Is anyone considering a non-fully-enclosed castle?

User avatar
Audles
Ogre
Ogre
Posts: 629
Joined: Mon Jul 21, 2014 4:32 pm
Location: Portland, OR

Re: Is anyone considering a non-fully-enclosed castle?

Post by Audles » Fri Mar 18, 2016 1:25 pm

Blue Prophet wrote:
Limbolance wrote:I'm afraid we have reached a point where DF cannot afford to show more and backers won't pledge more based on what is shown... Damn inertia...
To me, the SGs are (due to their limited nature) a non factor. Kinda different for this KS. I understand why, but it removed them as a contributing factor for me.
I originally wanted a Citadel pledge (even though it didn't fit my needs) - until they didn't have Towers. Then I wanted to go to Grand Citadel, until I realized that the Towers were not free standing and it didn't include Add Ons AND hit damn near my maximum budget.
Looking at my true needs - I need a Rampart, 2 Towers and some additional wall pieces which will leave me room to get Add Ons - until the Add Ons didn't match those needs either.
So, I'm torn - to make me happy...
1) Grand Entrance Pledge $555 (Don't even care if its discounted any further)
Ramparts + 2 Towers (which should qualify for 3 SGs based on the display)
2) Add On packages aimed EQUALLY at the Castles and the DT, Caverns and CBS needs. REALLY like the Modifiable Wall, Monster Mountain (rumored) and 8x8's (would really like to see 2 each 8x8s in Wood, Stone, Cavern and Clear and modified so the Post Holes go through) for example.
I'm thinking mostly the same way, maybe with a slightly smaller budget. I like the idea of a Grand Entrance Pledge which has Ramparts + 2 Towers (which only makes sense if it is slightly discounted since I can get those three pledges separately in the pledge manager anyway). I would consider calling it a "Castle Facade Pledge" since that is really how it will be used. This pledge would be useful for GC pledgers too, as it gives the other two towers plus another gate for inner buildings or a separate entrance to the outer wall.
I've been wanting this since day 1. The problem with buying multiple base pledges is that the shipping costs are bundled into those pledges. Going Ramparts + Watchtower + Watchtower (unpainted) is $555 with 3 stretch goals. Compare that to a Citadel at $455, which arguably has more complex and varied pieces. I can see the rounded pieces being more expensive to produce, but I think that added cost for a "3 stretch goal pledge" seems unfair. My 2 copper. I'm hoping the Tower Add-On pack fixes this somewhat.

Blue Prophet
Orc
Orc
Posts: 368
Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2014 10:51 am

Re: Is anyone considering a non-fully-enclosed castle?

Post by Blue Prophet » Thu Mar 17, 2016 6:50 pm

Limbolance wrote:I'm afraid we have reached a point where DF cannot afford to show more and backers won't pledge more based on what is shown... Damn inertia...
To me, the SGs are (due to their limited nature) a non factor. Kinda different for this KS. I understand why, but it removed them as a contributing factor for me.
I originally wanted a Citadel pledge (even though it didn't fit my needs) - until they didn't have Towers. Then I wanted to go to Grand Citadel, until I realized that the Towers were not free standing and it didn't include Add Ons AND hit damn near my maximum budget.
Looking at my true needs - I need a Rampart, 2 Towers and some additional wall pieces which will leave me room to get Add Ons - until the Add Ons didn't match those needs either.
So, I'm torn - to make me happy...
1) Grand Entrance Pledge $555 (Don't even care if its discounted any further)
Ramparts + 2 Towers (which should qualify for 3 SGs based on the display)
2) Add On packages aimed EQUALLY at the Castles and the DT, Caverns and CBS needs. REALLY like the Modifiable Wall, Monster Mountain (rumored) and 8x8's (would really like to see 2 each 8x8s in Wood, Stone, Cavern and Clear and modified so the Post Holes go through) for example.
I'm thinking mostly the same way, maybe with a slightly smaller budget. I like the idea of a Grand Entrance Pledge which has Ramparts + 2 Towers (which only makes sense if it is slightly discounted since I can get those three pledges separately in the pledge manager anyway). I would consider calling it a "Castle Facade Pledge" since that is really how it will be used. This pledge would be useful for GC pledgers too, as it gives the other two towers plus another gate for inner buildings or a separate entrance to the outer wall.

Mydienon
Orc
Orc
Posts: 257
Joined: Sun Mar 23, 2014 4:18 pm
Contact:

Re: Is anyone considering a non-fully-enclosed castle?

Post by Mydienon » Thu Mar 17, 2016 5:08 pm

Limbolance wrote:I'm afraid we have reached a point where DF cannot afford to show more and backers won't pledge more based on what is shown... Damn inertia...
Another possibility is that most backers are familiar with previous Dwarven Forge Kickstarters, and know that Dwarven Forge won't reveal all of the possible add-ons until the last day (or sometimes the last hour) of the campaign.

I'm in for a Grand Citadel, but I haven't increased my pledge for any add-ons, because I don't know what the final add-on options and stretch goals will be. For example, I don't want to add a Mountain Floor, Mountain Cliff, and Mountain Peak pack if, later in the campaign, there is a single add-on that provides all of those pieces. Or, I don't want to add a Stone Bridge if, later in the campaign, those pieces are available as stretch goals. Etc.

In order to reach stretch goals, I know I should just go ahead and pledge my theoretical "maximum pledge amount", then adjust it up or down later. But I hate to do that (especially adjusting down) if it means the total funded amount retracts from previously-reached stretch goals.

We have a couple weeks left. I guess sometime in a week or so I'll try to figure out an accurate pledge amount based on what's available, then finalize it on the last day...

User avatar
Limbolance
Orc
Orc
Posts: 238
Joined: Wed Jul 23, 2014 12:27 am
Location: Clinton Township, MI

Re: Is anyone considering a non-fully-enclosed castle?

Post by Limbolance » Thu Mar 17, 2016 4:51 pm

I'm afraid we have reached a point where DF cannot afford to show more and backers won't pledge more based on what is shown... Damn inertia...
To me, the SGs are (due to their limited nature) a non factor. Kinda different for this KS. I understand why, but it removed them as a contributing factor for me.
I originally wanted a Citadel pledge (even though it didn't fit my needs) - until they didn't have Towers. Then I wanted to go to Grand Citadel, until I realized that the Towers were not free standing and it didn't include Add Ons AND hit damn near my maximum budget.
Looking at my true needs - I need a Rampart, 2 Towers and some additional wall pieces which will leave me room to get Add Ons - until the Add Ons didn't match those needs either.
So, I'm torn - to make me happy...
1) Grand Entrance Pledge $555 (Don't even care if its discounted any further)
Ramparts + 2 Towers (which should qualify for 3 SGs based on the display)
2) Add On packages aimed EQUALLY at the Castles and the DT, Caverns and CBS needs. REALLY like the Modifiable Wall, Monster Mountain (rumored) and 8x8's (would really like to see 2 each 8x8s in Wood, Stone, Cavern and Clear and modified so the Post Holes go through) for example.

kmj9907
Orc
Orc
Posts: 308
Joined: Sun Dec 29, 2013 5:18 pm

Re: Is anyone considering a non-fully-enclosed castle?

Post by kmj9907 » Sat Mar 12, 2016 10:58 am

I completely agree with arsthein and Arcarius2001. I don't really know where or how DF is planning on releasing the platform packs, whether as their own add-on or part of something larger, but these would give people who own the older sets a great reason to get into this KS. Perhaps the reason they've been looking for. They, along with the 8x8 floor / post combination, also provide an elegant way for elevated and mult-tiered setups for the older sets. I'd be able to have a two-story inn sitting on a basement and sewer below, and use 2x2 or 4x4 pieces whereever I want. It seems really useful to have the platforms (or trays, whatever we call em) as a pack of their own to maximize modularity and backward compatibility.

User avatar
Arcarius2001
Minotaur Lord
Minotaur Lord
Posts: 2018
Joined: Wed May 04, 2011 11:32 am
Location: California

Re: Is anyone considering a non-fully-enclosed castle?

Post by Arcarius2001 » Sat Mar 12, 2016 9:48 am

arsthein wrote:
2) Now this is very important: Let me purchase Roof Platforms add-on packs. Tons of them. 4X4 inches, 6X6, 4X6. Round and Square. I would buy a freakin' ton of those. Make them the way that I can use multi-layered buildings with my standard dungeon pieces, hell, even DoE and RotA (or cavern!). Those pieces are freakin' brilliant, how come that there are not packs of them? they even achieve almost total compatibility with the old Medieval Building System.
This idea is overflowing with merit. It should be a no-brainer to put this out as an add-on. Has anyone seen any response to it yet???

User avatar
jackattack
Minotaur Lord
Minotaur Lord
Posts: 3359
Joined: Sun Mar 04, 2012 12:47 pm

Re: Is anyone considering a non-fully-enclosed castle?

Post by jackattack » Sat Mar 12, 2016 7:12 am

They only show what they can already afford to produce, or what they are so close to having funded that they are willing to risk the difference. When the molds for new pieces are paid for by pledges for other items, they include a new add-on (or possibly a new pledge level).

If the initial funding goal had been set higher, a good portion of the add-ons we see now could have been shown up front, or possibly included in (additional) larger pledge levels, like a "Deluxe" Castle that includes interior walls and crenellations.

DF could show more of what they have planned, with the funding milestones necessary, but would that inspire more (hesitant) backers to pledge immediately so they can pledge more when their target add-ons are available, or will it discourage hesitant backers from pledging until their target add-ons are available?
Favorite Pieces: Chasms, 45 Degree Passages, River & Lava Banks, Ledges, Large Curved Walls, Elevation Arch

Arravis
Orc
Orc
Posts: 229
Joined: Sun Apr 28, 2013 9:44 pm
Location: Huntsville, AL

Re: Is anyone considering a non-fully-enclosed castle?

Post by Arravis » Sat Mar 12, 2016 1:00 am

I do not understand why they're waiting on so much material... its not doing the kickstarter campaign any favors.

GODofwar
Minotaur Lord
Minotaur Lord
Posts: 2514
Joined: Wed Mar 04, 2015 9:46 pm
Location: Midwest

Re: Is anyone considering a non-fully-enclosed castle?

Post by GODofwar » Fri Mar 11, 2016 9:12 pm

Spiropolous the Minotaur wrote:Talistran,
We will certainly have long wall packs...we show a long Gorgonite wall in the intro video...and towers as well...keep in mind those towers can also be half round towers set against your long walls:)
Yay!.............but...............when.....

The Least Weasel
Totus KS Delendum Est
WeaselWarGod

User avatar
Stormfury
Ogre
Ogre
Posts: 500
Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2013 8:43 am

Re: Is anyone considering a non-fully-enclosed castle?

Post by Stormfury » Fri Mar 11, 2016 7:28 am

Spiropolous the Minotaur wrote:Talistran,
We will certainly have long wall packs...we show a long Gorgonite wall in the intro video...and towers as well...keep in mind those towers can also be half round towers set against your long walls:)
Can we have long wall packs and 8x8 floor packs sooner rather than later? I think this might push the kickstarter a bit as many of us are interested in these.
He who laughs last, thinks slowest.

Xeno Syncretic Order - Salvation Through Unity

Post Reply

Return to “Kickstarter 4 Discussion”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 10 guests