Charge rifles are too common

[sadpickle]

I have a ballistic, "realistic" weapon pack which afaik should only make them rarer, with the bigger variety of conventional firearms. But I still get 1-3 per pirate raid.

I think Outlanders favor conventional ballistic weapons (I could be totally wrong, but that's my impression) whilst Tribals of course just bring Neolithic.

[Mikhail Reign]

Well..... given that its the year 3000 or so, Lee Enfields, Uzi's and M16's should be as rare as 1000 year old guns today, and Charged Rifles (assuming they are the 'current' tech in game) should be as plentiful as AK-47 (variants) are today..

[brcruchairman]

Well..... given that its the year 3000 or so, Lee Enfields, Uzi's and M16's should be as rare as 1000 year old guns today, and Charged Rifles (assuming they are the 'current' tech in game) should be as plentiful as AK-47 (variants) are today..

Hmm... I can see your point. I guess it depends on the rate of human expansion; often the limiting factor for the mass production of goods isn't technological know-how, but rather industrial base. If humans are expanding slowly relative to their industrial base, you're completely right; we should see high-tech EVERYTHING! If, however, humanity is expanding about as fast as they can build ships, then one would expect significantly less complicated devices to be the norm.

For instance, today we have the technical know-how to build flying cars, but we lack the industrial base to make it economically viable. A more relevant example is self-aiming rifles, which exist and are therefore possible, but again due to the lack of an industrial base to provide inexpensive components, doesn't exist on any wide scale.

So I guess the question I'm left with is one about Rimworld lore: how fast are people expanding? Are Urbworlds the norm, and Rimworlds just for the crazy pilgrims and unfortunate shipwrecks? Or do rim worlds outnumber developed ones ten to one, making the frontier the norm, and civilization only rare patches?

Hmm... I wonder if Tynan will weigh in on this. :p Nah, prolly more fun to let us debate and see what fan theories we come up with. ^ ^

[mastamage]

Really? I'm in about my third year and I've only been seeing them since like, middle of year 2? And it's still only one or two per raid.

same, it varies per playtrough, but it seems like that there is little middle ground here

[NickB0]

Well..... given that its the year 3000 or so, Lee Enfields, Uzi's and M16's should be as rare as 1000 year old guns today, and Charged Rifles (assuming they are the 'current' tech in game) should be as plentiful as AK-47 (variants) are today..

Yes if you want to look at it from a realism point of view, but gameplay is more important than realism. You can also argue that thousands of years from now laser weaponry will be developed that is super accurate and disintegrates targets on hit and everyone has all these different types of super guns, but that would just make for boring gameplay. The best gear shouldn't be available immediately and so easily.

[Shurp]

Tech level should determine the armament of attackers. Seeing how common drop pods are it makes sense that the people in them commonly have charge rifles. But you're right that the best weapon in the game shouldn't be so common. There should be rare weapons BETTER than the CR!

[brcruchairman]

Tech level should determine the armament of attackers. Seeing how common drop pods are it makes sense that the people in them commonly have charge rifles. But you're right that the best weapon in the game shouldn't be so common. There should be rare weapons BETTER than the CR!

Huh, I really like that point of view. This goes double since, at least the way I play, my colony inevitably ends up making charge rifles, which would seem to imply that they're fairly common. Your idea of having weapons BETTER than charge rifles would provide much rarer ultra-weapons. Good idea, Shurp!

[Mikhail Reign]

I see where you are coming from with the industrial base arguement, but when a colonist can bash together a solar panel, geothermal generator, a planet to space radio or literally all the parts needed to make a spaceship with nothing more then whatever that flashing tool is, I don't see why they couldn't make what ever their times equivalent of a AK-47 is (assuming it's the Charge Rifle).

I could actually see with all of the weapons in game having some fluffier names given to them, and a reskinning. I really doesnt make any sense at all for them to be using 20th/21st century guns. In Firefly, Malcom uses a pistol that looks very similar to a 18/19th century six shooter, but it's a actually a gauss/coil gun that holds six slugs. The props name is 'Moses Brothers Self-Defense Engine Frontier Model B' obviously inspired by the 'Colt 'Peacemaker' Single Action Frontier Six Shooter, Model P'.

Instead of a 'survival rifle' it could be a 'Rimington Frontier Varmint Rail, Model 2886', with some fluff about it being a old-timey railgun. A 'pistol' could be a 'M2911 'Tribalstopper' Army Special'. A 'PDW' could be a ''Shaved' Warg Personal Liberator', with some fluff about it being a coilgun that shaves a metal rod for ammo (Warg=Colt).

Following this the lesser guns would still be 'old' but only a few hundred year, and so comparable with current ingame tech and futuristic. Given the tech the colonist have access too, rail/coil guns would be an easy first step - it's just propelling metal with magnets. It would probably be easier for them to do that then make gunpowder.

This would just bring all the weapons together so they feel like they are comparable on the battle field. Then Charged Rifles COULD be the King of the firefight, but modern weapons like they would be rare out on the rim. People would have to make do with leaver action rail guns, double barrel sonic disrupters and six shooting coil cannons, which would be a lot more powerful then their 18/19/20/21st century counterparts, and so could be made more on par with the Charged Rifle then they currently are.

[Boston]

Why do people in Warhammer 40k use cartridge-based firearms, including a literal M2 Browning HMG, unchanged for 38,000 years ( I am not kidding. The Heavy Stubber is a M2 Browning), as well as literal black powder weapons, when they could have the option to use laser rifles, guns that shoot miniature suns at people, and MARTIAN DEATH RAYS?

Because the older guns are cheap, to make and to repair, can be made in lower-tech facilities compared to the "modern" stuff, and , well ...... they work. A bullet to the face is still a bullet to the face.

For the person talking about railguns and such, you do realize that they are stupidly expensive to make, right? The rails need to be re-machined after almost every shot, the ammunition has to be made to exacting specifications, etc. You can make an assault rifle in a shitty machine shop with poor tools.

"It's just propelling metal with magnets", is kinda like " it is just fusing atoms together, right?" -eyeroll-

You apparently have no idea how complicated things really are.

[Mikhail Reign]

Why do people in Warhammer 40k use cartridge-based firearms, including a literal M2 Browning HMG, unchanged for 38,000 years ( I am not kidding. The Heavy Stubber is a M2 Browning), as well as literal black powder weapons, when they could have the option to use laser rifles, guns that shoot miniature suns at people, and MARTIAN DEATH RAYS

...... Because it's a fictional universe and they could field literally whatever they want?

Also, yeah when your culture has handheld tools that can build anything, that are probably based on some crazy similar tech, it would be easier to make rail guns then it would be gun powder. One is utilising the tech you have access to in a difference way (assuming the wonder tool uses a awesome battery and electricty in some way, and isn't gun powder powered), while the other is creating a chemical you don't have, to put in a case you have to make, to cap with another material you have to find, to put into a weapon that uses ancient tech. If you are in the futur and have access to awesome batteries and super magnets, yeah I reckon it would be easier making a rail gun then a powder gun.

Any 'problems' rail guns have now, are completely irrelevant - it's 1000 years in the future. That's like a 10th century surgeon saying that heart surgery is impossible because the person would run out of the four essential life fluids.

It isn't just about how modern the tech it - it's about how familiar your are with it. By your reasoning you should be able to make a longbow in ya backyard in half a day with no reference. I bet you would be able to make a reasonable gun before you could make a reasonable bow simply because the technology used in a gun is current, and at least somewhat social memory. I know the chemistry and mechanics behind a bullet and gun. I have no idea they type of wood, how to arrange the grain, how to prepair it, how to optimally attach string, optimal bow lengths etc etc. give me an afternoon and I could make a zipgun that would kill, but I would probably have made a bow that would hurt.

[Boston]

Why do people in Warhammer 40k use cartridge-based firearms, including a literal M2 Browning HMG, unchanged for 38,000 years ( I am not kidding. The Heavy Stubber is a M2 Browning), as well as literal black powder weapons, when they could have the option to use laser rifles, guns that shoot miniature suns at people, and MARTIAN DEATH RAYS

So is Rimworld.
...... Because it's a fictional universe and they could field literally whatever they want?

[Mikhail Reign]

Why do people in Warhammer 40k use cartridge-based firearms, including a literal M2 Browning HMG, unchanged for 38,000 years ( I am not kidding. The Heavy Stubber is a M2 Browning), as well as literal black powder weapons, when they could have the option to use laser rifles, guns that shoot miniature suns at people, and MARTIAN DEATH RAYS

So is Rimworld.
...... Because it's a fictional universe and they could field literally whatever they want?

A: ya fucked up ya quote.

B: I'm not saying they should use particular guns, because realisum (using 40k as a reference?). I'm saying they should use interesting guns because it's the year 3000 so it should seem like it. If everyone is going to use Lee Enfields and M-16's, why bother to set it in the future at all? Instead of 'Rimworld' it could be 'Shipwreaked 1987' and I wouldn't be able to tell.

[Boston]

Why do people in Warhammer 40k use cartridge-based firearms, including a literal M2 Browning HMG, unchanged for 38,000 years ( I am not kidding. The Heavy Stubber is a M2 Browning), as well as literal black powder weapons, when they could have the option to use laser rifles, guns that shoot miniature suns at people, and MARTIAN DEATH RAYS

...... Because it's a fictional universe and they could field literally whatever they want?

Also, yeah when your culture has handheld tools that can build anything, that are probably based on some crazy similar tech, it would be easier to make rail guns then it would be gun powder. One is utilising the tech you have access to in a difference way (assuming the wonder tool uses a awesome battery and electricty in some way, and isn't gun powder powered), while the other is creating a chemical you don't have, to put in a case you have to make, to cap with another material you have to find, to put into a weapon that uses ancient tech. If you are in the futur and have access to awesome batteries and super magnets, yeah I reckon it would be easier making a rail gun then a powder gun.

Any 'problems' rail guns have now, are completely irrelevant - it's 1000 years in the future. That's like a 10th century surgeon saying that heart surgery is impossible because the person would run out of the four essential life fluids.

It isn't just about how modern the tech it - it's about how familiar your are with it. By your reasoning you should be able to make a longbow in ya backyard in half a day with no reference. I bet you would be able to make a reasonable gun before you could make a reasonable bow simply because the technology used in a gun is current, and at least somewhat social memory. I know the chemistry and mechanics behind a bullet and gun. I have no idea they type of wood, how to arrange the grain, how to prepair it, how to optimally attach string, optimal bow lengths etc etc. give me an afternoon and I could make a zipgun that would kill, but I would probably have made a bow that would hurt.

They aren't using miraculous hand tools, they are using hammers, axes, welding torches. Do you even pay attention in-game? Take a listen to some of the sounds they make whenever the colonists work at a task. Chop down trees? Axe sounds. Mine some rock? Pickaxe. Build something? Hammer and saw. Work on something mechanical? Welding torch. All tools that would likely be a part of any colonization effort, and specifically mentioned as existing in the fiction primer.

The colonists also don't have access to "awesome batteries" and "super magnets". First of all, where are you seeing magnets in-game? As far as I can tell, there are none. As for batteries, they actually kind of suck. Generally, the trend for more advanced technology is to get more compact and more efficient.  Batteries that take up the same amount of space as a bed and explode on an alarmingly-regular basis are not "awesome". They sound like cribbed-together junk. Which is what they are. Modern batteries are more efficient.

I can build a bow in my backyard, actually. A bow is far simpler to make than a firearm, which in turn is far simpler to make than a railgun.

Take a look at the fiction primer of Rimworld sometime, and you will realize that a large part of the theme of Rimworld is how technology is unsustainable. The whole reason there are tribes and "modern" people on the Rimworlds is specifically because they couldn't sustain all the superawesome shit they had on Glitterworlds. It is why components and breakdowns were added, and why there are specifically non-powered versions of almost every workbench in the game. If you can't support your current level of technology, TECH DOWN. Stop using DEW and use cartridge-based firearms. Stop using firearms and use bows and arrows.

You might be able to crib together a zipgun, but could you sustain it? Make new parts for it when they break, make new ammunition (not find new ammunition, but make new ones)? Chances are almost overwhelmingly likely no.

A railgun, or other advanced technology for that matter, is that multiplied by 100000. Hell, "modern" technology in and of itself is unsustainable.  Can you build a refrigerator, without the internet or a guide telling you how? How about a windmill? A heater? You do realize that, if society were to somehow collapse in real life, humanity would be back to the Iron Age within a couple of generations, and we would never be able to have another Industrial Revolution? We used up all the resources.

I consider myself pretty familiar with most examples of modern technology, but that doesn't mean I could reproduce it. I know the mechanics behind a computer, but I couldn't build one out of scrap. I know the mechanics behind an internal combustion engine, but I couldn't build one from scrap.

Such as it is in Rimworld. The colonists come from planets with advanced technology (in some cases. In many cases, they come from worlds with similar technology to our own, or even less), but that doesn't mean they know how to build it, or how it functions Again, sustainability and reproduction is key

Oh, and the setting is clearly in the future. Are you missing the space ships flying by, the mechanic killer-bots, and the Directed Energy Weapons?

[NickB0]

B: I'm not saying they should use particular guns, because realisum (using 40k as a reference?). I'm saying they should use interesting guns because it's the year 3000 so it should seem like it. If everyone is going to use Lee Enfields and M-16's, why bother to set it in the future at all? Instead of 'Rimworld' it could be 'Shipwreaked 1987' and I wouldn't be able to tell.

Well the guns have been renamed in the newer alphas to more generic names like lee enfields to survival rifle, and m16 to assault rifle ect. so these guns are probably not weapons brought from 20/21th century earth. They were most likely manufactured on the rimworld by factions/corporations who's tech level does not exceed the 20th century.

One of the interesting things about rimworld is the colliding time periods. You have the tribals with primitive technology, Raiders with modern weapons, and super advanced mechiniods. So maybe it would be cool to have an advanced faction with advanced weapons.

I'm not sure if you're arguing you want laser/rail/particle guns to replace all gunpowdered weapons or if you want both. If gunpowdered weapons were replaced by the future guns, would the damage output be the same? If yes then it's just a reskin and not very interesting.

If the future guns are more damaging/accurate/faster then that just throws off the balance of the game completely. Tribals have less deadly weaponry than pirates but they make up for that weakness by having 2x as many soldiers. Would futuristic factions have less soldiers than gunpowdered factions to balance it out? Then once a futuristic faction is defeated during a raid your colony has probably collected a bunch of future guns. This will obsolete your gunpowdered weapons making them as useless as bows are now.

[brcruchairman]

I see where you are coming from with the industrial base arguement, but when a colonist can bash together a solar panel, geothermal generator, a planet to space radio or literally all the parts needed to make a spaceship with nothing more then whatever that flashing tool is, I don't see why they couldn't make what ever their times equivalent of a AK-47 is (assuming it's the Charge Rifle).

A good point; I hadn't even considered that. Given that a colony can manufacture their own charge rifles, it would seem to support the notion of them being more common. This is, of course, assuming that other rimworlds have similar settlers and similar tech levels to the ones we play, but I feel confident in that assumption. So, in  a way, charge rifles being that common makes sense; if your faction has researched machining, pulse rifles, and component assembly, there isn't much reason why you wouldn't crank out charge rifles. (Well, aside from potentially losing money on it; the information I have on firearm profitability is dated [A13] but that's what I have to go on.) This could account for how common they are.

However, I worry that I may have sidetracked Boston and Mikhail. The very real issue of game balance, as Nick points out, remains. When you get one to three charge rifles per pirate raid, they no longer seem rare, and as others such as Shurp have pointed out, they present a dominant strategy; arming colonists with snipers, charge rifles, and miniguns (as well as a few grenadiers) seems to work better than any combination I've found which uses the many guns in the game, such as shotguns, PDWs, machine pistols, and so on.

Unfortunately, I'm not quite sure how to solve that; perhaps for the one-hand weapons (pistol, machine pistol, etc.) a very short aim time is in order, making them close-quarters surprise weapons. (The idea being a pistol is a lot easier to maneuver and bring to bear than a longarm.) However, with the way combat currently works, a one-shot incapacitation seems unlikely, rendering that advantage minimal. I do feel that somehow specializing the guns for roles would be useful, I'm just not sure how one would go about that. Though, once I looked at the weapon stats, it seems that's already in place.

Really, the only thing that comes to mind is perhaps increasing the cooldown of the charge rifle from 40 ticks (as the postiol) to 80 (as the LMG or HSMG). I say this because, on paper, the guns DO look balanced; the HSMG for instance has only slightly less damage (10 vs 13) than the pulse rifle, comparable accuracy, slightly reduced range but a larger burst. If the above suggested were introduced, they'd also have similar warm-up and cooldown speeds.

I'll also say that having the assault rifle have half the damage of the survival rifle seems a little odd, assuming they're of similar calibers. Bringing AR damage to 18 would be overkill, mind, given the AR's burst. I'm not sure. Maybe a general damage buff for non-CR weapons is in order?