Imagine the sex robots 3000+ years from now. I mean, the guns are unrealistic.
My understanding is that this game presumes not-FTL so a lot of that is travel time while in cold sleep.
Even so, if you want to go pure realism/plausibility the weapon distribution is silly. Fortunately the game is not so constrained.
Quote from: KingKnee on February 03, 2017, 12:56:13 PM
Imagine the sex robots 3000+ years from now. I mean, the guns are unrealistic.
The guns are realistic (not their stats which aren't). Kinetic weapons are just that efficient. :P
Quote from: KingKnee on February 03, 2017, 12:56:13 PM
Imagine the sex robots 3000+ years from now. I mean, the guns are unrealistic.
It mainly goes with how people travel in cryosleep, so every planet is a different tech level. You have glitterworlds that are all power armor and lazer guns (pew pew), to planets stuck at earths 21st century tech. Basically, some of the people might have been in cryo for a 1000 years and to them, a combustion pistol is a common thing, while those that spend 20 years in cryo would be expecting to have a lazer gun and a combustion pistol to be an antique.
Well, do you have a convincing alternative to fossil fuels ? They are incredibly energy efficient per unit of mass.
There is a reason people fantasize about lasers IN SPACE: no dust in space, no clouds, no fog. And what if enemy covers itself in mirrors ?
Still, you didn't address my point about advanced sex robots.
Quote from: b0rsuk on February 03, 2017, 02:21:32 PM
Well, do you have a convincing alternative to fossil fuels ? They are incredibly energy efficient per unit of mass.
There is a reason people fantasize about lasers IN SPACE: no dust in space, no clouds, no fog. And what if enemy covers itself in mirrors ?
US military has drones that can destroy other drones with lasers.
The advantage to a non-kinetic weapon is the lack of need for ammo/ease of transport of alternatives to ammo.
However even relatively weak nations militarily have much better arms today than end game Rimworld colonies have. To an extent that makes sense, since none of these settlements are near nation-levels of industry, but if you're making a space ship, launching drop pods, pulling strings of mechanoids, researching advanced tech like cryogenics then it's strange that arms are so constrained. Even power armor is inconsistently strong with the weapons available :p.
It's not a game trying to be super tight with lore consistency though, it is pushing for gameplay consistency which is the correct approach IMO.
QuoteStill, you didn't address my point about advanced sex robots.
Constant +12 (arguably more considering) mood would be a little overpowered :p.
Kinetic weapons are simple, hard to screw up, and easy to maintain - Perfect for a trip into the unknown aboard a sleeper ship. They also work without the need for any fancy things like power sources or charging or specialized mixtures of gases. If you have a projectile and a way to make it go very fast, you've got a weapon.
Quote from: Trylobyte on February 03, 2017, 02:42:15 PM
Kinetic weapons are simple, hard to screw up, and easy to maintain - Perfect for a trip into the unknown aboard a sleeper ship. They also work without the need for any fancy things like power sources or charging or specialized mixtures of gases. If you have a projectile and a way to make it go very fast, you've got a weapon.
If we're going this route I'd expect to see a LOT more 12 gauge shotguns and a lot less ARs which require manufactured ammunition your target planet is unlikely to self-produce a while. Said shotguns can push a lot of non-standard stuff to lethal speeds easily and are easier to maintain than the automatic weapons in the game.
I'm a bit disappointed the shotgun has a high-ish cooldown time compared to machine pistol and bows, because it would be a great stick-and-move weapon otherwise. It's damage profile is also JUST low enough that clothing will keep limbs intact, a pity really.
Quote from: TheMeInTeam on February 03, 2017, 02:47:24 PMI'm a bit disappointed the shotgun has a high-ish cooldown time compared to machine pistol and bows, because it would be a great stick-and-move weapon otherwise. It's damage profile is also JUST low enough that clothing will keep limbs intact, a pity really.
Yeah. The general lack of oomph shotguns have makes me sad too.
dunno what you're talking about with primitive weapons...
even the bow's self-replicate endless arrows! now that's technology!
Quote from: Limdood on February 03, 2017, 04:20:00 PM
dunno what you're talking about with primitive weapons...
even the bow's self-replicate endless arrows! now that's technology!
Frags and molotovs are the most impressive TBH. Must have one of those interdimensional bags or a hand-held factory going on.
Velocitas eradico...... "speed destroys"
Note that Rimworld doesn't actually have DEW, or Directed Energy Weapons. The Charge Rifle is more along the lines of a railgun than a lazer. It fires extremely small projectiles, "coated" with electrically charged particles, which change phase when they hit a target, causing an explosion.
However, the point remains that, no matter how far in the future you get, hitting anything hard/fast enough will destroy/kill it, be it a person, an animal or a vehicle. This is what bullets do. They travel so fast, they effectively vaporize flesh when they hit.
Plus, ballistic firearms are easy to make, easy to use, easy to maintain, and easy to keep supplied, especially when compared to energy weapons.
I mean, you can make an AK-pattern rifle on a blacksmith forge, if you really wanted to.
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/KineticWeaponsAreJustBetter
You could also make a blackpowder musket, along with powder and projectiles, using stuff you have around your house/farm.
The word "Rimworld" is another way of saying "backwater world".
On the rimworld every game is based on, a previous civilization had risen and destroyed itself, and all technology and knowledge was lost. The survivors are the primitive tribespeople you encounter, hence the primitive weapons.
I dont get this argument tho.
The year is 3000. 'Backwater' planets still using that tech makes no sense. Thats like saying today 3rd world countries still use bow's and arrows'
Why would anyone still be using 1500 year old technology? Its not like half developed nations today use bow's and arrows. They use the old versions of current tech.
In 1500 years, why would the most common 'old' stuff be tech from today? Wouldn't it be tech from a couple hundreds years ago? So instead of everyone using M1911's and AK-47's as well as future Charge Rifles, they would be using top of the line Charge Rifles, and then the poor people would use outdated, old, crappy charge rifles?
Like if you were in a battle line, facing off against murderous automated robots, and someone was handing out Pulse Rifles, shoulder firing napalm launchers, wouldn't you be a bit pissed when someone handed you a 1500 year old gun?
Its not even a stat problem. Its an identity problem that the game has - this is space western - why am I wielding an Lee Enfield? Shouldn't it be a Rimvarment Hunting Rifle? Why is it a 'pistol' instead of a Frontier Protection Revolver?
Bascially the weapons as they stand feel so much like a 'stand in'. They have no connection to the world around them. Why are they mass producing UZI's a millennia or more into the future? We barely produce them now....
Kinetic weaponry would be easier to manufacture, and provide the same general use as a Tokamak rifle, minus what is just a controlled small explosion.
It's just a matter of logistics. Realistically speaking, manufacturing Tokamak rifles would be an absolute nightmare for a normal rimworld colony. While they would know they exist, and they can engineer them around that idea, the level of quality control you would need to put into manufacturing one of those would be a nightmare.
It's simply easier, and cheaper, to arm a group of pre-glitter peoples with proven kinetic weaponry, than it would be to manufacture Tokamaks.
Logistics.
Means of production limit the equipment available and ready to maintain.That means bullets are go and the robots can be watched through the TV tubes. However, what if der robots disguise themselves as survivors?
Quote from: CiceroThePoet on February 03, 2017, 09:14:40 PM
Kinetic weaponry would be easier to manufacture, and provide the same general use as a Tokamak rifle, minus what is just a controlled small explosion.
It's just a matter of logistics. Realistically speaking, manufacturing Tokamak rifles would be an absolute nightmare for a normal rimworld colony. While they would know they exist, and they can engineer them around that idea, the level of quality control you would need to put into manufacturing one of those would be a nightmare.
It's simply easier, and cheaper, to arm a group of pre-glitter peoples with proven kinetic weaponry, than it would be to manufacture Tokamaks.
Logistics.
Why? Ballistic (bows and arrows are kinetic weapons) weapons require a pretty decent production base to make them of any quality. You have to be able to produce quality steel, work it, forge it, machine it. Its not quick and easy. If I was going to invest time/effort into making weapons production, I would make weapons that are current in terms of technology.
This is 1500 year into the future. I would look at ballistic weapons with the same eye as I would a bow and arrow. Old, ancient technology, long surpassed by current technology.
As you move away from technology, it becomes harder to recreate, simply because the general everyday usage isnt there. Everyday people generally can't make bow's and arrow's because the in depth knowledge of working wood (grains, veins, types, density etc) just isn't there. That said, they can generally make some form of explosive, simply because we exist in a time of chemistry, so there is a base knowledge in our society of how it works.
I don't see why in 1500 years there hasn't been a technology that came along and supplanted ballistic weapons.
To bring it back to the game, I dont see why a game set 1500 year into the future would continue to use boring everyday weapons names, when they could simply be renamed/reskinned something more fitting with the theme
Because it's a game and not really a window 3000+ years into the future. If it works well with the theme and setting then why not.
Quote from: Mikhail Reign on February 03, 2017, 07:49:20 PM
Its not even a stat problem. Its an identity problem that the game has - this is space western - why am I wielding an Lee Enfield? Shouldn't it be a Rimvarment Hunting Rifle? Why is it a 'pistol' instead of a Frontier Protection Revolver?
But I agree with this though. Tynan, give us revolvers already
However, whether or not its a realistic depiction of the future is a different question.
It's simply extremely difficult to beat the efficiency of kinetic weaponry, and traditional chemical guns are reliable, low maintenance, and extremely effective. Ever seen what a .50 cal. sabot (armor-piercing), explosive, or incendiary round can do, or seen how far they can accurately fire (2 km, on a tripod, for ball ammo =o)? Do you understand how powerful a laser you'd have to field, in a small, man-portable package (85 lbs. for the old M2 but it's a real porker xD, you can easily field a 10-12 pound .50 cal. rifle), and how large a power supply you'd need, to duplicate this performance..?! You already HAVE charge rifles, you know, which are essentially particle cannons. Furthermore, any power supply that large IS a bomb; ever seen what happens when a fully-charged lithium battery is compromised?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SMy2_qNO2Y0 <- this is a cell phone battery. Think about how much power is in a single megajoule laser shot o.O' !
You can make traditional guns entirely via good machining and a bit of basic chemistry, and you can carry a ridiculous number of effective rounds for most (hundreds, easily). These rounds generally are quite shock/damage resistant, humidity resistant, and most rifles can fire at least as far as you can see, even with optics. They're cheap, light, tough, need no additional power to work, and can be field-maintained easily. What more, exactly, do you want from a weapon..?!
Yeah, you could make a small, manpack-able railgun or laser cannon, say, with approximately the same tech level as charge rifles, but there's simply no damn reason to do so at personal combat ranges, and the costs and maintenance are inevitably going to be a lot higher for things that aren't any more useful, that also are going to break far more often in ways you cannot repair in the field =p . Meh.
The way I see this, tribes are natives from that planet, colonies are settlers who arrived there using non-FTL transportation (or 2-3 generations after them), and pirates are... well pirates.
That's why tribes have neolithic weapons, colonies have XX century guns and pirates have mixed techs depending of who they've robbed.
On the other hand I agree, for a 5000 years old civilization, they sure lack in weapon tech. As a matter of fact all their tech leaves a lot to be desired.
When you think at year 2100, you think matter replicators, energy weapon tech, climate control, enhanced genetics, solar system colonization.
2200? Planetary shields, antimatter, FTL, teleportation.
2500? true AI, gravitational manipulation, star core energy extraction
3000? psionics, mind over matter.
... And yet, in year 5000 we are supposed to research colored lights.
Quote from: Mikhail Reign on February 03, 2017, 07:49:20 PM
I dont get this argument tho.
The year is 3000. 'Backwater' planets still using that tech makes no sense. Thats like saying today 3rd world countries still use bow's and arrows'
Why would anyone still be using 1500 year old technology? Its not like half developed nations today use bow's and arrows. They use the old versions of current tech.
This proves you don't know history, too. Many times in history an invention has been lost. Zero, crucial to proper math, has been independently discovered and lost many times. We use portland concrete, but there are examples of Roman exposed to harsh marine environments showing little wear and tear. Note there are many Roman constructions which stand well to this day. We still don't know how they made their superior concrete, although recent research shows presence of volcanic ash. Roman concrete was sturdier AND cheaper to make, you didn't have to use super high temperatures like our awesome modern concrete requires. I bet there are many more inventions that were completely lost. What about the library of Alexandria ? The Greek mechanism of Antikythera - it was only found in a shipwreck, but there are clues Greeks had more stuff like that. We know Greeks had steam engines, but they treated them like toys for kids.
More generally, medieval / dark ages started because of the fall of Roman civilization. Bronze age ended when major civilizations of the time were crippled by the Sea Peoples. Only Egypt survived, and it wasn't what it once was. It's common in history that a source of stability disappears, and - gradually, not suddenly - people lose ability to build, craft, lose their knowledge, know-how how to maintain or create advanced items. Sometimes it's deliberate - for example ISIS is destroying various ancient ruins because they were made by "infidels".
In fiction there are examples like "Book of the New Sun" by Gene Wolfe, "The Dying Earth" by Jack Vance (which inspired Dungeons&Dragons, which inspired nearly all computer RPG games we have today), and more. "Dune" by Frank Herbert, which Rimworld is influenced by (not as much as Firefly though), had all computers banned by a religious movement because there was a problem with sentient machines. The "Human Computer" and "Spice Miner" backgrounds of Rimworld are nods to Dune, as is Personal Shield. More recently there's the new Numenera setting, made for pen&paper RPG games, but also used in Torment: Tides of Numenera. It has no less than 9 (nine) civilization that rose and fallen on the same planet, and "magical artifacts" are simply items made by a civilization so advanced people barely understand how to use them.
Someone brought a great point about exploding cellphone batteries. I'd rather face an exploding pistol round, thank you. There's much talk about renewable energy sources, solar, wind power - but one of main problems is getting adequate batteries so a cloudy day doesn't ruin you. That's why Tesla cars are such a big deal. Now look at Rimworld and its exploding batteries. Would you feel safe with a colonist whose weapon can explode at any time ?
Why is AK-47 so damn popular ? It's not the greatest rifle ever, but its variants and successors are used WIDELY across the world, especially in developing countries. Sturdy, very little maintenance, rarely jams, hits hard, reasonably accurate. It loses to modern rifles, but those are nowhere near as reliable and require supply chain to work. Americans could rely on supplying their army by air, so they didn't care to make M16 - an equivalent of A47 from the time - particularly durable. Soviets could only dream of regular air supply drops, so they built AK-47 to last.
Funny, but your argument is possibly even better than you realized, because in the "Book of the Long Sun" series, long-forgotten AIs are also pivotal. GOD, I love Gene Wolfe..! *fangasm*
+1 internet cookie, flavor of your choice, for the Gene Wolfe and Jack Vance shout-outs; props.
Rimworld setting is a setting without Faster Than Light travel. We currently have a huge problem transporting cargo into orbit, so how do you build an advanced factory on another planet ? Space elevators are a potential solution, but even if made they would be very vulnerable to sabotage or war.
All modern satellites are the shape of an A-bomb! The rockets were developed to transport atomic bombs, not humans or their cargo. Similarly, research shows uranium reactors are inferior to thorium reactors, but thorium, while far more common, is much worse for exploding violently (and has no dangerous meltdowns). So they chose the research path to uranium reactors, because it's relatively easy to make atomic bombs with their help.
If there's something STOOPID in Rimworld it's the fact that uranium, not thorium, is the nuclear resource 3000 years from now.
After reading all the post here, i think of one thing, why bother improving handgun technology over and over to be more powerfull, while flesh body is still as weak a 2000 years before. A simple bullet burst can already kill a human in a split second, why bother creating a super laser rifle of the awesome death, that can kill a human body in "half" a split second? Oo
Rimworld is retro-futuristic.
Those settings NEVER make sense, especially not if the civilizations portrayed once had advanced computer technology.
But they are so much fun everyone tends to overlook that fact. It is one of the assumed base principles you just need to adhere to to be able to enjoy them.
It's the same with all variants of retro-futurism, be it steampunk, falloutlike, 40k, dune or rimworld.
About those sex robots, though: I guess in the glitterworlds they use tactile-genuine holobabes (and -dudes).
Quote from: Mikhail Reign on February 03, 2017, 07:49:20 PM
Why would anyone still be using 1500 year old technology? Its not like half developed nations today use bow's and arrows. They use the old versions of current tech.
There's older weapons technology still in use today. Crossbows are 2600 years old and some Special Forces units still use them. You can suppress a gun, but it still sounds like a gun. A crossbow shot is just as fatal and is nearly silent. Yes modern crossbows are different than ancient Chinese models, but they're similar enough that you can look at one, then the other, and go 'Yep, those are both crossbows.'
The effectiveness of a thing determines whether or not we use it, not the age of the thing. For a situation like a RimWorld, simple, reliable, easily-crafted projectile weapons just work.
Speaking of... Why don't we have crossbows on Rimworld?
Borsuk has it right. It's all about energy density. A power cell with enough power to power a laser comparable to a modern assault rifle would basically be a bomb. And probably very difficult to manufacture even with future tech.
In the end, people like lasers because they look futuristic, not because they're a particularly good idea (when it comes to personal weapons). It's likely any future laser weapons used on a human scale would be specialist weapons (laser=high accuracy so maybe sniper weapon).
In a universe of spread out planets t seems ok that some would be in the dumpster for tech and a little wild
US navy is testing gauss guns, and they have some very interesting properties. Naturally they don't advertise how unstable their batteries are. But the ammo they carry are fairly simple bolts. These don't explode. This is a big deal because one of most feared things for a warship is getting hit in the ammo compartment. Also, gauss guns are next to silent. They would make terrifying sniper rifles and terrorist weapons.
If Rimworld is supposed to have some more futuristic weapons, save it for something that CAN'T be done without high tech magic. Tesla coils, or railguns that pierce through multiple targets, that kind of stuff.
As for crossbows, in my country you need a "gun" license to own one, but you don't need for a bow. Crossbows are mostly inferior to guns, but they're still pretty damn deadly and EASY TO USE compared to bows. The best part is the rifle stock and trigger mechanism. It comes directly from crossbow. It simply works so well that it's been in use for thousands of years (Star Trek phasers are so awkward!!). Crossbow stock/trigger also works very well for cameras. You don't see them used that way because it makes police very nervous. It looks just like you're trying to shoot someone.
Quote from: b0rsuk on February 04, 2017, 03:53:21 AM
More generally, medieval / dark ages started because of the fall of Roman civilization. Bronze age ended when major civilizations of the time were crippled by the Sea Peoples. Only Egypt survived, and it wasn't what it once was. It's common in history that a source of stability disappears, and - gradually, not suddenly - people lose ability to build, craft, lose their knowledge, know-how how to maintain or create advanced items. Sometimes it's deliberate - for example ISIS is destroying various ancient ruins because they were made by "infidels".
Uh, Borsuk ....... technology actually
advanced during the so-called "Dark Ages"/medieval Europe, contrary to "popular knowledge". The windmill, the stirrup, the crossbow, 3-fields agriculture, Gothic Architecture as a whole, plenty of other technologies.
The Medieval ages were called "Dark" not because they sucked, but because Renaissance-era were, to be honest, talking themselves up and shit-talking their ancestors, and because not much was known about the time period. Now, in the modern day, we DO know more about the time period, and the term "Dark Ages" is now known as the "Migration Period" or "Early Middle Ages".
Also, medieval Europe didn't
exactly forget how to build Roman/Classical technologies, they just didn't have the means. When (Western) Rome fell (which, in and of itself, wasn't exactly the nigh-post apocalyptic event many people think of it as. It took a couple decades for the Empire to shit the bed, and the result was more "say goodbye to the old boss, say hi to the new boss"), most urban populations moved to the countryside, in order to grow their own food. Now, since premodern preindustrial agriculture is HARD AS FUCK, people flat-out didn't have the time to maintain roads, etc, and since forests were being cut down to make more cropland, there was less fuel for bathhouses and the like.
Again, contrary to "popular knowledge", the average Medieval peasant wasn't all that dirty. People, generally, don't really like being dirty, and medieval Europe was no exception. They still bathed, and washed their clothing, and cleaned their houses, they just did it less often (because it was more expensive and more time-consuming) than you or I. Roman-era sensibilities concerning cleanliness still prevailed for a couple centuries after its fall, and, when you really look at it, the Renaissance was actually
more disgusting than the preceding period. The first real epidemics of STD's, the resurgence of urban population booms, etc.
It recovered and advanced, but it took a nosedive first. We have few accounts of medieval times because literacy was so very rare in the period, and that's terrible enough in itself. When you don't have the means to build, and you can't write, you forget. As for hygiene, I don't remember many antique plagues, but they were common in medieval (no public baths!).
Quote from: b0rsuk on February 04, 2017, 03:30:55 PM
It recovered and advanced, but it took a nosedive first. We have few accounts of medieval times because literacy was so very rare in the period, and that's terrible enough in itself. When you don't have the means to build, and you can't write, you forget. As for hygiene, I don't remember many antique plagues, but they were common in medieval (no public baths!).
It
didn't take a nosedive, Borsuk.
Yes, technologies
gradually fell off, but not because we essentially "forgot", but because it wasn't economically feasible to maintain. An essential component of Roman concrete was volcanic ash from southern Italy. No matter how much you remember about concrete, if you don't have that ash, you are shit out of luck.
Same thing with bathouses. People
didn't forget how to make bathouses, or take baths, it just wasn't
economically feasible. Bathhouses require heating. The Romans used wood, because Lo and behold, Europe was positively
LOUSY with trees and forests! After the collapse of the WRE, urban populations fled to the countryside, because urban logistics (sewer, mainly, although food trade got interrupted as well) started to decline as Imperial bureaucracy failed. These now-rural populations, in order to have enough land to grow food,
cut down the trees. Hence, there was less firewood available for bathhouses. They tried using coal, but it made people sick, and was thrown out.
So, bathhouses died off, not because people forgot about them, but because they were too hard to maintain. People still took baths, however. And, in places were there was still abundant wood, like Scandinavia, Finland, and Russia, bathing-culture still stayed strong into the modern period. Sauna, anyone?
Same thing with roads. People didn't
"forget" how to build Roman-style roads, it just wasn't economically feasible (you will note that that last topic comes up a lot). Generally, road-building requires a strong State (aka government), with organized labor. The Romans used their military to build roads and infrastructure. Once the WRE fell, there was no real State left to organize things.
People still built roads, however, they just weren't the pinnacle of science that Roman roads were, namely because road-worthy stones are either 1) not located everywhere, or 2) hard to shape and fit. Instead, they used timber-and-track, or cannibalized Roman works for already-shaped stone.
Also, note that as soon as the "barbarians" (who in reality tended to be pretty Romanized) took over sections of the collapsed WRE, they started building infrastructure as soon as they were organized enough. For example, one of the main obligations of the Anglo-Saxon peasant was to work on roads and bridges.
As for plagues ....... the rate of plagues actually
dropped in the Middle Ages, at least in the early (and Early) parts. Mainly, because urban populations declined and spread out into the rural areas, and migration and immigration rates dropped (due to both people becoming occupied in agriculture, and because safe-travelling was not guarenteed). Lower urban populations + lower rates of migration = less chance for communicable diseases to spread.
There were
plenty of plagues in both the Classical eras and in the High + Late Middle Ages, mainly due to comparatively high urban distributions of populations. The months of July through October were known in the city of Rome as the "sickly months", and it is estimated that about 30,000 people died each year.
The Plague of Athens. The Antonine Plague. The Plague of Cyprian.
The Plague, the "Black Death".
If you don't know "the truth" about history, please don't spread misinformation.
I'm not taking your post as gospel. If you make claims like that, you need to provide sources.
Quote from: b0rsuk on February 04, 2017, 05:57:17 PM
I'm not taking your post as gospel. If you make claims like that, you need to provide sources.
Right back at you, pal.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_Ages_(historiography)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medieval_technology
While the articles themselves are interesting, the real meat of the info can be gleaned from the sources referenced by the texts, found at the bottom of the articles
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/3pjuc4/when_did_the_public_bath_house_die_out_in_europe/
http://www.medievalists.net/2013/04/did-people-in-the-middle-ages-take-baths/
Those two sources are less academic, although they do reference "proper" research
Quote from: Bozobub on February 04, 2017, 03:23:23 AM
Yeah, you could make a small, manpack-able railgun or laser cannon, say, with approximately the same tech level as charge rifles, but there's simply no damn reason to do so at personal combat ranges, and the costs and maintenance are inevitably going to be a lot higher for things that aren't any more useful, that also are going to break far more often in ways you cannot repair in the field =p . Meh.
I don't really see this to be intrinsically true. It would cost more to maintain a chariot today then it would a car, because current tech is easier to maintain then old. Current tech has cross overs, while old tech requires special knowledge in a specific old art form. This is why we have trouble rebuilding ancient boats that we find - no one builds boats like that anymore, so no one knows exactly how its done. We could build a new boat a lot simpler out of welded steel easier then a wooden one (or even riveted steel for that matter) simply because its uses techniques used everywhere else.
If I can build a reactor for a spaceship, solar panels, electric motors (for doors etc), batteries, stoves, air conditions etc etc out of stuff that I find on the ground, its a safe bet that they have access to some form of futuristic tech.
Saying that futuristic weaponry would be prohibitively expensive, large, dangerous etc etc 1500 years from now, is like saying 'You couldn't have a computer at home, they would be too big' in 1965. As we advance, stuff gets easier. The colonists have access to cyro freezing tech, space travel, charge rifles - why would there day to day gun be a M1911?
Quote from: Mikhail Reign on February 04, 2017, 09:58:59 PM
Quote from: Bozobub on February 04, 2017, 03:23:23 AM
Yeah, you could make a small, manpack-able railgun or laser cannon, say, with approximately the same tech level as charge rifles, but there's simply no damn reason to do so at personal combat ranges, and the costs and maintenance are inevitably going to be a lot higher for things that aren't any more useful, that also are going to break far more often in ways you cannot repair in the field =p . Meh.
I don't really see this to be intrinsically true. It would cost more to maintain a chariot today then it would a car, because current tech is easier to maintain then old. Current tech has cross overs, while old tech requires special knowledge in a specific old art form. This is why we have trouble rebuilding ancient boats that we find - no one builds boats like that anymore, so no one knows exactly how its done. We could build a new boat a lot simpler out of welded steel easier then a wooden one (or even riveted steel for that matter) simply because its uses technicians everywhere else.
If I can build a reactor for a spaceship, solar panels, electric motors (for doors etc), batteries, stoves, air conditions etc etc out of stuff that I find on the ground, its a safe bet that they have access to some form of futuristic tech.
Saying that futuristic weaponry would be prohibitively expensive, large, dangerous etc etc 1500 years from now, is like saying 'You couldn't have a computer at home, they would be too big' in 1965. As we advance, stuff gets easier. The colonists have access to cyro freezing tech, space travel, charge rifles - why would there day to day gun be a M1911?
I seriously doubt energy weapons will ever supersede kinetics weapons as personal weapons due to the energy densities involved. However, the rest of your point stands. If we use guns in the future, they will of course be more advanced than the ones we have today; light polymer cased or caseless telescoped ammunition, an electrical ignition system, and integrated "smartgun" electronics. Probably smart ammunition as well! :P Also railguns, coilguns, etc (more likely as vehicle/heavy weapons than personal weapons I think though).
However, Rimworld presumes a series of technological collapses have happened. You might not agree that is realistic but it is the presumption nonetheless. So worlds which are at a low tech level (industrial worlds) would use weapon patterns similar to the ones we have today simply because they don't have the means or ability to produce anything better. In addition, those worlds which can produce better weaponry may produce simpler weaponry in great abundance because that's all their more primitive customers can maintain.
Ok - A: can you stop calling ballistic weapons kinetic? A rail gun is a kinetic weapons. Pretty much ANYTHING is a kinetic weapon. Anything that moves a projectile. A catapult is a kinetic weapon.
Quote from: LordMunchkin on February 04, 2017, 10:16:00 PM
I seriously doubt energy weapons will ever supersede kinetics weapons as personal weapons due to the energy densities involved.
This is EXACTLY my computer in 1968 VS 2018 A computer wouldn't have fit in a building. Now one fits in to my hand. Thats only 50 years. Ok - so there was a collapse, but we remembered how to make solar panels, uranium reactors and fire alarms, but only 2 guns that we are going to make in the next 1500 years?
Again with the maintenance angle - these people are building reactors, bionics and power suits. I feel that an electrical based rail gun, for example, would be a lot easier to maintain in those conditions then a ballistic weapons, simply for the cross over in needs.
Also wouldn't Glitter worlds produce SOME kind of weaponry? Even if just defensive weapons.
I'm not the smartest person in the world or have a lot to add to this... But I'll add my two cents..
In the real world we know how things work, but remaking them well that is something different. I like to imagine being on an island. What could I make myself? A chess set? A computer? A small one shot pistol? Maybe.
Quote from: Seeker89 on February 04, 2017, 11:07:00 PM
I'm not the smartest person in the world or have a lot to add to this... But I'll add my two cents..
In the real world we know how things work, but remaking them well that is something different. I like to imagine being on an island. What could I make myself? A chess set? A computer? A small one shot pistol? Maybe.
Working from this - this game would be a lot more interesting if research was linked to the pawns. Like if you wanted to make guns, you would have to take in a metalsmith, and maybe a chemist. As the pawns them selves would KNOW stuff. Then expand the type of things you can build.
This way every colony would be different depending on what your people brought 'knowledge wise' to the table.
Quote from: Mikhail Reign on February 04, 2017, 11:04:37 PM
Ok - A: can you stop calling ballistic weapons kinetic? A rail gun is a kinetic weapons. Pretty much ANYTHING is a kinetic weapon. Anything that moves a projectile. A catapult is a kinetic weapon.
Quote from: LordMunchkin on February 04, 2017, 10:16:00 PM
I seriously doubt energy weapons will ever supersede kinetics weapons as personal weapons due to the energy densities involved.
This is EXACTLY my computer in 1968 VS 2018 A computer wouldn't have fit in a building. Now one fits in to my hand. Thats only 50 years. Ok - so there was a collapse, but we remembered how to make solar panels, uranium reactors and fire alarms, but only 2 guns that we are going to make in the next 1500 years?
Again with the maintenance angle - these people are building reactors, bionics and power suits. I feel that an electrical based rail gun, for example, would be a lot easier to maintain in those conditions then a ballistic weapons, simply for the cross over in needs.
Also wouldn't Glitter worlds produce SOME kind of weaponry? Even if just defensive weapons.
First off, I will continue to call them kinetic weapons because that suits my purpose just fine. If you can come up for a better general term for missiles, rockets, compressed gas weapons, conventional firearms, primitive firearms, low-tech missile weapons, coilguns, railguns, etc go ahead. Until then, arguing about semantics is awfully sophomoric.
Secondly, it's a mistake to believe technology and miniaturization will continue to advance in a linear fashion indefinitely into the future. There are physical limits to how much energy you can store chemically. That is a fact. Sure there are other means of storing energy but most conventional ones are equally nonviable for personal energy weapons. So you're going to have to do something exotic if you want a laser rifle that can outperform a M16. Which brings in the matter of cost which IS valid even in the future and in this case it won't be a M16 vs your laser rifle. It will be the M9000 with near zero recoil, less weight, smartgun accessories, 2x the ammo, and smart ammunition that can lock onto targets a mile away.
Thirdly, yes people do mix technologies of different levels. Ever wonder why people in Afghanistan are using donkeys, AK47's, and satellite phones? Because an isolated society often does not have the number of people or materials to become wholly self-sufficient. Thus, they rely on more primitive technology to fill the gaps (and carefully pick and choose the few techs they will maintain/import). If Rimworld were more realistic, there would be a new category of components that you couldn't produce and had to be traded for. Small colonies like our in game ones would be very dependent on steady trade to survive and maintain their style of life.
Lastly, where did I say glitter worlds wouldn't produce their own type of weaponry? I merely gave a reason why advanced spacefaring cultures would trade and produce lower-tech weapons.
Honestly, if you want to learn the challenges most spacefaring societies would face when trying to create a self-sufficient colony, I suggest you read some of the old (and newish) NASA/USAF plans to colonize the Moon and later Mars. It's basically almost impossible to build lots of advanced goods in an isolated environment like space. The most you can is produce food, water, raw material, a few specialized things like solar panels (with a lot of planning), and import everything else.
On a sidenote, if you're really disappointed with the lack of futuristic weaponry, I suggest you use the Rimsenal mod. ;D
Quote
Saying that futuristic weaponry would be prohibitively expensive, large, dangerous etc etc 1500 years from now, is like saying 'You couldn't have a computer at home, they would be too big' in 1965. As we advance, stuff gets easier. The colonists have access to cyro freezing tech, space travel, charge rifles - why would there day to day gun be a M1911?
And yet you can build neither. Both require access to a highly advanced factory, and very specialized knowledge. How would you manufacture ammunition ? By contrast, you could probably make an Awful charriot if you had a hammer, a saw, some nails, and a supply of wood. If you don't have wood, add an axe and a forest and you could still make one given enough time. Two slices of a thick tree to serve as wheels, a young but durable trunk as an axis.
"Rimworld" is a type of backwater planet. It's right there in the game's title. It's on the edge of the known universe, which has no faster-than-light travel. It's fundamental to the game's design. You may as well complain the game has Growing and Animals skill. Surely 3000 years from now they must have something better than agriculture ? Just spread some nanobot dust and food makes itself ?
Also, there was a good point that gunpowder weapons are deadly enough. If a single hit can be fatal, what else do you need ? What could be the possible improvement ?
I think the point here is that the Rimworld universe is a "post apocalyptic survival" scenario, repeated thousands of times over and over. All that compacted steel and machinery? You're living on the corpse of an ancient Glitterworld that nuked itself. There's advanced technology lying around (charged pulse rifle!). It's just that any civilization advanced enough to make them is also advanced enough to blow itself up and turn itself into a tribal civilization scavenging the remains.
The reason we're still using projectile weapons is that anyone with a basement workshop who knows what they're doing can make one. It's a bit harder to build a disintegrator ray gun in that mountain cave you call "home".
Quote from: Shurp on February 05, 2017, 07:31:41 AM
I think the point here is that the Rimworld universe is a "post apocalyptic survival" scenario, repeated thousands of times over and over. All that compacted steel and machinery? You're living on the corpse of an ancient Glitterworld that nuked itself. There's advanced technology lying around (charged pulse rifle!). It's just that any civilization advanced enough to make them is also advanced enough to blow itself up and turn itself into a tribal civilization scavenging the remains.
The reason we're still using projectile weapons is that anyone with a basement workshop who knows what they're doing can make one. It's a bit harder to build a disintegrator ray gun in that mountain cave you call "home".
I think Tynan said something like that some where on the forums.
Almost everything we have now a day is made with some form of technology. From power tools to full computerized robotics. Have you watched the show, How it's made? It takes technology to make technology, it has to start from somewhere.
We also can't expect all people to understand how to the technology or how to remake said technology. And sure you can make motor, but can you make all the tools that make the motor?
Youtube and other sites have videos showing how to make black gunpowder weapons. In contrast to other firearms, in my country you don't need a gun permit for them. But you do need for a crossbow.
Quote from: b0rsuk on February 03, 2017, 02:21:32 PM
There is a reason people fantasize about lasers IN SPACE: no dust in space, no clouds, no fog. And what if enemy covers itself in mirrors ?
Lasers can have different colors, and mirrors are mirrors just for visible light. Infrared of ultraviolet won't be fully reflected with usual mirror.
There must be very many mirror layers.
Infrared and ultraviolet is another thing, but are you sure laser weapons wouldn't have downsides ? What about muzzle flash (or the equivalent) ? Unless it's a single concentrated pulse lasting a tiny fraction of a second, you'd be making yourself visible (okay, I know lasers in real life are visible mostly because they deliberately shoot them in smoky or dusty interiors). But people who are asking for lasers definitely want visible lasers.
Quote from: b0rsuk on February 06, 2017, 10:11:20 AM
Infrared and ultraviolet is another thing, but are you sure laser weapons wouldn't have downsides ? What about muzzle flash (or the equivalent) ? Unless it's a single concentrated pulse lasting a tiny fraction of a second, you'd be making yourself visible (okay, I know lasers in real life are visible mostly because they deliberately shoot them in smoky or dusty interiors). But people who are asking for lasers definitely want visible lasers.
Any laser (with visible or invisible color), would be invisible in vacuum.
People who asking for lasers really asking for plasma or something alike.
Amazing arguments and a hell lot of fun to read *bored @work*
Please keep em coming, guys.
Quote from: Mikhail Reign on February 04, 2017, 11:11:29 PMWorking from this - this game would be a lot more interesting if research was linked to the pawns. Like if you wanted to make guns, you would have to take in a metalsmith, and maybe a chemist. As the pawns them selves would KNOW stuff. Then expand the type of things you can build.
This way every colony would be different depending on what your people brought 'knowledge wise' to the table.
This would be so cool. You should cross post that in the suggestions section, if it's not there already. I love the idea that a colony could potentially lose
knowledge.
It leads to all sorts of other interesting opportunities to add value to specific pawns/backgrounds (and thus player attachment, which is great for Story).
Regarding *lasers* vs projectiles: the goal of any weapon is to deliver a lot of energy as quickly as possible to a small space.
Projectiles do this job really well. Even in space combat nothing is more terrifying than a tungsten slug at orbital velocity. It'll punch a hole through anything. Your best defense is to have such a thin hull that it punches clean through without the energy being absorbed!
The chemical energy contained in a bullet cartridge is extremely effective at putting a large amount of energy very quickly into a small package. Lasers have far bulkier energy storage and have a hard time delivering the power as quickly.
Quote from: LordMunchkin on February 05, 2017, 12:07:38 AMFirst off, I will continue to call them kinetic weapons because that suits my purpose just fine. If you can come up for a better general term for missiles, rockets, compressed gas weapons, conventional firearms, primitive firearms, low-tech missile weapons, coilguns, railguns, etc go ahead. Until then, arguing about semantics is awfully sophomoric.
But thats not the point - we are talking about ballistic weapons - ie: current guns - VS some kinda futuristic weaponry - possibly kinetic, probably not ballistic. You grouping both under 'kinetic' isn't helpful to the conversation. Its like talking 'Mustang VS Ducati' and you calling them both 'car'. A personal mag-gun covers my argument and it is ALSO a kinetic weapon - I'm not saying that the colonists should have Halo alien weapons, just something that looks like it actually evolved from our current weaponry instead of just being an M16.
Like I dont even get the argument against this - Example: the current mid range gun in game is "Assault Rifle". The sprite is obviously an M16. It even use to be called an M16. What so 1500 year into the future we started reproducing a gun that is being phased out now?
What I'm saying is
A: Call it something interesting. Something with some in game flavor. Something that makes sense in game.
B: Make the sprite LOOK like a gun that was made in 3024, instead of being an M16. Same goes to the 'Pistol' (plainly a M1911), the Heavy SMG (Tech-9), the Survival Rifle (Lee - Enfield), the UZI (... an Uzi) and everything else. I mean what, in 1500 years we haven't found something better then Kevlar? (Also is Ty aware that Kevlar is a registered trademark and not a generic term?)
I was going to address the rest of your post directly, but it was all completely unrelated to anything that I said, and off on some wild tangent, so I didn't bother.
Quote from: b0rsuk on February 05, 2017, 02:02:46 AM
"Rimworld" is a type of backwater planet. It's right there in the game's title. It's on the edge of the known universe, which has no faster-than-light travel. It's fundamental to the game's design. You may as well complain the game has Growing and Animals skill. Surely 3000 years from now they must have something better than agriculture ? Just spread some nanobot dust and food makes itself ?
Well... we did. Most of the in game animals have been genetically modified. Grated, mostly for war, but some for agriculture. So yeah - thats covered - we have strange Muffflo animals instead of just standard pigs and sheep.
Quote from: b0rsuk on February 05, 2017, 02:02:46 AM
Also, there was a good point that gunpowder weapons are deadly enough. If a single hit can be fatal, what else do you need ? What could be the possible improvement ?
I wonder why we made nuclear weapons then? Or really anything after the first pointy stick? Oh thats right - because if there is one thing that humans do well, it is constantly advance and refine the way that we kill each other.
Quote from: Shurp on February 06, 2017, 10:05:52 PM
Regarding *lasers* vs projectiles: the goal of any weapon is to deliver a lot of energy as quickly as possible to a small space.
Projectiles do this job really well. Even in space combat nothing is more terrifying than a tungsten slug at orbital velocity. It'll punch a hole through anything.
1. If it hit first. Distance, maneuvers and all that.
2. Small hole in hull do nothing. MIR station had same problems with micro-meteors, but stay in orbit for 15 years.
3. Large hole (holes) mean large recoil for shooting vessel.
4.
Quote
Your best defense is to have such a thin hull that it punches clean through without the energy being absorbed!
Layered rotating cylinder hull to keep atmosphere in.
Or acute-angled armor plating to ricochet all incoming.
Quote
The chemical energy contained in a bullet cartridge is extremely effective at putting a large amount of energy very quickly into a small package. Lasers have far bulkier energy storage and have a hard time delivering the power as quickly.
Maybe railgun shell filled with small directed blast which discharge something like a gamma/neutron cone to the target?
Yet we still have pointy sticks, and yes, they're more useful than nothing. Sorry, your point is utterly moot.
You're suffering from some pretty bad "magical thinking", re: beam/energy weaponry, and the actual purpose of weapons. For the reasons given (repeatedly) above, no, it's NOT guaranteed that a man-packable personal weapon will be anything but a reasonably recognizable chemical slug-thrower. It's cheaper, FAR easier to maintain (ever aligned laser mirrors or tried to repair IC/surface-mount components in the field?), the ammo is stable and relatively light, emits zero EM/EMI, can be modified to emit *zero* visible radiation, is almost certainly lighter in any similar role (laser power supplies are HEAVY), and significantly less fragile. Furthermore, any small-arms scale laser is going to have serious issues, keeping it on target long enough to get in a damaging pulse; unlike bullets, lasers are NOT "instantaneous" damage, except at insane power levels.
Now, would such a weapon be quite advanced, in many ways? Sure, probably including significant targeting assistance and startlingly light weight and superior reliability. But, especially considering the fact that you can vary ammo (ball, explosive, incendiary, sabot armor-piercing, marking), you're going to have serious problems, trying to come up with a better, more flexible, cheaper, easily manufactured/maintained, easier to train weapon.
On the other hand, futuristic technology *could* improve the efficiency and lethality of ordinary projectile weapons.
For example, a plasteel machine pistol could fire continuously for minutes without overheating, and with a laser sight and unobtainum-fin stabilized slugs accurately target an enemy 300 meters away.
And how about U235 slugs with detonator caps that provide a fission explosive kick to whatever they hit?
Why?
Why would you want to spend enough to do so? How much dead-er than dead do your targets need to be?! How much more range than 2km (M2 .50 cal. machine gun max. effective range) and lethality do you need, for a personal defense weapon?
Yes, I'm sure incredibly exotic weapons systems will happen, here and there, as conditions and needs permit. But truly exotic addons such as smart ammo (although *finned* ammo is certainly possible)/autotargeting will again be relatively unlikely at the "individual colonist on a backwater Rimworld" level. Who needs a smart gun/ammo to shoot rabbits?! And the design for an assault rifle would be believably possible to research AND machine in a small machine shop. Charged pulse rifles are ALREADY "super weapons", as it is!
If you want advanced weaponry, there's already quite a few extant, excellent mods for exactly that. I see zero reason to change the vanilla, basic set much at all, beyond balance tweaks..
Quote from: Bozobub on February 07, 2017, 12:31:22 AM
Yet we still have pointy sticks, and yes, they're more useful than nothing. Sorry, your point is utterly moot.
You're suffering from some pretty bad "magical thinking", re: beam/energy weaponry, and the actual purpose of weapons. For the reasons given (repeatedly) above, no, it's NOT guaranteed that a man-packable personal weapon will be anything but a reasonably recognizable chemical slug-thrower. It's cheaper, FAR easier to maintain (ever aligned laser mirrors or tried to repair IC/surface-mount components in the field?), the ammo is stable and relatively light, emits zero EM/EMI, can be modified to emit *zero* visible radiation, is almost certainly lighter in any similar role (laser power supplies are HEAVY), and significantly less fragile. Furthermore, any small-arms scale laser is going to have serious issues, keeping it on target long enough to get in a damaging pulse; unlike bullets, lasers are NOT "instantaneous" damage, except at insane power levels.
Now, would such a weapon be quite advanced, in many ways? Sure, probably including significant targeting assistance and startlingly light weight and superior reliability. But, especially considering the fact that you can vary ammo (ball, explosive, incendiary, sabot armor-piercing, marking), you're going to have serious problems, trying to come up with a better, more flexible, cheaper, easily manufactured/maintained, easier to train weapon.
These our discussions are meaningless at all because almost no one here consider the 3000 years of technology research and industry progress.
1. First DNA analysis cost about 3 BILLION dollars and 10 years to complete, now the SAME analysis (the same that was the first, not just any DNA analysis) takes half an hour and cost less than 300 dollars. Just 40 years of science and price/effort dropped a million times.
2. Energy research not as spectacular but about 5-10 times more capacity for batteries in these 40 years.
3. Miniaturization and processor speed. The cheapest phone that weighs 100 grams now have much faster pure calculation speed than a hundred kilo computer 40 years before.
4. Price drops with industry progress. 15W laser cutters (evaporates somewhere 10mm3 of wood in one second) cost less than 100$ (just laser without all infrastructure). Don't know what price it had 40 years ago and what size it was. I think more than x10 times larger.
5. New technologies. Smartphones, drones and all that no one could even imagine 40 years ago.
Soooo.
Lasers then can be in size of just a single match. And delivers power more than a bullet.
And weapons can be laser but have no batteries but a package of one-use bullets that discharge a laser (or more deadly gamma) ray.
This is always an interesting discussion, but both sides of this argument seem to suffer from the same problem once we try to apply it to the game:
Option A: "Pirates bathed your colony in gamma rays. Everyone died. The end"
Option B: "Pirates armed with glitterworld small arms are assaulting your colony from several kilometers outside the viewable map area. Everyone died. The end"
Gameplay wise, I think it's necessary that all the ranged weapons are comically weak, inaccurate and short ranged (relative to today's firearms, let alone futuristic ones.) I suppose it'd be nice if the sprites weren't immediately recognisable as specific contemporary firearms, but I think there's mods for that.
What would futuristic weapons bring to the game that current weapons don't ? Just degraded audio and visuals ? Because it's a fact that gunpowder weapons are extremely well researched and known and there are plenty of punchy, convincing and satisfying sounds. Impact effects are well known.
You want to replace it with pew-pew sounds and blue lines ? Can you actually show me futuristic weapons in games that look like joy to fire ? Youtube videos welcome.
I'm sure that high-powered laser weapons exist in the Rimworld universe. I doubt they are much good on the Rimworlds themselves, though.
In Rimworld your fighting is primarily done at close to medium range with man-portable weapons. Given the effectiveness of kinetic weapons at that range, and the relative technology level, it seems perfectly reasonable that colonists would rely on old-fashioned guns and ammo to eliminate threats. And while I believe that the design and materials should evolve over the years the core concept will likely remain the same, presuming we don't come across a more powerful and safer accellerant than gunpowder.
Besides, once you start trying to make energy weapons man-portable you run into all kinds of trouble. First, the weapons require complex electrical knowledge to repair and maintain in the field rather than simple mechanical knowledge. Because they rely on circuits and electricity, they are far more susceptible to water and the effects of the elements. And unless you have an insane energy output they will not damage a target as quickly as a bullet would - and a battery to store that level of energy would be very large and heavy and deplete quickly. Even assuming the technology to shrink such a power source to a convienent and portable size exists, you are then effectively walking around carrying a bunch of bombs.
Meanwhile, a gun we have now, the AK-47, has decent accuracy at range and good stopping power even against armored targets and is so solidly built it can be buried in the dirt for ten years, dug up and still be made to fire with minimal maintenance.
So while I believe that lasers and other purely energy-based weapons do exist, they are likely vehicle-mounted or stationary weapons rather than standard equipment for the soldier of 5500.
Quote from: CrazyEyes on February 07, 2017, 03:13:07 AM
And while I believe that the design and materials should evolve over the years the core concept will likely remain the same, presuming we don't come across a more powerful and safer accellerant than gunpowder.
Meanwhile, a gun we have now, the AK-47, has decent accuracy at range and good stopping power even against armored targets and is so solidly built it can be buried in the dirt for ten years, dug up and still be made to fire with minimal maintenance.
I sign on to that.
Also we allready found better propellants than gunpowder :)
Nitroglycerine.
Most bullets use a form of Nitroglycerine soaked cellulose powder because it burns better and with less smoke than gunpowder.
And I remember the great line from the Movie "Lord of War" more people where killed by the AK-47 than any other man made weapon.
Um, no, you're thinking of nitrocellulose (modern gunpowder), which is made simply by, well, nitrating cellulose. Cotton and fuming red nitric acid are literally the only direct ingredients required* — I used to make it quite often, to fire a home-made cannon — and baking soda water (to neutralize the product's remaining acidity) as a "secondary" ingredient. Nitroglycerin/glycerin is not remotely involved, although nitroglycerin IS chemically quite similar and is made via a similar process.
And yes, the AK-47 is a GREAT example of the type of gun you'd be likely to find. It's simple, cheap to manufacture, reasonably accurate, a proven design, can use a gazillion specialized attachments, AND it has effectively been in the public domain for along time now, making it ubiquitous. The Rimworld version might be some caseless-ammo, bullpup design, but it will almost inevitably have most of the same design decisions, so will likely look recognizable as an "assault rifle".
Newer and flashier is NOT always better, folks. And energy weapons are horribad in an atmosphere, to boot, without relatively elaborate countermeasures (say, firing a laser beam, THEN a particle beam down the same path, to avoid deflection/attenuation). There's simply no reason to do so, if I can instead use a cheap-ass rifle that is effective, easy to use AND hits any target in visual range, with enough practice and luck. You don't need to blast some poor sod with a relativistic round or a gamma-ray burst, if you can cap his ass with a rifle bullet in the noggin at similar ranges xD .
By the by, re: railgun/gauss weapons, no, you're NOT going to get amazingly better performance out of one, UNLESS you also fire another round out the back of the gun at the same energy (so, if the same mass, the same velocity). Remember, these types of weapon have IMMENSE recoil!
As a wonderfully ridiculously extreme example, if you wanted a gun that could fire at Earth's escape velocity (roughly Mach 49), with a 3-meter barrel (yes, 9 feet!) gun, the average 175 lb. male firing the weapon would end up flying the opposite direction at roughly Mach 6-7 (as I recall from when I worked this out in Physics for extra credit years ago - lol), unless a compensating mass was fired at the appropriate velocity the other way. You could get around this by making a "ring accelerator" that shot macroscopic particles, say, but I don't see that as being overly portable and it would add *torsion* loads, as well =x !
No matter how "gee whiz" the tech gets, physics will still be an issue, that simple.
________
*Another good reason for modern gunpowder weapons' likely persistence; the ingredients are SUPER-cheap, simple, and pretty easy to acquire/manufacture from a wide variety of initial compounds.
Quote from: Bozobub on February 07, 2017, 03:52:06 AM
Newer and flashier is NOT always better, folks. And energy weapons are horribad in an atmosphere, to boot, without relatively elaborate countermeasures (say, firing a laser beam, THEN a particle beam down the same path, to avoid deflection/attenuation).
Your "technological" thought is bounded within our time.
Just an example. 100 years ago nobody could imagine a handheld plasma-cutter.
There's 30x more time passed in game.
Quote
There's simply no reason to do so, if I can instead use a cheap-ass rifle that is effective, easy to use AND hits any target in visual range, with enough practice and luck.
It's cheap because there's industry to make it amass. If there's an industry to make laser-cannon-as-a-single-piece - it will be likely as cheap as AK-47.
And maybe even more cost effective because of cheap technology of molecular printing.
High-tech weapons can (and i'm sure, will) have targeting and ray-assisting systems (just like old CRT displays were controlling the line scan) and other things that will need only visual contact with target. (Take a look on Predator's shoulder cannon)
Firearms can also have homing abilities, but that will not be effective with such speeds and inertion of bullet.
Quote
You don't need to blast some poor sod with a relativistic round or a gamma-ray burst, if you can cap his ass with a rifle bullet in the noggin at similar ranges xD ...
Why not burn a clear hole through the head with a laser or plasma or something high-tech if you can?
Nope. Physics IS physics, and materials can only be so good, sorry. Especially for power supplies, we actually know, for example, the absolute maximum possible power density you can possibly ever achieve per cubic centimeter, and no, you're not getting above that without occupying a rapidly expanding ball of rather excited plasma.
Nor are you going to be particularly happy, if raiders end up with the same weaponry, as someone already noted. You are not going to appreciate being irradiated from 5 km away or pelted by an orbital kinetic-kill weapon ("rods from God"), I promise! And if not, why should you get those toys and not them..? This type of weaponry would drastically change the game from a sim into a direct wargame, in my opinion, and would also require a MUCH larger map, or why have insanely-long-range weapons at all?
If you want to play a game using relatively realistic hyper-tech weapons, I suggest Renegade Legion (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Renegade_Legion), rather than Rimworld. And even if you want to stay in the Rimworld universe, there are a LOT of mods that already add a metric fuckton of weapons and associated mechanics. There literally is zero reason to change the main game for this.
Quote from: Grax on February 07, 2017, 04:16:06 AMWhy not burn a clear hole through the head with a laser or plasma or something high-tech if you can?
Because you don't NEED to. Dead is dead; why pay extra money and time to manufacture a weapon that literally cannot make anyone any deader and isn't any more effective at any usable range..?
Okay I'm not good at physics and I don't know the english terminology, but it's possible to make high-tech weapons that are still...projectile weapons. That's what I meant. I think the word is coilgun.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E0Nthk-lizM
But what would the advantage be ?
None, likely.
ANY weapon has one basic requirement that you cannot avoid: It simply has to be operable AND maintainable by humans, preferably only one, in field conditions. This means (in no particular order):
- Simple is good.
- Cheap is even better.
- Insensitivity to shock and weather is a must.
- You cannot have a weapon with recoil (or other effects) that will kill the operator. If you fire a megawatt+ gamma laser, for example, atmospheric backscatter will easily fry you, unless you're hardened vs. radiation somehow. This is, by the by, part of the reason X-ray/gamma personal weapons are highly unlikely, and even lasers and particle beams are sketchy; the atmosphere simply eats 'em, and the side-effects at useful energies can be... Problematic.
- It must be cheap and easy to manufacture, likely with a 3D printer/CNC mill "combo" device, in Rimworld's setting.
A coilgun COULD be effectively manufactured, I agree — I've personally built working scale models — and in fact, more easily than a railgun (which needs a much larger amount of power, to work at all). But it won't be any better than the equivalent traditional rifle, because the current limiting factor is mostly recoil and weapon weight, as it is. It can only be "so" good as a personal weapon, that simple, and like I said, we already can get there with present-day gunpowder weapons and explosives.
Quote from: Bozobub on February 07, 2017, 04:24:17 AM
Nope. Physics IS physics, and materials can only be so good, sorry. Especially for power supplies, we actually know, for example, the absolute maximum possible power density you can possibly ever achieve per cubic centimeter, and no, you're not getting above that without occupying a rapidly expanding ball of rather excited plasma.
Somewhen people couldn't thought of other power than by burning wood.
Then they found coal, oil, gas and other pretty things that were prepared for us by biological evolution.
Now were're burning radioactives.
...3000 years in future what will we burn? Maybe little sun-in-pockets?
Quote
Nor are you going to be particularly happy, if raiders end up with the same weaponry, as someone already noted. You are not going to appreciate being irradiated from 5 km away or pelted by an
I'm speaking mostly about technologies, not about who can or have to use them.
Quote
Quote from: Grax on February 07, 2017, 04:16:06 AMWhy not burn a clear hole through the head with a laser or plasma or something high-tech if you can?
Because you don't NEED to. Dead is dead;
Why don't need? I think its hard to shoot at stealth shielded flying self-targeting laser drones that have a reactive armor and point defence.
Don't know the cost of one, but maybe men lives will someday cost more than simple printed matter.
And also, if you're capturing a base or ship or something alike, who will be cleaning all that apparel and walls from bloody mess and splashed brains if you want to sell it all?
Quote
why pay extra money and time to manufacture a weapon that literally cannot make anyone any deader and isn't any more effective at any usable range..?
Fk, it's impossible. You're bound in today's technologies too.
Nope. You simply want a different game.
Yes, there are certain limitations you won't be getting around, without a lot of "woo" and broken physics. It takes at least a certain amount of energy to produce any given effect (like a hole in an enemy's cranium), and applying that energy must not kill the user of the weapon, unless you have quite a large number of rather dumb recruits to eliminate; I'm pretty sure there are easier ways o.O' .
Again, there's also no point to this, as there are already mods that add a plethora of exotic weapons, if that's what you desire. Why would the main game need to change?
Quote from: dogthinker on February 07, 2017, 01:22:32 AM
Gameplay wise, I think it's necessary that all the ranged weapons are comically weak, inaccurate and short ranged (relative to today's firearms, let alone futuristic ones.)
Wonderful comment. This goes for almost ANY game that uses any kind of guns. Wonder why tabletop miniature games have shooting ranges that can be crossed within one turn, two at most? Because otherwise, the game would simply cease to work. Rimworld does not take itself or its worldbuilding overly serious, and that is a good thing, because it allows for retro-futuristic stuff to appear without it looking alien.
Quote from: Grax on February 07, 2017, 04:56:01 AM
Somewhen people couldn't thought of other power than by burning wood.
Then they found coal, oil, gas and other pretty things that were prepared for us by biological evolution.
Now were're burning radioactives.
...3000 years in future what will we burn? Maybe little sun-in-pockets?
Suns work on fusion, not fission. To build something like that you would have to replicate the incredibly high density and temperature (think about the core of the sun, quite literally) in a safe and portable fashion. Even then, while it may produce a lot of power, it will last a very short time. So it's not a sustainable solution.
But let's say you found some other power source that makes generating the levels of power required to have an effective laser weapon possible. You still have to transport that energy around in battery packs to be used in the weapon, much the same as traditional ammo. And as for
storing the energy, there are limits in physics as to how much energy can be stored in a given space. That's not based on our engineering skill or material strength - it's based on fundamental laws of the universe. There is an upper limit on how much energy can be stored in a given area before there's enough of it to strip the electrons off of atoms and convert any substance into plasma.
Quote
Why don't need? I think its hard to shoot at stealth shielded flying self-targeting laser drones that have a reactive armor and point defence.
Don't know the cost of one, but maybe men lives will someday cost more than simple printed matter.
You're not talking about man-portable personal defense weapons any more. He's talking about how an assault rifle is just as effective against a
person as a higher tech solution, and you're basically saying "yes, but an assault rifle won't kill an armored stealth drone so lasers are better". That isn't the point. We have anti-drone and anti-missile lasers
now. But when it comes to fighting soldiers there's no reason to employ such force when a smaller, simpler tool will do the job. That'd be like using an ICBM to kill a tank when an RPG will work just fine.
We're discussing the practicality of small, portable energy weapons being used by ground troops to fight other soldiers. The problems with such weapons are not based on their cost of manufacture or whatever. They are issues based in fundamental properties of physics that are not going to change no matter how advanced we get. And even if you could ignore the laws of physics that say your batteries may as well be bombs, or shouldn't exist, or that it is wildly inefficent to fire a laser weapon in an atmosphere, or that the backscatter from doing so creates deadly radiation that is a threat to the operator of the weapon? At the end of the day, it's still no more effective than a bullet in the brain.
There's also the fact that the game already has ridiculously-efffective, compact, man-portable energy weapons called "charge rifles (http://rimworldwiki.com/wiki/Charge_rifle)", which are particle accelerators, with a reasonably believable limited in-atmosphere range, compared to projectile weapons.
So yes, both types of weapon already exist, even in Vanilla, and yes, there's arguments that can be made for either. Just substitute "laser rifle" for "charge rifle" in a mod, or clone and slightly change the sprite, and profit. I see zero justification, however, for changing the overall character of weaponry in Vanilla, beyond "laser shows are cool"; that's completely legit, if that's what you like, but a mod can easily take care of such for you, whether your own or "pre-baked" (there's a LOT of weapon mods).
There are probably a few more 'glitterworld' items coming, including weapons. Tynan will probably want to give an impression that those worlds at various stages of progress - neolithic, medieval, industrial, glitterworld - do exist in the same game. If only because it would be fun to have more diverse factions. Currently there are only tribals and non-tribals. Pirates and outlanders barely differ in their equipment and tactics.
You know what ?
30,000 years in the future they still use projectile Weapons and call it the peak of weapons tech.
[attachment deleted by admin due to age]
Quote from: SpaceDorf on February 07, 2017, 05:55:07 PM
You know what ?
30,000 years in the future they still use projectile Weapons and call it the peak of weapons tech.
Yes - but it is exactly my point. The Bolter isn't an M16. It fires essentially RPG's as bullets.
This is exactly why people need to stop using the term "Kinetic Weapons" in their argument. The Bolters is BOTH a Kinatic Weapons and a Ballistic Weapon. Futuristic weapons can be Kinetic weapons. I never said that they shouldn't be.
I also never said that the stats have to change drastically. All I'm talking about is giving the fluff/sprites for the plainly 20th century weapons so that they seem like something made in 3000, instead of literally being M16's, Lee Enfeild's and M1911's.
On the argument that our current ballistic weapons represent the pinnacle of human weapons development - that seems mighty short sighted doesn't it? Current tech weapons are woefully in efficient. The Vietnam war (the last time most of the in game guns were used) it look 50,000 bullets to get a confirmed kill. In WWII, it was 25,000. In our current war we are using around 250,000 bullets for every confirmed kill. An M16 bullet weighs about 12g. Think about the ammunition requirement that our colony would have. 10kg's of M16 ammo is only about 600 rounds, or 30 mags. Once you take suppressing fire into account, 600 bullets is nothing - during the North Hollywood shootout, in a hour long running gun fight, the robbers fired over 1100 rounds of ammunition. The ONLY reason they were able to put out that volume of fire is because they literally had a car full of ammo.
Are you telling me that over the next 1500 years we haven't thought to address that problem? Even tho we are working on addressing it NOW? The Charge Rifle already sets the precedent that there is technology around to harness large amounts of electrical energy - the direction that we are taking weaponry TODAY - so I don't see why a ballistic weapon would be the go too. Once we figured out the basics of, for example, a rail/mag gun type weapon, I don't see any reason why would continue to use an ammunition that inherently fouls the weapon, inherently unstable, prone to variation and can be rendered useless in a million ways.
Any technical problem that people want to throw up is easy covered by the fact that we are talking about 1500 years into the future. 1500 years into the past we didn't have electricity, ballistic weapons, or really ANYTHING. A lot of the issues that people are giving as examples are being worked on TODAY.
Weapons are the single things that humans constantly advance. We constantly revolutionize the way that we kill people.
We could have easily been having this argument about how 'fire is completely uncontrollable and useless as weapon' the day before someone figured out Greek Fire.
We could be having this argument over how Bronze weapons are the best edged weapons around.
Why the bow is the pinnacle of 'pointy stick weaponry' and there is no need for further advances (until someone thinks up a cross bow).
We NEVER stop making weapons. In 1500 years, I have no idea what the world, or the universe will be like (and neither does anyone else), but looking back over human history, I can tell you that if we are still around and making stuff, we will be thinking up new and better ways to kill each other.
Using your own example, the recipe for Greek fire was lost, and in fact has never been duplicated to this day.
By the by, bolters are merely compact, high muzzle velocity, clip-fed, rocket-propelled minigrenade launchers (a clip-fed Gyrojet (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gyrojet), in essence); the basic tech already exists in our present day. Your own example shows how tech actually changes very little, in certain ways.
And no, in 1500 years, we are NOT going to bypass the basic limits of the physics of maximum power density in a power supply, any more than we will be building a perpetual-motion ("over unity") machine.
Again, what you're asking for is in the realm of a mod (and has already been done), not a sweeping change to Vanilla.
What people in this thread want is Science Fantasy, not Science Fiction. Throw plausibility out because I want green explosions or red lasers. Science isn't meant to explain or support things, it's meant as a techno-babble to make colorful explosions possible. Next update: spells, renamed to psionic powers.
Charge rifle is shaped like a crossbow stock. That is over 2000 years old. It suggests it still works. Humans in 5500 have the same number of hands and fingers. A crossbow stock is a very stable way to hold an object.
Rimworld is strongly inspired by Firefly. This is what you have problem with. This is not going to change. Firefly WAS basically a space western.
Quote from: Bozobub on February 07, 2017, 11:47:50 PM
Using your own example, the recipe for Greek fire was lost, and in fact has never been duplicated to this day.
While I'll admit its not a perfect example, that just reinforces my point. The gun used in game ARE M16's, M1911 and En-field. We kept the exact same design over 1500 years? It was never lost? Modified? Improved? Even greek fire was eventually semi-recreated in the form of napalm
Quote from: Bozobub on February 07, 2017, 11:47:50 PM
By the by, bolters are merely compact, high muzzle velocity, clip-fed, rocket-propelled minigrenade launchers (a clip-fed Gyrojet (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gyrojet), in essence); the basic tech already exists in our present day. Your own example shows how tech actually changes very little, in certain ways.
And no, in 1500 years, we are NOT going to bypass the basic limits of the physics of maximum power density in a power supply, any more than we will be building a perpetual-motion ("over unity") machine.
Did you even read my post? I said that the Bolter is basically a mag fed RPG. I know what they are. My point was the Bolter represents an EVOLUTION of current designs, something that is almost completely absent from Rimworld. The weapons available (aside from the Charge Rifle and a couple of others) aren't evolution, they are the exact weapons we use today.
Also - If you want to use 40K as an example, Ballistic weapons are a rare find. Space Marines (and asso.) are about the only faction that wield them. The reason? Compared to an energy weapon, they are logistical hassle. Guard only have to have recharging stations to which empty flashlight mags are returned to and filled. Marines on the other hand have to have their ammunition shipped in, off world in most cases.
Again - I'm not saying the guns should be 100000 rounds a second laser rifles. They could have the exact same stats as they currently do. I just want them to actually look (and be described) like 1500 years have passed. The guns used in 1845 looked completely different to the guns used in 1945, so why am I using a gun my grandfather would have thought was antiquated?
Quote from: b0rsuk on February 08, 2017, 02:10:13 AMRimworld is strongly inspired by Firefly. This is what you have problem with. This is not going to change. Firefly WAS basically a space western.
Huh? What I want is the weaponry from Firefly! I want my 'pistol' to be a "Moses Brothers Self-Defense Engine Frontier Model B". Its EXACTLY what I want. Its a revolver inspired gun, that is also an railgun. It has some western inspired themes (it looks like a Volcano repeater), but it also looks futuristic. It fires a railgun as a primary ammuntion, but switches over to a hammer fired, manually loaded, caseless ammunition once the battery for the railgun is expended.
THAT is what I want. Not lazer pew pew. Something with some flavorsome meat to it.
I am behind you 100% in that the weapons could use a redesign just so that they're not immediately recognizable as real-world gun models. I don't mind then being called "assault rifle" or "pistol" because that is meant to describe what they do at a glance. It's be neat if they had a more futuristic name in the descriptions though, like "TAR-887" or "Versalite MAG Bolter."
I'm not sure you wouldn't run into a lot of the same problems with personal railguns as you would with energy weapons, though. They at least aren't garbage in the atmosphere and don't generate deadly radiation to kill the user. But you still have problems of power storage (I don't know offhand, and I imagine it's less than a laser, but I'd bet railguns still take a hefty amount of power). Also, the gun can't be too strong or the recoil becomes unmanageable.
I'm sure we would run into PLENTY of problems making rail guns. Just as I'm sure when they were making the first ballistic weapons a bunch of people got their hands blown off. Didn't and wont stop us.
Power storage seems like a null issue. Batteries + a power source in the gun. Power armour is powered by something. Whatever powers that, a smaller version charges the mag in my mag gun. Hell I dig up uranium - its not like I have a Nuclear Regulatory Commission looking over my shoulder - make a little reactor for the gun. Before someone says 'size' - reactors today are essentially giant steam engines. I'm sure we will think of a more efficient way to capture that energy in 1500 years. Also, 1500 years of R&D.
If I told someone 300 years ago that I could make it rain, they would have called me liar, or called me a witch. Today we can literally seed clouds.
"Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic."
Arthur C Clarke
Quote from: Mikhail Reign on February 08, 2017, 04:16:55 AM
Also - If you want to use 40K as an example, Ballistic weapons are a rare find. Space Marines (and asso.) are about the only faction that wield them. The reason? Compared to an energy weapon, they are logistical hassle. Guard only have to have recharging stations to which empty flashlight mags are returned to and filled. Marines on the other hand have to have their ammunition shipped in, off world in most cases.
Except WH40k proves the opposite of your point. This is the universe, after all, where there are 21st century firearms alongside blackpowder smoothbores, bows and arrows, slings, laser weapons, plasma weapons,
literal Martian Death Rays, and swords alongside not!lightsabers and monomolecular chainsaw axes.
Ballistic Weapons in 40K are
not a rare find, actually. Literally every single Imperial faction uses them, up to and including the Imperial Guard. The Guard actually uses Solid-Projectile weapons
a lot. Not to mention the Xeno-factions that use Solid-Projectile weapons, which is
all of them. Shuriken weapons? Solid Projectile. Pulse Rifle? Solid Projectile.
For example, the "Heavy Stubber", aka the heavy support weapon used on almost every single IG vehicle and by almost every single Heavy Weapons Platoon?
A fucking M2 Browning HMG. Literally unchanged for 38,000 years.
The main cannon on Leman Russ MBTs? 120mm cannon.
Basilisk and Earthshaker artillery pieces? 132mm cannon.
Not to mention the absolute ass-ton of Solid-Projectile firearms stockpiled for governmental, military, civilian and Inquisitorial use.
Why?
Because they fucking work. Despite the existence of "laser guns" (which, all evidence to the contrary, probably aren't lasers, since they don't suck balls in atmosphere. I've got money on particle projectors, but that is just me), a bullet to the head is still a bullet to the head.
Amusingly, in the TTRPG's, outside of logistics, an autoweapon is probably going to be more effective, combat-wise, than a lasweapon, due to different ammunition types that can be loaded. With the changing of a magazine, you can change your autorifle from a boring not!AK-47 to a shotgun, than to a
goddamn wannabe Bolter.
132mm ? thats 23mm less than todays standard of 155mm for the big guns :)
And the design of the Abrams is now nearly 50 years old.
Soldiers don't like flashy weapons. Soldiers like weapons that work, are easy to use and easy to fix.
Generals like those kind of weapons because it decreases training time, accidents and logistics.
The technological research is no longer focussed on better weapons, than on better equipment.
Night Vision, Light and Flexible Armor, Communication Systems and Targeting Systems
Quote from: Boston on February 08, 2017, 08:19:03 AM<snip>
Way to side step the point, AGAIN. The point is that a Bolter doesn't look like a AK-47, not that it doesn't use a ballistic propelled round. Also, the fluff on Lazguns has them with a variable load. You can overcharge it for a powerful shot that quickly depletes the batteries, or put it down low for a less lethal, energy conserving shot. LazCannons, Lazpistol and even Multi-lazers all use the same ammo. Seems to me that having a generic ammuntion which could be fired by any type of gun, in a range of different ways, would be heaps better then a gun that could fires heaps of ammos types.
Also I think you brought up another awesome point. Its 40K. Completely unrelated. But you DID hit my point right on the head. 40K has a MASSIVE range of weaponry, almost all of it directly inspired by some real thing, none of it looks like it was gotten off a shelf today. Leman Russ are this cool blend of WWI tanks crossed with cartoons from the future. Valkyrie's are futuristic parody of UH-1's. Even the ubiquitous sword gets an reskin to a CHAINsword. Ifs the standard Space Marine melee weapon was obviously a cutlass, and the Imperial Guard drove M1 Abrams, I would be having the same argument there.
So with everyone screaming black and blue that we are now literally at the very pinnacle of weapons development, whats your opinion on the HELLADS? Or that we project that we will be 'perfecting' railgun technology around 2025? Hell - whats your opinion on something are pie in the sky as DREAD? How about Metalstorm (know they went defunt a couple of years back, but they sold a lot of patents before hand)? MAHEM?
Quote from: SpaceDorf on February 08, 2017, 10:20:18 AM
The technological research is no longer focussed on better weapons, than on better equipment.
Night Vision, Light and Flexible Armor, Communication Systems and Targeting Systems
We designed all those things during WWII, all of which look nothing like their original design.
Quote from: SpaceDorf on February 08, 2017, 10:20:18 AM
Soldiers don't like flashy weapons. Soldiers like weapons that work, are easy to use and easy to fix.
Generals like those kind of weapons because it decreases training time, accidents and logistics.
Using that logic, we never should have moved from Pikes to Rifles. Your not looking a millennia and a half into the future. Just because its 'crazy new technology' NOW, doesnt mean it will be in 1500 years. At one point BOWS were the new fangled weapon. So were guns. So will be whatever we use next.
Its fucking CHILDISH to think that what we have made cant be improved.
@mikhail reign
first, I am sorry. I get your point that we don't know what the future will bring,
and I am the first to admit I love spacey explody stuff and would love some weird
Science Fantasy stuff in Rimworld.
But to back up my point.
Bows were not replaced by Crossbows and then Muskets because Muskets where better in the beginning, but they were easier to use and supply.
A bow looks easy in its use but to achieve accuracy and more important the ability to fire a sustained volley needs a lot of training ( 6-8 arrows per minute for french and british archers takes a lot of upper body strength )
The point and pull trigger technique of the crossbow stock are a lot easier to learn and implement under fire.
It took quite a while until firearms were as accurate and reliable as bows, but still, losing a kadet with six weeks of gun training under his belt is a lot cheaper than losing an archer with years of training.
Fletching and Transporting Arrows is a logistic and cost problem. It is much easier to transport barrels of gunpowder and bags of lead balls.
A box of modern bullets is even easier to transport.
So I stand by my childish point. Because my point did never say, there can't and won't be improvements.
My point is you have to be able to teach a locker room full of b-grade ball players, ghetto escapees, redneck idiots and flag wankers to shoot and maintain this tool under every bad condition you can think of while trusting them not to kill each other in the process. Because those are the lot of people you end up with in basic infantry.
To actually give you something in favor of your point
@everyone
Personal Shields are allready there,SkyNet has Armored Robot Snails, and when you dig to deep you get eaten by bugs,
Starship Generators that run forever on nothing.
What I want is this to be within reason and the feel of the game.
I don't like all of the weapon mods that add hundreds of the same weapons with different names into the game, thats bull in my oppinion.
I want weapons with different gameplay effects and the rock paper scissor principle that starcraft embraces.
And I think the best match for this feeling would be the cobbled together arsenal of the fallout games. Part Tribe, Part Scrounged Together Scrap Launcher, Part Space Marine with giant boomstick.
So screw science and go with your gut.
But if anybody tries to argue that with !!SCIENCE!! and the "we won't know" argument, real hard science will be used against that. Sorry.
Quote from: Boston on February 08, 2017, 08:19:03 AM
Quote from: Mikhail Reign on February 08, 2017, 04:16:55 AM
Why? Because they fucking work. Despite the existence of "laser guns" (which, all evidence to the contrary, probably aren't lasers, since they don't suck balls in atmosphere. I've got money on particle projectors, but that is just me), a bullet to the head is still a bullet to the head.
Lazguns just suck balls every where
Quote from: hunter2012 on February 08, 2017, 03:18:14 PM
Quote from: Boston on February 08, 2017, 08:19:03 AM
Quote from: Mikhail Reign on February 08, 2017, 04:16:55 AM
Why? Because they fucking work. Despite the existence of "laser guns" (which, all evidence to the contrary, probably aren't lasers, since they don't suck balls in atmosphere. I've got money on particle projectors, but that is just me), a bullet to the head is still a bullet to the head.
Lazguns just suck balls every where
And that is why it is so popular ..
You know, I don't see why chemical-based projectile weapons are an issue, when the Rimworld universe has theoretically hundreds or thousands of Human-seeded planets at varying technological levels. So what? I expected more vanilla weaponry, like plasma rifles, energy-pistols, plasma-throwers, etc.
Now my only problem is: Why are all the chemical-based weapons in this game, essentially the same 20th century Earth weapons we have now? That doesn't make much logical sense. An AR-15 and an AK-47 should be preposterously rare pieces of equipment several thousand years in the future. They should be in the game, but an LMG that is from WW2/WW1 (Can't remember that one's name) just shouldn't exist by then. Similar criticism towards the melee weapons in this game. They're chiefly Medieval European and Roman constructs. But what if my Rimworld culturally followed the path similar to ancient Thracian's, Celts, Tang Dynasty, and patterned similar weapons in concept, like Falx, or Falcatas? I wouldn't go that far into that argument though.
The artwork looks amazing in its unique style, but I was surprised to see an "M16" in the year 5,000AD in common usage. I was expecting made-up Rimworld weapons designs that look like they're industrial and informational age era systems.
Honestly, I was expecting an AK-47 somewhere than the M16 , but it seems this game was made by an American such as myself, similar to how Tolkien's LoTR is. The ocean is always on the western side of the map (Atlantic), the southerners are always dark-skinned and malevolent (Arab's, Africans, etc).
The russian AK-47, the american A14 and the german G3 were basically the same rifle.
Clip fed, recoil loaded, 7.62mm rifles, the russian 7.62x54 is a bit longer than the nato 7.62x51
thats it .. so yes the standard assault rifle just looks like that.
LMG means Light Machine Gun and is not a bound to a time.
There are also MMG's and HMG's, medium and heavy MG's
You might have confused it with the Browning 1918 which was the american LMG of WW1 and 2
or the MG 08/15 or MG 34 of the German Army.
Both Designs are with some modifications to ammunition types nearly unchanged in use today.
Concerning Melee, rename the gladius to short sword and be done with it.
Maybe we should back down from nitpicking and say something more constructive ..
What Types of Weapons would you like to see in Rimworld ?
I for one really like the WH40k Terran Style Weapons, clunky, sturdy, different kinds of blam, pew and boom for futuristic stuff.
The Fallout New Vegas Arsenal for the Post-Apocalyptic Western Survival feeling combined with the first gen X-Com Arsenal of Weird 50's Sci-Fi Stuff.
On top of that I want to add Half-Life 1 Bio-Engineered Weapons, that Beelauncher and that thing you feed the exploding apples or whatever it was ..
Quote from: hunter2012 on February 08, 2017, 03:18:14 PM
Lazguns just suck balls every where
Except they don't. Not really. They have the same killing potential as a ballistic firearm, in a package that requires logistics little more in-depth than working electricity or working heating, which, in a pinch, can be
sunlightLasguns
are insanely effective, they just kinda fall flat compared to Boltguns and Xenoweaponry.
In the Dark Heresy TTG, I would use Lasweaponry as my "walking around" firearm, then use an Autorifle with various ammunition for specific missions. Does that means the Lasrifle "sucked"? Hell no.
Quote from: Mikhail Reign on February 08, 2017, 01:07:54 PM
Way to side step the point, AGAIN. The point is that a Bolter doesn't look like a AK-47, not that it doesn't use a ballistic propelled round. Also, the fluff on Lazguns has them with a variable load. You can overcharge it for a powerful shot that quickly depletes the batteries, or put it down low for a less lethal, energy conserving shot. LazCannons, Lazpistol and even Multi-lazers all use the same ammo. Seems to me that having a generic ammuntion which could be fired by any type of gun, in a range of different ways, would be heaps better then a gun that could fires heaps of ammos types.
Also I think you brought up another awesome point. Its 40K. Completely unrelated. But you DID hit my point right on the head. 40K has a MASSIVE range of weaponry, almost all of it directly inspired by some real thing, none of it looks like it was gotten off a shelf today. Leman Russ are this cool blend of WWI tanks crossed with cartoons from the future. Valkyrie's are futuristic parody of UH-1's. Even the ubiquitous sword gets an reskin to a CHAINsword. Ifs the standard Space Marine melee weapon was obviously a cutlass, and the Imperial Guard drove M1 Abrams, I would be having the same argument there.
Pal ....... you do realize that "Modern day" weaponry is still in use in WH40k, right? Not "modern day themed" weaponry, but stuff you could go grab off a shelf at a gun store?
Go take a look at an Autorifle, Autopistol, Stub Automatic, Stub Revolver. The Autorifle is pretty much a clone of an M16. The autopistol, a MAC10. Oh, and about chainswords?
they still have regular swords. Fucking Astartes use them, read some of the fiction sometime. Hell, in one book, some Astartes drive off an Ork horde using a
Greek Phalanx with
BRONZE SPEARS.
Your general argument is "why are they using modern firearms so far in the future?"
Our argument is "if it ain't broke, don't fix it." People in WH40k, and in Rimworld, use modern-designed firearms because, well,
the design works.
If it ain't broke.......
Quote from: Boston on February 08, 2017, 06:44:33 PM
If it ain't broke.......
Maxim 48. If it ain't broke, it hasn't been issued to the infantry.
Quote from: SpaceDorf on February 08, 2017, 06:12:35 PM
The russian AK-47, the american A14 and the german G3 were basically the same rifle.
Clip fed, recoil loaded, 7.62mm rifles, the russian 7.62x54 is a bit longer than the nato 7.62x51
thats it .. so yes the standard assault rifle just looks like that.
Those three rifles look extremely different, have different philosophies behind them, made with different materials in different parts at least, and are from different eras. Your argument isn't very good, and honestly comes off a bit defensive as if I offended you. The Fedorov Avtomat looks barely like an AK-47 yet is an assault rifle; there's countless assault rifles in existence and all look shockingly different, such as an STG45 or the XM8. Your talking about Earth's assault rifles, not Rimworld's. Not Glitterworld #34, #189, or Urbworld 02# in the sector furthest from the Milky Way's center, closest to the Andromeda galaxy, whom the colonists came from approximately several hundred years earlier, where no industrial factory on "Urbworld 02#" has Earthling blueprints, which seceded from etc, etc, etc. That's my example, that's my point.
I figured the game could've been a bit more creative in that department in "making up" the weapons. It's not a big deal, but only disappointing aspect of the game. I mean, the "Survival Rifle" is meant to be based on a Lee Enfield. Imagine how many of those exist in production in the year 5,000. I like how the Charge Rifle looks though.
Quote from: SpaceDorfLMG means Light Machine Gun and is not a bound to a time.
There are also MMG's and HMG's, medium and heavy MG's
I know what it means, that's why I referred to it as an LMG, like the games Wikipedia states it is. I'm aware
of all this, I know some history too.
QuoteYou might have confused it with the Browning 1918 which was the american LMG of WW1 and 2
or the MG 08/15 or MG 34 of the German Army.
Both Designs are with some modifications to ammunition types nearly unchanged in use today.
The LMG's graphic is nowhere near the Browning 1918, more like the Lewis Gun.
http://rimworldwiki.com/wiki/LMG
QuoteConcerning Melee, rename the gladius to short sword and be done with it.
Maybe we should back down from nitpicking and say something more constructive ..
You know, you think someone with that much of a post count would be a bit more friendly on the forum they frequent,
I hope your not a moderator because, you don't deserve to be one lol. Since when did your opinion suddenly become more
valuable than mine, someone new here? Think before you say something, it'll do you good in life.
The LMG is a DP28 - a gun that is woefully outdated NOW.
I don't get how everyone sides steps the issue that the in game guns are all 20th century guns. Not similar. They ARE those guns. Before an old update they WERE called their 20th century name.
I mean it's not like we all drive T-Model Fords.
Good to know, thought I was pretty close.
I don't know what the conversation has been about these prior pages, except 40K.
That was half my point, I was just expecting unique artwork like the Charge Rifle for everything but looks similar to our stuff, for a game that's as far away from Earth as possible.
I'm honestly waiting on them to implement water into the mix.
Quote from: NagaPrince on February 08, 2017, 06:59:00 PM
You know, you think someone with that much of a post count would be a bit more friendly on the forum they frequent,
I hope your not a moderator because, you don't deserve to be one lol. Since when did your opinion suddenly become more
valuable than mine, someone new here? Think before you say something, it'll do you good in life.
Nope I am not a mod .. I only frequent the forums every few weeks or so, when I am playing Rimworld at the time.
And I am sorry if I offended you.
You are right, I get a bit harsh when I feel like an argument is getting stupid.
Before everyone gets offended by that. Let me clarify.
The thread started out from "why there no pew pew laser ?"
got heated over "guns are better because of science"
changed to "in 40k there is only guns .. "
and is now "the assault rifle is this gun, because I know better"
What I wanted to say is, "Please everybody stop trying to be more right about something trivial"
and change the direction of the thread into
"Hey Look, if we apply the rule of cool, which kind of weapons would actually add something to rimworld ? "
Could you agree on that ?
I'd like to say that the 40k tangent was completely unintended, and pointless. I tried to use it as a passing example, and someone else wanted to tell me how much they knew about 40k..... Final shot tho - auto pistols, stubbers etc (20th C guns) are like.... the WORST weapons in that game. They are stuff guardsmen laugh at
Also the assist rifle isn't an M16 because I know better. It's an M16 because
A: it looks like one, but more importantly because
B: up until a few Alphas ago it was CALLED M16. In game. All the other weapons had their real names too. Before the Machine Pistol was a Machine Pistol it was a PDW. Before that it was just called UZI. Before the Survival Rifle was called that, it was called a Lee-Enfield. In game.
Anyway, back on point.
Quote from: SpaceDorf on February 09, 2017, 06:08:27 AM
"Hey Look, if we apply the rule of cool, which kind of weapons would actually add something to rimworld ? "
Like I said before - some kinda appropriate blend of current and future tech. Something that looks like it was made on a Rimworld from steel I chiseled out of a mountain. Something with a bit of flavour.
I'm a massive fan of the 'Western' naming themes. Completely unstandardized, and produced without a production line.
Real: Single Action Army, SAA, Model P, Peacemaker, M1873
Fictional: Moses Brothers Self-Defense Engine Frontier Model B
Firefly really knew how to hit the nail on the head when it came to getting the theme right. I mean even the ship embodied a horse (look at it from profile - the cockpit is the head and the panels that come out are the ears).
So yeah - some kinda leaver action powered railgun to replace the survival rifle? A "Emily Chesterfield Rotation Railgun M2887"?
Some kind of Gattling gun inspired crank powered energy weapon?
A 2 shot plasma gun? A "12KW, double rail Rimington Special"
I really want a "+/-" button for posts. Some of the arguments here deserved extra credit.
Quote from: Mikhail Reign on February 09, 2017, 11:03:07 AM
I'd like to say that the 40k tangent was completely unintended, and pointless. I tried to use it as a passing example, and someone else wanted to tell me how much they knew about 40k..... Final shot tho - auto pistols, stubbers etc (20th C guns) are like.... the WORST weapons in that game. They are stuff guardsmen laugh at
Also the assist rifle isn't an M16 because I know better. It's an M16 because
A: it looks like one, but more importantly because
B: up until a few Alphas ago it was CALLED M16. In game. All the other weapons had their real names too. Before the Machine Pistol was a Machine Pistol it was a PDW. Before that it was just called UZI. Before the Survival Rifle was called that, it was called a Lee-Enfield. In game.
Anyway, back on point.
Quote from: SpaceDorf on February 09, 2017, 06:08:27 AM
"Hey Look, if we apply the rule of cool, which kind of weapons would actually add something to rimworld ? "
Like I said before - some kinda appropriate blend of current and future tech. Something that looks like it was made on a Rimworld from steel I chiseled out of a mountain. Something with a bit of flavour.
I'm a massive fan of the 'Western' naming themes. Completely unstandardized, and produced without a production line.
Real: Single Action Army, SAA, Model P, Peacemaker, M1873
Fictional: Moses Brothers Self-Defense Engine Frontier Model B
Firefly really knew how to hit the nail on the head when it came to getting the theme right. I mean even the ship embodied a horse (look at it from profile - the cockpit is the head and the panels that come out are the ears).
So yeah - some kinda leaver action powered railgun to replace the survival rifle? A "Emily Chesterfield Rotation Railgun M2887"?
Some kind of Gattling gun inspired crank powered energy weapon?
A 2 shot plasma gun? A "12KW, double rail Rimington Special"
While I disagreed with every argument you made up until this point, something amazing just came out of this.
Randomly generated weapon brandnames.
"Orangezebras Normal Rifle."
"Megafauna Materwork Shotgun"
"Raider's Surprise Awful Wooden Shiv"
or... something to that effect, you get the idea.
Quote from: SpaceDorf on February 09, 2017, 06:08:27 AM
Quote from: NagaPrince on February 08, 2017, 06:59:00 PM
You know, you think someone with that much of a post count would be a bit more friendly on the forum they frequent,
I hope your not a moderator because, you don't deserve to be one lol. Since when did your opinion suddenly become more
valuable than mine, someone new here? Think before you say something, it'll do you good in life.
Nope I am not a mod .. I only frequent the forums every few weeks or so, when I am playing Rimworld at the time.
And I am sorry if I offended you.
You are right, I get a bit harsh when I feel like an argument is getting stupid.
Before everyone gets offended by that. Let me clarify.
The thread started out from "why there no pew pew laser ?"
got heated over "guns are better because of science"
changed to "in 40k there is only guns .. "
and is now "the assault rifle is this gun, because I know better"
What I wanted to say is, "Please everybody stop trying to be more right about something trivial"
and change the direction of the thread into
"Hey Look, if we apply the rule of cool, which kind of weapons would actually add something to rimworld ? "
Could you agree on that ?
I don't care anymore it doesn't bother me, I just don't understand blatant negativity.
I understand entirely where your coming from, it was just my first post in here and at a certain length I see no point reading after the first 2-3 pages. I just wanted to chime in that I think the game is fantastic, and I noticed how odd it is seeing Earthling guns deep enough into the future where it'd be cooler if they just made unique looking 20th century stuff. Guess I'll look for a modification for that.
Projectile weapons are the best!
In space you can't beat projectile weapons. you can accelerate projectiles to such speed where their impact will be insanely explosive because of the lack of drag :)
Not light speed unfortunately but still very good :)
The main problem with any kinetic weapon in space, as opposed to missiles or energy weapons, is that they have recoil. In fact, any gun that uses a physical round makes for a rather good "rocket" motor, so to speak. Emergency recovery "rockets" (used when spacewalk maneuver systems fail catastrophically) are essentially guns, gas pistols, more specifically ^^ .
It probably wouldn't be too difficult for a really massive object, such as a spaceship, to bleed off a bit of energy to fire some sort of KEW (Kinetic Energy Weapon), but this could be really problematic for a human-sized user, or for that matter a station. It's probably not a great idea to deorbit your space station, every time you pull the trigger, or splatter yourself across the nearest bulkhead ::).
I think the use of old-timey guns is because of the game's Firefly inspirations. Firefly mixes 19th century America (cowboys) with sci-fi, which is a weird but wonderful combo. It means that you see revolvers and rifles (and horses) alongside laser/energy weapons, much like in Rimworld.
Okay, so theoretically energy weapons could have great power without murderous recoil. What enemies could this be useful against ? Centipedes and megaspiders ?
cultist: projectile weapons in sci-fi Firefly might seem unusual, but at least they made the setting different.
Again, the charge rifle IS an energy weapon; it's a small particle accelerator. It also has reasonably believable comparable range, vs. ballistic/kinetic weapons, in atmosphere :) .
And yes, they're useful vs. centipedes and megaspiders, as most of us probably know.
Quote from: b0rsuk on February 11, 2017, 12:12:27 PM
Okay, so theoretically energy weapons could have great power without murderous recoil. What enemies could this be useful against ? Centipedes and megaspiders ?
cultist: projectile weapons in sci-fi Firefly might seem unusual, but at least they made the setting different.
Not really. It depends on the power source.
Having a power source small enough to be used as "ammunition" for a rifle-sized DEW would mean the energy weapon would have about the same "power" as an equivalently-sized ballistic firearm.
Going back to WH40k, lasguns (which aren't actually lasers, more particle accelerators) and autoguns (21st century firearms) deal the same damage, and have the same range. They are pretty much identical in every respect, except for logistics (lasweaponry is powered by "charge packs", described as liquid-metal batteries in one of the books, and capable of recharging via electricity or even heat), which is the main reason they replaced autoweapons in most militaries. Planetary Defense Forces, however, still use Autoweapons a large portion of the time.
Larger lasweapons have larger charge packs, and deal more damage. Lascannons (anti-tank weapons) and multi-lasers (machine-gun equivalents) have charge packs described as being the size of car batteries.
Quote from: Boston on February 11, 2017, 01:25:26 PM
Larger lasweapons have larger charge packs, and deal more damage. Lascannons (anti-tank weapons) and multi-lasers (machine-gun equivalents) have charge packs described as being the size of car batteries.
Which again fits the comparison to their ballistic counterpart, RPG's and Ammo-Boxes for Machine Guns.
I think Lascannons are the only ones which are clearly better then RPG's in this case because
they could fire multiple shots before reloading.
Also count me in for the double barreled plasma shotgun.
You know it could be interesting if Rimworld had energy weapons which used the colony's power grid as ammo. They could cause brown-outs, would drain STATIONARY batteries, would compete with turrets and would absolutely not work far from conduits. If you wanted to attack with them you would have to take and install a battery.
Total Annihilation had Commander robots with super powerful weapons which worked that way.
Quote from: SpaceDorf on February 11, 2017, 05:25:35 PM
Quote from: Boston on February 11, 2017, 01:25:26 PM
Larger lasweapons have larger charge packs, and deal more damage. Lascannons (anti-tank weapons) and multi-lasers (machine-gun equivalents) have charge packs described as being the size of car batteries.
Which again fits the comparison to their ballistic counterpart, RPG's and Ammo-Boxes for Machine Guns.
I think Lascannons are the only ones which are clearly better then RPG's in this case because
they could fire multiple shots before reloading.
Also count me in for the double barreled plasma shotgun.
The counterpart of Lascannons are Autocannons, not RPG's. Lascannons are, yet again, only superior in the logistical sense, getting 5 shots out of a charge pack before it requires a reload. Autocannons, on the other hand, beat it out in ROF and in capacity. On the other-other hand, autocannons require actual ammunition, while lascannons can be recharged by hooking them up to a vehicle generator, which is actually what usually happens.
In WH40k, ballistic (also known as Solid-Projectile) weapons are superior for specific missions and targets, while lasweapons are more effective logistically. Just because lasweapons are the main weapon of the Imperial Guard, doesn't mean SP weapons aren't used, or "laughed at", as one poster so blithely put it. In situations where logistics aren't really an issue, such as police officers, Planetary-only militaries, or civilian use, chances are SP firearms are going to be in use, because, well, they are cheaper than lasweapons, require much less of a technological base to produce, and can be custom-built to certain situations that lasweapons can't.
For example, I brought up the topic of different ammunition earlier, but SP firearms can be silenced/suppressed, and have flash-hiders installed. You can't do that with a lasrifle, so when you fire one, the opponent will know where you are.
My Dark Heresy character was a former Guardsman, so they had a lasrifle that was their baby. However, when push came to shove, and I needed to be stealthy, kill hard targets, or do anything other than "be logistically efficient", I would switch out to an Autorifle with a suppressor, laser-dot sight and different magazines, varied between standard, armor-piercing and hollowpoint ammunition. I also had a Stub revolver (a.... basic revolver, pretty much), a laspistol, and a double-barrel shotgun stowed in my kit.
Don't get me wrong, I
loved the lasrifle (60 shots per charge pack, and very little jamming? YES PLEASE), but autoweapons definitely had a place in my arsenal as well.
On a related note: it is really easy to reskin the Dark Heresy tabletop rules for use as a Rimworld setting. I've done it, and it works really well. Like, all you are doing is refluffing, no mechanical changes at all.
That has to be my favorite aspect of the WH40k universe, that is, the fact that you can do anything, anywhere, and it will fit. Different technological settings? WH40k has it.
Bows and spears and swords? Feral/Feudal World!
Muskets and revolvers, frontier settlement and such? Frontier/Colony World!
Cloudy with a chance of cyberpunk, high technology and conspiracies? Hive-World!
Note that the planet-types used as backgrounds in Rimworlds are almost-literally just ripped from WH40K.
Urbworld: Hive-world
Midworld: Civilized World
Rimworld: Frontier World
Indworld: Forge World
etc
Why are you going back to 40k? I thought we kinda established that it was an off topic tangent? Different game. Different world. Their ballistic weapons aren't guns you can buy today - ie: they look 'cool'.
Returning briefly to the original topic...
What limits the available firearms tech in this game isn't so much science but logistics. You're playing from the point of view of a tiny, isolated settlement that's totally dependent on what they can find locally or buy off the odd caravan. What do you think is easier to get hold of, glitterworld-Clarketech batteries to power a charge rifle, or a few hundredweight of sulphur to make gunpowder with? Or even fulminate of mercury for primers, come to that.
Same goes for the weapon itself; any half-decent metalwork shop can turn out some rough-and-ready but perfectly functional Kalashnikovs or Sten guns, but fancy glittertech kit requires the kind of tolerances you can only get with computer-guided tooling and probably a laser cutter.
Yet I can hammer together solar panels, nuclear reactors, batteries, etc etc out of nothing.... Production isn't the limiting problem.
Quote from: Jake on February 11, 2017, 10:36:43 PM
...You're playing from the point of view of a tiny, isolated settlement that's totally dependent on what they can find locally or buy off the odd caravan....
Exactly, just the same reason you can't build a spaceship to leave the planet and have it autonomously pilot you to salvation.
Wait....
You're acting as if "reasearch" in Rimworld is anything like hwat we think of it. This is patently foolish; how long do you think it would take, to research fro "here's how you dres stone" fo "here's how you build an antimatter reactor"?
IMO, "research" in Rimworld is merely your colonists figuring out how to implement and use found/known tech in their own situation]/i], not truly inventing it from scratch. Think of a lifepod's "survival database", perhaps. This would also handily explain why colonies share the same tech tree =) .
Remember, also, that these worlds have *compacted machinery* as a mineable material. If you think 5000 years or so would be enough to turn machinery into a "pseudo-ore", I have a lovely bridge in NYC to sell you. Don't take the given timeline as gospel.
Things like steel, plasteel and machinery aren't ores. The key word there is compacted. What you're digging up are the ruins of ancient structures that have been obliterated by the never-ending cycle of war that consumes the Rimworlds.
The lore is essentially that every inhabited world reaches a "tipping point" where the inhabitants either annihilate themselves back to the stone age with nuclear war, or (much, much more rarely) manage to put their differences aside, unite as a culture and develop into a glitterworld.
In Rimworld, your colony is located on one of these inhabitable worlds that has destroyed itself with war, potentially many times over. That is why you are able to dig up things like steel (which is an alloy) or components. It's why tribal societies exist alongside industrial colonies and space-age pirates. It's also why, outside of the glitterworlds, technological development tends to be limited - societies get to what we would consider the modern age or maybe a couple hundred years beyond, then wipe out all that progress with nukes and revert back to tribal status for several centuries.
To tie this back into the point of the thread, the explanation for the prevalence of "ancient" gunpowder weapons is probably because to the people on the Rim, those weapons are relatively modern and just about the best you'd expect to find given the general technology level. Exceptions exist, but in general these weapons are abundant, easy to make and cheap to maintain so they're what people use.
Geothermal plants, interplanetary rocket engines and nuclear reactors are'abundant, easy to make and cheap to maintain' using that standard.
What you know affects what's easy.
If I asked someone 100 years ago 'make me food right now' compared to now, what they would create would be entirely different. What they have on hand, what they individually know, what they culturally know - all those things would mean that what you make would be different.
So in the year 3000, on a derelict planet, after falling from the sky, if I ask someone 'make me a gun' they shouldn't hand me an M16.
The lore holds true, even today on a much smaller scale there are still vast differences in technology used around the world.
We may have had ballistic weapons for over 500 years but during the Rwandan genocide alot of the murders happened using machetes, not because they like them so much but because the country was poor and technologically behind.
Now expand this concept on the scale of a galaxy with isolated worlds near the rim and having medieval worlds next to industrial worlds in a single solar system isn't too far fetched.
My problem isn't with the mix of technology. It's with it all looking like I brought it from the corner shop in 1995. Like why of any gun design to be passed down through the ages, whispered around tribal camp fires, handforged in medieval furnaces, mass produced on fantastical futuristic glitterworld industrial islands an M16 clone?
Quote from: OFWG on February 12, 2017, 01:03:35 AMExactly, just the same reason you can't build a spaceship to leave the planet and have it autonomously pilot you to salvation.
Wait....
Yes, but look at how much of a challenge that is, and how much of the necessary raw materials you have to buy from external sources. Plasteel, uranium, even components for the most part; one settlement by itself can't do that.
And in any case, I didn't say it was impossible. Just really,
really impractical without a lot of work and a much larger and more complicated supply chain, and for only marginal benefits; tribals or ill-equipped pirates die just as quickly to a bullet as they would to a charged-particle beam.
Quote from: Mikhail Reign on February 12, 2017, 09:20:41 AMMy problem isn't with the mix of technology. It's with it all looking like I brought it from the corner shop in 1995. Like why of any gun design to be passed down through the ages, whispered around tribal camp fires, handforged in medieval furnaces, mass produced on fantastical futuristic glitterworld industrial islands an M16 clone?
I prefer to think of the weapon sprites as a sort of visual shorthand; they probably don't look anything like that in real life, but they're shown that way in the UI so that we can identify them at a glance.
I don't know about that; we're able to learn to associate new things with existing concepts. I would be 100% in favor of some or all of the weapons getting a reskin to fit a bit more closely with the retro-futuristic look. They could keep the names "assault rifle" or "sniper rifle" rather than "VariTech VX77 Enforcer" so that we as players know what we are crafting or looking at (although the descriptions can and should have such names). It shouldn't be too hard to identify them at a glance - for the most part, a pistol looks like a pistol and a shotgun looks like a shotgun.
Or maybe, just maybe, those gunpowder weapons are pretty much pinnacle of what's possible with that technology. It's like with spears. Everything has been done and perfected already. There are only so many ways you can sharpen a stick. To get something better you would have to have access to glittertech factories, and you obviously don't.
Yes, a spear is a spear is a spear and the functionality of a sword isn't likely to change. But there's a reason they started making swords and spears out of steel instead of bronze and wood.
It's the same with the guns. The functionality shouldn't change, but the design and materials should. A plasteel gun, for example, would be lighter and could be fired longer without risk of overheating. The components would be more durable and less prone to breaks or jams. It doesn't make sense to use a gun model that has already been antiquated for decades.
Again, the functionality doesn't need to change, and I'm not advocating for pew pew laser weapons. I just think that changing the look of the firearms, purely for flavor purposes, would help them fit the aesthetic of the game better.
Quote from: CrazyEyes on February 12, 2017, 03:00:23 PM
Yes, a spear is a spear is a spear and the functionality of a sword isn't likely to change. But there's a reason they started making swords and spears out of steel instead of bronze and wood.
It's the same with the guns. The functionality shouldn't change, but the design and materials should. A plasteel gun, for example, would be lighter and could be fired longer without risk of overheating. The components would be more durable and less prone to breaks or jams. It doesn't make sense to use a gun model that has already been antiquated for decades.
Again, the functionality doesn't need to change, and I'm not advocating for pew pew laser weapons. I just think that changing the look of the firearms, purely for flavor purposes, would help them fit the aesthetic of the game better.
The reason swords started being crafted from iron and steel isn't because steel was
better (hint: preindustrial steel wasn't.
Modern steel is, but that isn't what they had. Look up the difference between "bloomery steel" and "crucible steel"), but because the bronze age economy collapsed, making bronze extremely hard to get. So, they started using inferior iron, because that is what they had available.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Late_Bronze_Age_collapse
There is nothing that even suggests that plasteel would let a firearm be fired for longer without overheating (heat is heat), nor that the components would make for less jams.
Firearm jamming is a function of the cleanliness of the firearm and the complexity of the moving parts, not how "durable" the parts are. The more moving parts a firearm has (aka, if it is semi or fully-automatic), and the dirtier you get it, the more it will jam. Full stop.
Yes, even AK-pattern rifles can jam, they can actually jam
pretty fucking bad, contrary to the mythos built up around them, (that is because they have such loose tolerances, which in itself lends to their reliability, but when stuff gets in there, they get jammed all to hell), and they require regular cleaning, just like every other firearm.
The designs of firearms don't have to change, because
they work, and why fix what isn't broken?
What I read about the bronze is that bronze was simply more expensive to make, even if slightly harder and heavier (about 10%). Early on, officers had bronze swords while common soldiers had iron.
A plasteel rifle is not necessarily a good idea. It's light, yes ? So you'll suffer more recoil. Plasteel maces, or mithril maces, would be a dumb idea for the same reason balloon hammer is a dumb idea.
Quote from: b0rsuk on February 12, 2017, 03:40:34 PM
What I read about the bronze is that bronze was simply more expensive to make, even if slightly harder and heavier (about 10%). Early on, officers had bronze swords while common soldiers had iron.
A plasteel rifle is not necessarily a good idea. It's light, yes ? So you'll suffer more recoil. Plasteel maces, or mithril maces, would be a dumb idea for the same reason balloon hammer is a dumb idea.
That is pretty much it. Bronze requires some relatively-hard-to-get materials (tin, mainly, because copper is everywhere), and when the BAC happened, the trade of tin died off, meaning bronze got prohibitively expensive, on top of already being expensive.
So, warriors and warlords turned to the next best thing: iron. Iron was more widely available, which meant that, even if an iron spear was inferior to a bronze one, you could equip
many many more warriors with them, and quantity has a quality all of its own. 1000 iron-equipped warriors are going to defeat 100 bronze-equipped warriors.
Such as it is with directed-energy firearms and ballistic firearms. If you can no longer produce/maintain an adequate number of Charge Rifles, you drop down to what you can produce: Assault rifles and Survival Rifles. Or, failing that, muskets. Or, failing that, spears and bows.
Bronze isn't better for making swords. It's a soft metal....
Also can't produce charge rifle, but a power suit is fine. And a reactor. And a space worthy ship.
Quote from: Mikhail Reign on February 12, 2017, 04:21:28 PM
Bronze isn't better for making swords. It's a soft metal....
Also can't produce charge rifle, but a power suit is fine. And a reactor. And a space worthy ship.
You obviously don't know very much about metallurgy.
Bronze is pretty hard, actually, depending on what goes into it. Most high-tin (which is what weapons were made of) bronze swords are harder (and therefore sharper) than their early iron contemporaries. Plus, you work-harden the edges, making it harder still.
http://www.differencebetween.net/object/difference-between-iron-and-bronze/
The reason bronze "lost" to iron is pure logistics, plain and simple. Uncarburized (meaning not steel) iron is pretty flatly inferior to bronze in term of strength and edge-retention, but it is found in ample amounts on every continent. Tin, however, is extremely localized, meaning that if you want bronze, you need to have trade to the sources of tin.
No trade, no bronze.
Meanwhile, I could go down to the swamp in back of my house, and with some careful searching, find a source of bog iron. Not even bringing up hematite ore and other sources of iron. Sure, the bog iron will be inferior to bronze, but if that is all that I have........
It's more about what is readily available, than what is best.
So let's continue the bronze/iron analogy to charge rifles. Let's say you have some brainiacs who know how to make awesome charge rifles but there's no plasteel around, so they make do with ordinary steel. What do they come up with?
How about a single shot charge rifle that requires a significant cooldown time?
I'll admit I appear to have been wrong about bronze vs. steel. And no, there isn't any evidence to support that plasteel is necessarily less prone to overheating, etc. I was making a point. The point is, while the
functionality of gunpowder weapons are not likely to change significantly in the future, especially on the rimworlds, the
materials and design of such weapons would change. Maybe they're still made of steel, but a gun found on a colonized planet 3500 years in the future should
not just be exactly an M16 - a model of gun first introduced in 1964 and already replaced by the M4 Carbine. It should be reskinned (NOT rebalanced or otherwise mechanically changed in any way unless game balance damands it) so that the visual aestetic of the gun fits the overall theme of the game.
Quote from: Shurp on February 12, 2017, 06:28:09 PM
So let's continue the bronze/iron analogy to charge rifles. Let's say you have some brainiacs who know how to make awesome charge rifles but there's no plasteel around, so they make do with ordinary steel. What do they come up with?
How about a single shot charge rifle that requires a significant cooldown time?
What would be the point of having such a weapon instead of, say, a sniper rifle?
Quote from: Shurp on February 12, 2017, 06:28:09 PM
So let's continue the bronze/iron analogy to charge rifles. Let's say you have some brainiacs who know how to make awesome charge rifles but there's no plasteel around, so they make do with ordinary steel. What do they come up with?
How about a single shot charge rifle that requires a significant cooldown time?
Amusingly, WH40k has that, a "Laslock". Single shot lasrifles, often cribbed together from spare parts of other rifles, with crude charge packs that, while they are tempermental, pack a hell of a punch compared to "standard" lasrifles. They are used in colonization efforts (appropriately enough), on lower-teched worlds, and in down-Hive gangs and cults that make them themselves.
Ultimately,
all of this discussion about ballistic firearms vs energy firearms is really meaningless, at least until ammunition and the like becomes a thing.
I agree that weapons could do with a reskin, but that isn't really a priority. Like, at all. I would much rather have effective and well-implemented mechanics over some, bluntly, non-important reskin any day. That can wait until the game is finished.
Quote from: Boston on February 12, 2017, 06:55:53 PMI agree that weapons could do with a reskin, but that isn't really a priority. Like, at all. I would much rather have effective and well-implemented mechanics over some, bluntly, non-important reskin any day. That can wait until the game is finished.
This is the most derailing argument. The whole point of discussions is to discuss stuff - saying 'oh well I'd prefer X over Y' is subjective as hell. Everyone is also aware that stuff takes time. Its not like anyone is demanding that this happen now, in the next alpha.
/rant
That said - how many passes have the characters had? Thats just fluff for stats - exactly the same as the guns. Its not like any characters have any back stories as cliche as "Fought in the Reitbam War before becoming a mercenary". If they were all that bland and obviously a contemporary carbon copy, it would all get old pretty fast.
Off the top of my head now - in the same way that statues have 3 or 4 variants for the same thing, why not guns? It would better represent the way guns would look if they were constructed adhoc on random planets. They could all be stack-able, have the same stats etc etc, but each gun would have 3 or 4 variations of skin (it could even be related to the quality ie: a legendary pistol would look like some kinda railgun/bullet hybrid like Mals from Firefly, and a poor one would look like M1911 clone - the stats etc wouldn't change from how they are, given that a legendary pistol is already better). This would help with identifying stuff on the ground - instead of having to click through all the weapons laying around on the ground to find the good ones, you could just SEE which ones were better guns.
You could even take this a step further and do this to all crafted items - nice hats look better then crappy ones, a little bit of wear on them when they are buggered etc.
I'm not saying never add anything new, but the game has plenty of different systems, I think a little bit of time spent tying them together into something a little more focused wouldn't be a bad thing.
I'd considered contributing to this debate earlier, but after writing a solid three pages, I realized the point that I was arguing wasn't the point being made any longer. It sounds like everyone still here agrees that 1) Kinetic weapons (that is, weapons who do damage by propelling mass to a high velocity and letting momentum damage the target) are more likely to remain relevant in the Rimworld setting. 2) The basic functionality of such kinetic weapons (that is, using chemical accelerants to propel slugs of metal, and the designs to do so) is unlikely to change substantially.
The questions then seem to be, A) Would advances in technology make for any significant design changes, and B) Would a reskin of the current weapons help them fit better within the Rimworld universe? It's worth noting that the two questions do not necessarily have to be related; one could easily suggest that firearms today are likely to be firearms for our rimworlder while ceding that a reskin would make them fit a bit better. Conversely, one could also suggest that the current aesthetics fit better with the setting, even though the functions may change.
Because opinions are like arseholes, I'm going to go ahead and contribute mine. :p To point A I would suggest that advances in technology COULD significantly alter the profile of a firearm design. Things like the Smart-rifle1 could compensate for human error, allowing much longer engagement ranges, thus necessitating a more accurate rifle with corresponding design changes.
Similarly, some sort of futuristic material could conceivably change the way heat is dealt with; a material with a high heat capacity and low conductivity, particularly if brittle but with a high melting point (i.e., wouldn't deform under heat) would make a barrel able to put more rounds through it without deforming and damaging the weapon. Or, as an alternative, perhaps a highly heat conductive metal could conduct the heat away from a hot barrel into extremities on the firearm; as silly as it might look, a gun with heat-radiating frills could, given adequate conduction, allow for a greater volume of continuous fire, and as a result also look quite different from a rifle today.
And yet another factor which is being explored today in the HK G-112 is a floating barrel; simply put, the barrel is free-floating and with its high rate of fire, the user won't feel the recoil from the case until after the last of the three-round burst has left the barrel. This makes recoil much less of a factor. The only reason it wasn't adopted today is because the design, which requires caseless ammunition, couldn't be standardized for NATO.
These are just some examples of possible design improvements. Some would have a minimal aesthetic impact, some would have major. The point here is that the firearms of today tend to be the best we can do today. I don't believe they'll improve by leaps and bounds, as the OP suggested, but I do think there could be enough little tweaks, particularly done in isolation where efficiency and not standardization is the issue, that could make a firearm of the future have a different and distinct profile. Still recognizable as firearms, I'm sure, but as Mikhail had argued, just not completely identical to the ones we have today.
As for part B) I admit I have no real opinion on the issue. The Firefly weapons seemed to have distinct profiles some of the time and familiar ones others. Mal's pistol struck me as distinct from anything I'd seen, while Zoe's rifle seemed to be a standard lever-action one. I don't think a reskin would harm the game at all; whether it's worth it for Tynnan to devote resources to it is another question which I don't feel remotely qualified to answer. :p
1: http://www.tracking-point.com/
2: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heckler_%26_Koch_G11
Plasteel - it is implied it's more resistant to heat because it's a spaceship material, and traditional rockets we have must endure very high temperatures coming from friction against air. Items made out of plasteel in Rimworld are very fire resistant, except power armor and charge rifles for no reason.
Why is a reskin needed ? Why not reskin swords, surely they must look different in year 5500 ?
The way a sword looks stems from
a) physics
b) human anatomy
There are variants, like longswords, rapiers for piercing, sabres which only cut, brittle katanas which require high skill to use because they're made of inferior iron, two-handed swords. But what else could possibly change ?
Similarly, assuming that physics and human anatomy don't change significantly until 5500, how do you infer different shape of a rifle from these ? If rimworlds have roughly the same materials and methods of production available that we have to day, how could they come up with something very different ? Only if there's some kind of discovery that doesn't require very high end factories and high tech production chains.
Quote from: b0rsuk on February 13, 2017, 04:29:31 AM
Plasteel - it is implied it's more resistant to heat because it's a spaceship material, and traditional rockets we have must endure very high temperatures coming from friction against air. Items made out of plasteel in Rimworld are very fire resistant, except power armor and charge rifles for no reason.
Why is a reskin needed ? Why not reskin swords, surely they must look different in year 5500 ?
The way a sword looks stems from
a) physics
b) human anatomy
There are variants, like longswords, rapiers for piercing, sabres which only cut, brittle katanas which require high skill to use because they're made of inferior iron, two-handed swords. But what else could possibly change ?
Similarly, assuming that physics and human anatomy don't change significantly until 5500, how do you infer different shape of a rifle from these ? If rimworlds have roughly the same materials and methods of production available that we have to day, how could they come up with something very different ? Only if there's some kind of discovery that doesn't require very high end factories and high tech production chains.
Ight screw it. Nope. Screw it. Every gun in game should look exactly like guns that are currently purchasable in real life with absolutely 0 deviation. The Charge Gun should be removed because its impossible over 1500 years for humans to deviant from a design at all - since it is impossible to store enough energy to be a weapon obviously it shouldn't exist either. Leading from that, the power armour, and power shield should also be removed. The energy required by the shield is the same as required by a gun (stopping/starting a bullet is the same energy requirement) so obviously thats impossible. Looking back at history its plain to see that we have used the M16 for a millennia, and will continue to use it until the extinction of out species.
That's a nice false dichotomy and not what I've said. "Low fantasy" settings like "Song of Ice and Fire" and the world of "Blade Itself" exist. It's completely normal that "low sci-fi" can exist as well. Especially that it's inspired by Firefly. Firefly didn't have rayguns and lasers largely because of budget limitations, but people
liked it.
Quote from: WikipediaLow fantasy is a subgenre of fantasy fiction involving "nonrational happenings that are without causality or rationality because they occur in the rational world where such things are not supposed to occur."[1] Low fantasy stories are usually set in a fictional but rational world, and are contrasted with high fantasy stories, which take place in a completely fictional fantasy world setting with its own set of rules and physical laws.
It seems a number of people want sci-fi (or futuristic) elements to be central to Rimworld, but they're rather peripherial because that's what the setting is. It's a frontier world, Wild West in space with a sprinkle of new technologies and gimmicks.
Quote from: b0rsuk on February 13, 2017, 06:41:54 AMIt's a frontier world, Wild West in space
Other then hats and dusters - name 5 things that make it 'Western'. Other then the robot faction, and a couple of other thing, you can almost say the same for space
It may as well be 'Post Apocalypse Earth 2025'
Quote from: Mikhail Reign on February 13, 2017, 07:03:47 AM
Quote from: b0rsuk on February 13, 2017, 06:41:54 AMIt's a frontier world, Wild West in space
Other then hats and dusters - name 5 things that make it 'Western'. Other then the robot faction, and a couple of other thing, you can almost say the same for space
It may as well be 'Post Apocalypse Earth 2025'
1.) The music
2.) The Tribals
3.) Muffalos, Bears and Cougars
4.) Cacti, You had to play in one of the hot and dry climates for most comparison
5. ) Social Fights and Broken Furniture
Whats missing are
Swinging Doors,
Gallows,
Horses,
whiskey and moonshine,
and sherriffs worth a damn
Quote from: Mikhail Reign on February 13, 2017, 07:03:47 AM
Other then hats and dusters - name 5 things that make it 'Western'. Other then the robot faction, and a couple of other thing, you can almost say the same for space
1. Settlements raided by outlaws, firefights, lawlessness, you can do anything you like and the only price is faction relation or mood penalty
2. Arid Shrubland as the first biome ever in Rimworld. Untamed wilderness.
3. Firefly-inspired music
4. Animal husbandry (cowboys)
5. Someone always ends up dead.
6. Racist portrayal of natives. Dumb and vicious.
SpaceDorf: Sheriffs ARE worth a damn in this game! My coma child / sheriff is a brawler. I installed him 2 scyther blades and hope he never gets a mental break. He's my official switch flicker because he has 4 unlocked skills. But the game IS missing tumbleweed like hell!
Quote from: Mikhail Reignpersonal shields
Personal shields are one of the few items you can't manufacture without mods, along with AI cores, charge lances and heavy charge blasters. Glitterworld items.
Quote from: Mikhail Reign on February 13, 2017, 05:05:33 AM
Quote from: b0rsuk on February 13, 2017, 04:29:31 AM
Plasteel - it is implied it's more resistant to heat because it's a spaceship material, and traditional rockets we have must endure very high temperatures coming from friction against air. Items made out of plasteel in Rimworld are very fire resistant, except power armor and charge rifles for no reason.
Why is a reskin needed ? Why not reskin swords, surely they must look different in year 5500 ?
The way a sword looks stems from
a) physics
b) human anatomy
There are variants, like longswords, rapiers for piercing, sabres which only cut, brittle katanas which require high skill to use because they're made of inferior iron, two-handed swords. But what else could possibly change ?
Similarly, assuming that physics and human anatomy don't change significantly until 5500, how do you infer different shape of a rifle from these ? If rimworlds have roughly the same materials and methods of production available that we have to day, how could they come up with something very different ? Only if there's some kind of discovery that doesn't require very high end factories and high tech production chains.
Ight screw it. Nope. Screw it. Every gun in game should look exactly like guns that are currently purchasable in real life with absolutely 0 deviation. The Charge Gun should be removed because its impossible over 1500 years for humans to deviant from a design at all - since it is impossible to store enough energy to be a weapon obviously it shouldn't exist either. Leading from that, the power armour, and power shield should also be removed. The energy required by the shield is the same as required by a gun (stopping/starting a bullet is the same energy requirement) so obviously thats impossible. Looking back at history its plain to see that we have used the M16 for a millennia, and will continue to use it until the extinction of out species.
...Said no one at all but YOU. Nice sulk, there.
and literally no-one is talking about advanced sex robots at all.
Quote from: b0rsuk on February 13, 2017, 04:29:31 AM
Plasteel - it is implied it's more resistant to heat because it's a spaceship material, and traditional rockets we have must endure very high temperatures coming from friction against air. Items made out of plasteel in Rimworld are very fire resistant, except power armor and charge rifles for no reason.
Why is a reskin needed ? Why not reskin swords, surely they must look different in year 5500 ?
The way a sword looks stems from
a) physics
b) human anatomy
There are variants, like longswords, rapiers for piercing, sabres which only cut, brittle katanas which require high skill to use because they're made of inferior iron, two-handed swords. But what else could possibly change ?
Similarly, assuming that physics and human anatomy don't change significantly until 5500, how do you infer different shape of a rifle from these ? If rimworlds have roughly the same materials and methods of production available that we have to day, how could they come up with something very different ? Only if there's some kind of discovery that doesn't require very high end factories and high tech production chains.
I assume that weapon design will have aesthetic differences or one very simple reason: they
already have aesthetic differences. Compare the M16, G36, AK74, Steyr AUG, and FN FAL. They all have distinct shapes despite the identical physics, human anatomy, and approximate tech levels.
Furthermore, you explicitly assumed no advances in materials and methods. Yet plasteel is a common building product, thanks to the ruins of ancient empires. Similarly, there are other futuristic and pseudofuturistic advancements, such as drop pods. Things
have changed, and as such I don't think it's unreasonable to expect the external appearance of some items to change as well.
In summation, it's my belief that, even with relatively minor changes in tech (e.g., new materials), given the variance in rifle appearances
today it is not unreasonable to expect that there could be some significant variations in appearance over 3,000 years without modifying the core operating requirements.
As for
why a reskin is necessary, that seems to be a matter of opinion. Some people feel that the contemporary weapon looks fits well. Others seem to feel that they're jarring, and don't fit in well with the setting. Personally, I don't have any real preference; I just felt that it bore mentioning that it wasn't unreasonable from a tech standpoint for a different design to surface.
As for advanced sex robots, yup, I fully admit I'm not talking about that. :p Perhaps discussing it has merit, but my interest lays more in the realm of firearm and technical details. What can I say, I'm a nerd. :p
Quote from: brcruchairman on February 13, 2017, 02:00:28 PM
I assume that weapon design will have aesthetic differences or one very simple reason: they already have aesthetic differences. Compare the M16, G36, AK74, Steyr AUG, and FN FAL. They all have distinct shapes despite the identical physics, human anatomy, and approximate tech levels.
Okay, so assuming M16, G36 and so on differ mostly in aesthetics, do you... propose to have futuristic
looking weapons just because the looks of current weapons
bother you ? I mean, that's the main point of having futuristic weapons for you ? Cool aesthetics ? No exploring of new possibilities, no new mechanics ? What a waste !
This is what bothers
me - many supporters of this thread want weapons that function the same, are futuristic but differ only in aesthetics. I've seen almost zero proposals for
intriguing weapons. I fact, I probably made most of these in this thread. Like, a railgun that hits everything in a line (penetrates targets).
Quote
Furthermore, you explicitly assumed no advances in materials and methods. Yet plasteel is a common building product, thanks to the ruins of ancient empires.
It's required for the spaceship, they drop from the "ultimate" enemies in the game, and your map likely has 1-2 veins of it not counting deep drilling. A single tile (75) is what, 15000 HP to dig through ? I wouldn't call it common.
QuoteSimilarly, there are other futuristic and pseudofuturistic advancements, such as drop pods. Things have changed, and as such I don't think it's unreasonable to expect the external appearance of some items to change as well.
Again, drop pods require a multi-analyzer, which makes them a tier 3 research item (Simple research bench = Town Hall, High-tech research bench = Keep, Multi-analyzer = Castle). Drop pods require a fairly rare resource - chemfuel, which you can obtain only from drilling and trade. Ground-penetrating scanner requires about the same amount of research as spaceship parts.
My point is that things you mention as common are in fact hard to obtain and near the top of the tech tree. They're rare in this setting.
Quote
As for why a reskin is necessary, that seems to be a matter of opinion. Some people feel that the contemporary weapon looks fits well. Others seem to feel that they're jarring, and don't fit in well with the setting.
Like they didn't fit in Firefly, which is the biggest inspiration behind Rimworld ?
There are probably more high tech / glitterworld items coming, including weapons. Current factions are very poorly fleshed out. There are differences between tribals and the rest (but not among tribals themselves - they're an unwashed, shapeless horde). But pirates and outlanders barely differ. I've never been at war with outlanders, but I think they don't use personal shields, mortars or drop pods. I haven't seen one with a charge rifle. That's it. I hope most of 'glitterworld' items are impossible to manufacture. The game is called Rimworld, not Glitterworld. I also very much hope that the new 'glitterworld' items provide new mechanics and not just visuals.
Quote from: b0rsuk on February 13, 2017, 02:44:33 PM
Quote from: brcruchairman on February 13, 2017, 02:00:28 PM
Quote
Furthermore, you explicitly assumed no advances in materials and methods. Yet plasteel is a common building product, thanks to the ruins of ancient empires.
It's required for the spaceship, they drop from the "ultimate" enemies in the game, and your map likely has 1-2 veins of it not counting deep drilling. A single tile (75) is what, 15000 HP to dig through ? I wouldn't call it common.
It's even rarer a single tile yields 35 Units not 75 ..
When we talk about how gun models wouldn't have changed, let's not forget that many of the gun models used in the game have already changed in real life. To assume that they will not change any further in the next 500 or so years is a bit foolish. It's true that we are already very good at making guns, and the limitations we have now are more about recoil and mobilty than design or technique. But if human beings were not good at overcoming limits, we wouldn't be playing a video game about space colonization.
It seems that most people want is for the guns to look retro-western, or semi-futuristic, or both. What I don't understand why anyone would want is for your space colonists with centuries of technological advancement behind them to be weilding a gun model from Earth circa 1968.
If you want the "space western" feel that Firefly evokes, then we should be seeing things like revolvers, shotguns, and lever or bolt-action rifles being the chief armament. Wood rather than steel would be a primary component of the stocks, body, etc.. If you want a more "near future" feel then you should have assault rifles and SMGs that look like the designs have improved not only in function but to fit the aesthetic tastes of a society that has hundreds of years to change their minds about what looks good. Maybe they've decided that gray is the new black when it comes to gun design, or prefer hard angles to rounded edges.
I can accept that modelling the guns after existing models is a deliberate choice to avoid needing to spend time developing the art when other areas of the game need more attention. However, I strongly hope that they will change somewhere down the line to more accurately reflect the game's flavor, whatever that may end up being.
Quote from: b0rsuk on February 13, 2017, 02:44:33 PM
Okay, so assuming M16, G36 and so on differ mostly in aesthetics, do you... propose to have futuristic looking weapons just because the looks of current weapons bother you ? I mean, that's the main point of having futuristic weapons for you ? Cool aesthetics ? No exploring of new possibilities, no new mechanics ? What a waste !
This is what bothers me - many supporters of this thread want weapons that function the same, are futuristic but differ only in aesthetics. I've seen almost zero proposals for intriguing weapons. I fact, I probably made most of these in this thread. Like, a railgun that hits everything in a line (penetrates targets).
I think I get where you're coming from, that high-tech futuristic sleek looks both wouldn't fit, are unnecessary, and wouldn't fit with the relatively small gains in efficacy, but I feel like you may be misunderstanding the point you're attacking; it's not that we want super high-tech sleek looking guns, just
different looking guns. Like Mal's pistol, it looks like it could be at home in the 20th or 21st century, but is clearly not just a clone of one of those very same weapons. THAT'S what, as I understand it, is being advocated.
I'll also note, that what you've described would be interesting. It's not, however, what I think is currently being discussed; those are
functional changes, which change how a weapon work, and would require significantly more work on the part of the devs to make it work. A reskin alone to make it look less like carbon-copies of 20th century weapons and more like similar but not identical weapons would be only half the work: sprites only, not sprites AND code.
Quote
It's required for the spaceship, they drop from the "ultimate" enemies in the game, and your map likely has 1-2 veins of it not counting deep drilling. A single tile (75) is what, 15000 HP to dig through ? I wouldn't call it common.
I would; the fact that bulk traders carry hundreds of units of it means that, while it's
expensive, at the same time it's not some exotic prototype. Charge rifles and power armor both use the stuff in their production. Therefore, regardless of how we term it in terms of "rare" or "common", it is indisputably
present within the tech base.
You did make the good point, however, that plasteel is a relatively infrastructure- and tech-intensive resource within Rimworld; the things that use it all require research. This is a good point; it'd make plasteel specifically less likely to be used in general, mid-level firearms. I still maintain that it's demonstrative of the greater point that materials have advanced, and advances could change the profile of a weapon.
Quote
Again, drop pods require a multi-analyzer, which makes them a tier 3 research item (Simple research bench = Town Hall, High-tech research bench = Keep, Multi-analyzer = Castle). Drop pods require a fairly rare resource - chemfuel, which you can obtain only from drilling and trade. Ground-penetrating scanner requires about the same amount of research as spaceship parts.
My point is that things you mention as common are in fact hard to obtain and near the top of the tech tree. They're rare in this setting.
I think I'd mentioned this above; a good point. A high-tech plasteel rifle might have a different profile, but it'd also be a different production level. I think the gist of my point, though, was more that advances in material sciences lead to corresponding changes in design profiles.
Quote
Like they didn't fit in Firefly, which is the biggest inspiration behind Rimworld ?
There are probably more high tech / glitterworld items coming, including weapons. Current factions are very poorly fleshed out. There are differences between tribals and the rest (but not among tribals themselves - they're an unwashed, shapeless horde). But pirates and outlanders barely differ. I've never been at war with outlanders, but I think they don't use personal shields, mortars or drop pods. I haven't seen one with a charge rifle. That's it. I hope most of 'glitterworld' items are impossible to manufacture. The game is called Rimworld, not Glitterworld. I also very much hope that the new 'glitterworld' items provide new mechanics and not just visuals.
I'd mentioned this above, but it sounds like what you're arguing against is making all the weapons shiny and sleek and futuristic. That's not what I, personally, am advocating; the point (which, again, I'll stress I don't feel strongly about one way or another) I'm trying to clarify is that some feel that weapons that are clones of extant ones feel jarring, and ones
of similar tech level which just look different would be less jarring. Like, as you'd mentioned, in Firefly. I know that, personally, when I watched the series, I didn't see any of the weapons and go, "Oh hey, that's an MP5!" or "Wow, they just reused a Sig Saur? Laaame." Instead, despite all those weapons being functionally the same to present ones (in terms of, "Pull the trigger, goes boom") they all
looked different.
I'd also like to say that I felt a bit put out by your post; it felt to me that you were putting many words in my mouth. (E.g., "just because the looks of current weapons bother you".) I rather doubt you care enough about me to make the effort to try to get my hackles up, 'cause I'm just some guy on the internet. :p
However, I'd like to point out that, at least to me, the way parts of that post came off was turning me into a straw man, misrepresenting what I was trying to say and then attacking it. I've done my best to avoid making anything personal, where I can. If I've failed in this, please let me know where and how so I can apologize; I don't like being a dick, but that doesn't mean I won't act like one. :p The best I can do is apologize and try to learn from it. Similarly, my hope is that you would similarly try to engage the points brought up (as you so effectively did with your point on plasteel and tech levels) without making the opinions of the other person the issue.
I'd also like to apologize if I HAVE misunderstood you and thus misrepresented your points; lord knows I'm not infallible, so if I've erred in my perception of what you're trying to say, or presented any of my points poorly so they felt like a personal attack, I hope you'll forgive my mistake.
Quote from: CrazyEyes on February 13, 2017, 04:35:58 PM
[snip]
I feel like you've summed up what I was trying to say really nicely! Thanks, CrazyEyes; I appreciate the eloquent sum-up, particularly as it says the same thing much more briefly than anything I write. :p
You're far too polite and intellectually honest to be on the internet. Begone!
I'm not a gun enthusiast. I know just a couple of the more popular or iconic guns and rifles, like AK47, MG42, Thompson etc. I've seen them in video games and movies, mostly. Note weapons in movies are rarely called by their name. But even bringing up Firefly into this - note the start of the first episode. They're fighting some war and losing. Their equipment looks notably more futuristic than in the rest of the show. You really get an impression military grade weapons are another league. I didn't pay attention to the way guns looked, but they were projectile weapons. My point - rimworlds use older weapons.
I don't want guns that look like plastic toys. They should look rugged and functional. I want guns with oomph, even if they sound very mundane. Futuristic weapons, especially energy weapons have a big problem: no library of sounds to draw from, and no real idea how they should sound like. They tend to sound puny - you know, pew pew. Show me a youtube of a energy weapon I would want to use. I haven't seen one.
Quote from: b0rsuk on February 13, 2017, 06:35:30 PM
You're far too polite and intellectually honest to be on the internet. Begone!
Bwahaha! You're making me blush, good sir. *beams*
Quote
I'm not a gun enthusiast. I know just a couple of the more popular or iconic guns and rifles, like AK47, MG42, Thompson etc. I've seen them in video games and movies, mostly. Note weapons in movies are rarely called by their name. But even bringing up Firefly into this - note the start of the first episode. They're fighting some war and losing. Their equipment looks notably more futuristic than in the rest of the show. You really get an impression military grade weapons are another league. I didn't pay attention to the way guns looked, but they were projectile weapons. My point - rimworlds use older weapons.
I don't want guns that look like plastic toys. They should look rugged and functional. I want guns with oomph, even if they sound very mundane. Futuristic weapons, especially energy weapons have a big problem: no library of sounds to draw from, and no real idea how they should sound like. They tend to sound puny - you know, pew pew. Show me a youtube of a energy weapon I would want to use. I haven't seen one.
I think we can agree on this; if there were to be a weapon reskinning, I'd want it to look as you described, something rough-and-tumble, maybe even cobbled together, rather than sleek and futuristic. If I may ask, would some sort of modern-day looking weapon, but different in profile from modern designs, be agreeable to you? (Not that either of us have the authority to make it happen, but I like to reach a consensus when I can. ^ ^) I imagine something vaguely like the human weapons in Halo in terms of aesthetics; clearly still slug-throwers and looks similar to nowadays, just clearly also NOT a clone of an extant model.
You also make a good point regarding energy weapons; there just aren't many good sound effects for a Directed Energy Weapon out there. Probably because, while firearms make a distinct sound by their firing, DEWs wouldn't do so in the same way. As someone earlier in the thread pointed out, a DEW would likely do a very short, high intensity burst which would just make an explosion. Rather than sounding like a gun firing, it'd just be lotsa explosions. (As an example, here
1 is an example of a real-life DEW. Impressive, but not really something we'd see on squad-level combat. What we'd be more likely to see for a handheld weapon system seems more along these
2 lines, and the little "click" it gives would really not be satisfying for a player to hear.)
So, in summation, I think we can agree that "high-tech", much less energy weapons, wouldn't fit too well in the setting and would have the problem of lack of extant sounds to deal with. :)
1: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F85f1FHxMEs
2: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W3_XCnAlG0U
Quote from: b0rsuk on February 13, 2017, 06:35:30 PM
I'm not a gun enthusiast. I know just a couple of the more popular or iconic guns and rifles, like AK47, MG42, Thompson etc. I've seen them in video games and movies, mostly. Note weapons in movies are rarely called by their name. But even bringing up Firefly into this - note the start of the first episode. They're fighting some war and losing. Their equipment looks notably more futuristic than in the rest of the show. You really get an impression military grade weapons are another league. I didn't pay attention to the way guns looked, but they were projectile weapons. My point - rimworlds use older weapons.
I don't want guns that look like plastic toys. They should look rugged and functional. I want guns with oomph, even if they sound very mundane. Futuristic weapons, especially energy weapons have a big problem: no library of sounds to draw from, and no real idea how they should sound like. They tend to sound puny - you know, pew pew. Show me a youtube of a energy weapon I would want to use. I haven't seen one.
You make a good point about the sounds, and since we're talking about Firefly we may as well use that as an example. They have some quite excellent sound effects for most of their guns. Many of the guns have additional effects that indicate some sort of advanced technology at work. Here's a good example I found:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RjG6Saqaaos (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RjG6Saqaaos)
It's little details like this that go a long way towards building a universe. You watch that clip, and not only is the gun instantly recognizeable as a shotgun even though it's not any model of shotgun I've ever seen (the clip is altered and there's no stock), you immediately understand there's some technological aspect to it that makes it "better" in some unknowable way. The guns we see in the show almost never function any differently than we'd expect their present-day counterparts to, but little bits of flavor like that convince us that they
are different.
Also on the subject of Firefly, there are indeed "levels" of technology that are available to people. That's exactly how the Alliance wants it. The year is 2500-ish, i don't remember exactly, so there are definitely better weapons available than what Mal and his crew typically have access to. The military has advanced hardware, and we even see that handheld laser weapons are a reality, although they are implied to be rare and insanely expensive and shown to be somewhat impractical. However, when the Alliance settles a new world, they give them the garbage weapons and keep the technology level low on purpose to make sure that they don't have the strength to rise up. That's why you see more revolvers and rifles and less assault weapons. This probably isn't very different from what you'd expect to find on a rimworld, with the major difference being that the comparitively low technology level is entirely their own fault.
I, personally, would want them chunky, built-to-last, able to take a licking and keep on ticking, with sounds and effects to match.
Think about it: you are on a frontier world, a rough-and-tumble place at the best of times, you want a weapon that can stand up to that.
[attachment deleted by admin due to age]
In concur with boston.
Lets move away from High-Tech look alltogether and look in the other direction of
50's Science-Fiction, Steampunk and Mad Science. With the western background this is really low hanging fruit.
Also Nanotech and Biotech are clearly canon in the game. ( Luciferium, Boomalopes, VatGrown Soldiers ) so why not harvest from there a bit.
Acid Throwers, Exploding Mushrooms, plasma grenades and other Weird Shit ..
As a propable explenation why everything looks nearly the same across the rim, Warhammer 40k
has the concept of the STC, standard template construct's , without going into details, it is a settlers
library and construction manual on how to build sturdy and working stuff with local materials.
A good example of weapon designs I consider shitty weapon design is Aliens (the one with sentryguns). No one makes a weapon the size of a radiator (wall heater). It would be impractical and get in the way. All the bulkiness of an anti-tank weapon with no perceptible benefits, they got owned and hard.
My point with sounds and other effects (particles, ricochets) is that effects of projectile weapons are well known and there are libraries for it all. They make distinctive, menacing sounds, which are frankly quite satisfying for example when you one shot a Scyther. What are you going to replace them with to make weapons NOT sound and feel worse ? I mean look at EMP grenades. Does charge rifle, by far the most damaging weapon in the game, sound terrifying ? Does heavy charge blaster(hahaha!), a weapon whose DPS is off the scale ?
How are you going to improve the situation ? That would take a dedicated audio technician who likes to experiment.
If - by realism - energy weapons should have no ricochets, no loud sounds etc then they need to compensate with something, like very nice impact particles and sizzle sounds.
Quote from: b0rsuk on February 14, 2017, 02:35:54 AM
A good example of weapon designs I consider shitty weapon design is Aliens (the one with sentryguns). No one makes a weapon the size of a radiator (wall heater). It would be impractical and get in the way. All the bulkiness of an anti-tank weapon with no perceptible benefits, they got owned and hard.
Just randomly - which gun are you talking about? The sentrygun? The pulse rifle that they all carry? Or the MG42 on a camera sling that they use as a SSW?
Quote from: b0rsuk on February 14, 2017, 02:35:54 AM
My point with sounds and other effects (particles, ricochets) is that effects of projectile weapons are well known and there are libraries for it all. They make distinctive, menacing sounds, which are frankly quite satisfying for example when you one shot a Scyther. What are you going to replace them with to make weapons NOT sound and feel worse ? I mean look at EMP grenades. Does charge rifle, by far the most damaging weapon in the game, sound terrifying ? Does heavy charge blaster(hahaha!), a weapon whose DPS is off the scale ?
That just an opinion tho. I don't find that current guns sound intrinsically 'scarey'. A .22 sounds just as menacing as a .303 - both can kill the shit out of you. 'Gotta be big boom' seems like an American way of thinking to be honest...
Like me? I loved the shit outa the sci-fi noise that the sentry guns made.
The weapons they wield in those twisty corridors. Sentryguns can be as bulky as they want, they're not there to dance.
Quote from: Boston on February 13, 2017, 10:55:11 PM
I, personally, would want them chunky, built-to-last, able to take a licking and keep on ticking, with sounds and effects to match.
Think about it: you are on a frontier world, a rough-and-tumble place at the best of times, you want a weapon that can stand up to that.
I just wanted to say that these designs are something I could 100% get behind. It seems to perfectly encapsulate what CrazyEyes and SpaceDorf were saying, with the clearly non-contemporary look while at the same time looking cobbled together, sturdy, relatively simple, and functional, not high-tech "whee, space lasers!" So bravo, Boston. Bravo.
Quote from: Mikhail Reign on February 14, 2017, 02:45:50 AM
That just an opinion tho. I don't find that current guns sound intrinsically 'scarey'. A .22 sounds just as menacing as a .303 - both can kill the shit out of you. 'Gotta be big boom' seems like an American way of thinking to be honest...
Like me? I loved the shit outa the sci-fi noise that the sentry guns made.
Two notes, here: first is nitpicking (sorry, guys! D: ) that the Aliens Sentry Guns were actually ALSO slug-throwers. According to the wiki
1 they're chambered in 10x28 mm Caseless ammo. So those were definitely slug-throwers. ^ ^
Second note is that you're entirely correct that impressive sounds are subjective, and I wanted to thank you for acknowledging this. :) It's really easy for people (like, for instance, myself. <.< ) to consider their opinion and fact to be the same, so it's always refreshing when people like you and B0rsuk make the distinction clear. Thanks, you two! :)
Also, as always, adding my own two cents, there is, to me, a difference between the various calibers in terms of sound. When I fire my dinky little .22 LR, it makes this loud but not deafening "crack" which almost just sounds like breaking wood. When I fire my 12 guage, or a borrowed 9 mm or (oh god why did I even let my friend talk me into firing his) 8 mm Mauser, they all had a very different sound and feel to them. I swear I could
feel that 8 mm Mauser even when somebody else was firing it. Much more of a full-throated "BOOM!".
The above said? As you pointed out, the sound doesn't make for a terribly good indicator of lethality. Firing a 5.56 mm almost feels like shooting a toy, with the sound to match (in my experience) but those are designed people-killers. Firing a 12 ga. loaded with birdshot
feels powerful, both in recoil and sound, but at more than forty or fifty yards, those lil' pellets barely penetrate plastic; to be frank, I'm not sure they'd even get through a thick leather coat at that distance.
My opinion is that it may be worth discarding realism in favor of the "rule of cool" when it comes to weapon sound effects. Though it sounds like everyone here is firmly agreed that DEWs wouldn't be a good fit for Rimworld, for the sake of example I present this
2 sound bite as an example of an utterly unrealistic but still kinda cool- and satisfying-sounding effect. In a similar (and more relevant vein, as I think we all concur that a modern-style slug thrower fits Rimworld best) such sounds could be found or manufactured for the reskins. Personally, I'm content with the sound effects as they are, but I think I'm also a bit less discerning than some of the players here; after all, I'm usually to wrapped up in "HOMG LET'S MAKE MONEH!" to pay much attention to the weapon sprites. >.> Nobody ever said I was cool, okay?! :p
1: http://avp.wikia.com/wiki/UA_571-C_Automated_Sentry_Gun
2: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=StO9wHYuYPM
did someone allready mention that the turrets and mortars are also projectile weapons ?
Quote from: SpaceDorf on February 14, 2017, 03:03:41 PM
did someone allready mention that the turrets and mortars are also projectile weapons ?
This is EXACTLY why I had the 'people need to start appropriately using the terms 'projectile', 'kinetic' and 'ballistic'.
EVERYTHING is a projectile weapon. Even plasma guns PROJECT plasma. A rail gun and a regular gun are both kinetic weapons. A mortar and a sniper rifle can both be ballisitic weapons.
I have no problem with kinetic weapons , ballistic weapons or kinetic weapons.
I have a problem with weapons that look exactly like today's weapons.
I THINK there should be a higher amount of non-ballistic kinetic weapons in game (rail, coil, plasma, etc) considering that it isn technology that we are using to day.
Also, b0rsuck - (it's almost a tangent at this point) but I still do get which one you mean - the pulse rifles don't seem any bigger then the M16 they are based off, but I'm sure there would be a carbine variant (Aliens is Vietnam in space - the M16/Pulse Rifle being unwieldy to use in convinced quarters/a jungle is intentional). Seriously tho - friggen love that squad based weapon tho - and MG38/42 (can't remember which) attached to a video camera mount strapped to their chest.
100% modern/current/even painfully outdated.
Still looks 'cool' as shit because is 'cool' and not just a stock MG