LUs? (not light years I guess)
-How would you determine who wins the war? Army sizes aren't enough, there are
cases throughout history where little armies overcame big ones. (e.g.
Maccabies against Greeks, Israel against arab states in 1967) Dice? Too
random, isn't it? Maybe you get a "die" for every, say, ten soldiers. (or
twenty, or 100, never mind) Then the bigger your army, the more CHANCES of
winning you have. But the winning isn't certified.
Also, If you restrict attacks (a bit at least) by saying that one army can't
attack more than once a month/week/some period of time, you ensure that not
all creations will be destroyed during one week... (This is my suggestion,
adding on to yours)
I like all the other stuff you suggested.
-Shiri
In lugnet.castle, Bill Jackson writes:
> I don't know if this has already been thought of by Pawel or anyone else, but
> I'll say it anyway. On Pawel's "Castle-World" website, he says that he needs
> to know the dimensions of the universe. I think distances should still be
> measured in LUs. As an example, instead of being 950 miles across the world,
> it could be 10,000x10,000 LU. If we did the measurements in miles and feet,
> watch what could happen.
>
> My Dark Grey Castle is probably one third as large as Strombrachter. Pawel
> says Strombrachter is 500 feet by 500 feet. I want my castle to be bigger,
> but instead of adding on to it to make it bigger than Strombrachter, I just
> say that my castle is 900 feet by 900 feet.
>
> So, in order to keep everything realistic, we must first make a large map of
> the Castle World (let's say it's 10,000 by 10,000 LU.) We then divide the map
> into 500x500 LU squares on a grid. Everyone gets their very own 500x500 LU
> section to do what they please with. I have a 96x96 castle. This leaves
> about 404x404 LU worth of space in my square. Does this mean parts of this
> square are given to other people? No. BUT I cannot get any more squares
> unless I add onn another 404x404 LU worth of creations. After the LU of your
> creations surpasses the 500x500 square, you are given another square to work
> with. This square can be anywhere you want as long as the square you want is
> not owned by someone else, so you can start a new colony in a new place.
>
>
> What I think would also be nice would be if you could invade other people's
> squares once in awhile and conquer them. The defeated person would be given a
> new square somewhere while the successful invader could build things in his
> new square. Let's look at an example. I have my 96x96 castle, so I can't get
> a new square. But, I decide to summon up my army of 400 soldiers and lay
> siege to Pawel's square***. If I win, I get to have that square, no matter if
> my creations do not exceed 500x500 or not.
>
> I think this would be an organized way of dividing land, and would prevent
> many conflicts and sloppiness.
>
> ***On a final note, if we really want this to be realistic, when my soldiers
> destroyed Pawel's square, he would get a new one. Let's say Pawel's square
> contained the Gryphon's Nest and the Devil's Keep. He could not just
> reconstruct these two structures out of nowhere in his new square. Instead,
> he would have to scan in a picture of the structures being built and then be
> able to display the Nest and the Keep again. People may disagree with this,
> but it's the only way to be chronogically correct. When Rome was destroyed,
> did it suddenly pop up again in, say, Austria? No. Rome would have to
> rebuild itself in Austria.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
Ok, I'm just gonna ramble here, and hopefully someone will be inspired
from my ideas to think of something better. :)
Shiri wrote:
>
> I like your ideas, but a few questions:
>
> -What units are LUs? (not light years I guess)
I dont know myself, but I would assume something like "Lego Units"?
(Studs?) [I am usually decent at guessing acronyms. Or at least funny
alternatives. :)]
>
> -How would you determine who wins the war? Army sizes aren't enough, there are
> cases throughout history where little armies overcame big ones. (e.g.
> Maccabies against Greeks, Israel against arab states in 1967) Dice? Too
> random, isn't it? Maybe you get a "die" for every, say, ten soldiers. (or
> twenty, or 100, never mind) Then the bigger your army, the more CHANCES of
> winning you have. But the winning isn't certified.
Hard to make it simple enough to not be constraining, but not so simple
so as to
feel overly random and arbitrary.
Dice are good, but Perhaps some influence of dice and other influence
based on Offensive capabilities
vs defensive?
(Height of walls? # of seiege engines? Guard Towers, Arrow slits, etc?
Nestled in Mountains?)
[I probably missed an earlier discussion on a similar subject/same
subject under a different Subject[er, as newsreaders go that is, so
apologies if I'm going over irrelevant material]
>
> Also, If you restrict attacks (a bit at least) by saying that one army can't
> attack more than once a month/week/some period of time, you ensure that not
> all creations will be destroyed during one week... (This is my suggestion,
> adding on to yours)
>
> I like all the other stuff you suggested.
>
> -Shiri
On the subject of rebuilding, perhaps they are more or less thrown to
some somewhat nearby/reachable area as 'refugees' and
then are allowed a certain # of bricks / unit of time. [this Re: The
Rome Rebuilt in a Day comment] to build with,etc.
Perhaps make this a rule also for anyone wanting to build, expand etc.
Perhaps be based on population or somesuch.
(nonsoldiers? Hmmm.)
You know, if I am totally off topic here and such [it being relatively
late and I'm feeling a bit ill] this STILL sounds neat to me. :)
-Michel
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
> ***On a final note, if we really want this to be realistic, when my soldiers
> destroyed Pawel's square, he would get a new one. Let's say Pawel's square
> contained the Gryphon's Nest and the Devil's Keep. He could not just
> reconstruct these two structures out of nowhere in his new square. Instead,
> he would have to scan in a picture of the structures being built and then be
> able to display the Nest and the Keep again. People may disagree with this,
> but it's the only way to be chronogically correct. When Rome was destroyed,
> did it suddenly pop up again in, say, Austria? No. Rome would have to
> rebuild itself in Austria.
So you're saying that rome wasn't REbuilt in a day? :)
-David
| | | | | | |
