4.0 Dwarf Capital Planning/ideas ((Ooc))

[xSPULLERx 240]

I guess perhaps we could have a clergy half submerged into the rock in the "middle".  Since we dont want people in the middle much, and that the religion is very important to dwarven rp, it would make since to put it there.  Are aims it to keep people in the merchant area.  I dont think there should be much of anything else in the middle so that it doesn't get too cluttered and it will help maintain a natural feel to it.  Though I want to bring up and issue, we don't want to make the area completely stone.  Charles and I have discusses on possibly having a few custom made spruce trees, and maybe some grass.  Also the homes, we will likely use spruce as a secondary material, though maybe netherbrick could be good as well.  What do you guys think?

[shiftnative 3103]

I've changed the dwarven lands a little, hows it look?

(Might need a little more snow on the mountain looming over the city ;p)

 

[TEEbrown 348]

Agreed. Take a good look at the architectural design at Kal'Anart. We incorporated a lot of spruce wood into our building. Try utilizing plain smoothstone and cobble. It's been more complex configurations of stone brick lately that I've seen. Netherbrick could work as long as we could get our hands on it constantly. Most of the buildings will be done IG and we should build with the resources that we have around us. I would love to see us use more rare gems and minerals (gold, lapis, iron, etc.) later on in our builds when we have the ore. This shows more of our dedication to mining and our overall greed. For example.

 

 

Kal'Urguan Throne Room.

[TEEbrown 348]

I've changed the dwarven lands a little, hows it look?

(Might need a little more snow on the mountain looming over the city ;p)

 

 

Looks great Native. I'm sure you've been reading the posts, but we are going for a Markharth-like city. It would be fitting if we had a more "basin-a-top-a-mountain" kinda landscape. (if that makes and geographical sense lol) Something along those lines if you could fashion it into that. Although, we can always form our cities around the landscape and form it to our needs. Either way works really, just means more diggy diggy.

[xSPULLERx 240]

I've changed the dwarven lands a little, hows it look?

(Might need a little more snow on the mountain looming over the city ;p)

 

Shift, we are going to need a more enclosed circle, I think.  We dont want to have a wall/gate so long to fill that whole empty spot.  And maybe the bowl should be risen almost half way up the mountains?  I dont know just a suggestion.

 

edit:  Oh and how is the "build server" going to work?  Charles said it wont start until december?  That troubles me because that's when the new Hobbit is coming out and I'd think we'd want to prepare a release around then.  And maybe open for winter break.  So that we can grasp the new player base. 

[shiftnative 3103]

Shift, we are going to need a more enclosed circle, I think.  We dont want to have a wall/gate so long to fill that whole empty spot.  And maybe the bowl should be risen almost half way up the mountains?  I dont know just a suggestion.

That's do-able, lemme poke around

[xSPULLERx 240]

That's do-able, lemme poke around

Alright, send something back when you have it.

[Charles_Grimlie 1072]

I say we use regular brick for the rooves as the Markarth gold rooves wouldn't look good in minecraft. Netherbrick is far too dark red to look good with stone structures, also as mentioned by TEEbrown constant supply would be a common problem as well.

[Tethras 278]

How about we ask people to build concept designs in single player and upload screenshots to this thread? I think it would give people a clearer idea of what the city will actually look like, so we know if it will actually work. Meaning we don't get the whole "Oh... I don't like that concept." From what I heard of the 3.0 build the city was built twice, the concept changing. I think we need to solidify the concept to avoid having to completely rebuild it, or going for a new design that isn't part of any recommendations in this thread.

 

Quick Edit: Found a design of one of the Markarth Buildings. It looks quite good, considering it was made a year ago. 

[Lefty 1696]

This is what Markarth looks in minecraft version, however the maker had some obvious mistakes.

http://imgur.com/aKs7AVP,5fBIrop,ZgE9Q2i,CPSFuNf,l0mZ9Q3,rwJiHv7,KiMykMG,itqbGz0,GRyly1X,erNz1Sa,D3qwVVt,V4yka9C,kWTZ0eK,jG00V6C,o2SIqFI,FBx3jgO,RNqU8VP,9FYhFuz,bp3rjmR#0

[Zezimus 1523]

From what I heard of the 3.0 build the city was built twice, the concept changing. I think we need to solidify the concept to avoid having to completely rebuild it, or going for a new design that isn't part of any recommendations in this thread.

 

The main trouble with 3.0 was that we had a circular type of design originally, which though looking very nice, was incredibly difficult to build in game where we could use only cubes. The Kal'Urguan type of design that we ended up sticking with was only our second choice, acting as a type of back up idea. As you've pointed out however, there's already videos on youtube that show the city is perfectly possible to build in minecraft. The main question is therefore how close we should stick to the original concept and how we want the landscape around the city to be like.  Thankfully, outdoor cities are generally much easier to adapt than underground cities where we have to completely redo the design if we change our idea.

[Blundermore 2741]

I think your enterance should be underground, you would have a Dwarven door of sorts which merges into the mountain side or soemthing, when you step inside you come to a hall much like the one in Moria.

 

When you reach the end of this hall you would come to the main gate.

 

(Something like that but underground)

 

Then it would open up into a cavern of sorts...

Something like that is what I think would be cool...

 

 

[xSPULLERx 240]

The main trouble with 3.0 was that we had a circular type of design originally, which though looking very nice, was incredibly difficult to build in game where we could use only cubes. The Kal'Urguan type of design that we ended up sticking with was only our second choice, acting as a type of back up idea. As you've pointed out however, there's already videos on youtube that show the city is perfectly possible to build in minecraft. The main question is therefore how close we should stick to the original concept and how we want the landscape around the city to be like.  Thankfully, outdoor cities are generally much easier to adapt than underground cities where we have to completely redo the design if we change our idea.

I have to agree with Zezimus, we have to be careful about circular designs.  However, I think this build is more natural so that it doesnt have to be perfect curves and stuff like that so I feel that we can pull it off.  I'd like to start seeing some screens from you guys made in single player worlds, and ill do it as well on how buildings and terrain may look.  May Anbella grant yeh love.

[Paint 51]

City Type:

Cavern

Entrance:

Underground

City Concept:

Trade/Roleplay

Other Suggestions:

[shiftnative 3103]

The Dwarven lands so far,