IDK if it's already possible but colonists should automatically cancel or find another task if the current one makes them go X squares near an enemy. It doesn't make sense for them to walk 1 tile away from an enemy on their way to haul logs then immediately get killed.
+100
-1000 They are doing what you told them to do... if you are queing up hundreds of jobs to be done, then you deserve to have a pawn walk into the enemy camp.
Quote from: TLHeart on May 25, 2015, 12:38:59 PM
-1000 They are doing what you told them to do... if you are queing up hundreds of jobs to be done, then you deserve to have a pawn walk into the enemy camp.
Going your logic i should cancel all the buidling plans, forbid all items, close all doors and watch everyone even when i play on Rimsenal Storyteller (week=raid)? Nice suggestion, but no. I told colonists to do X when there are
NO ENEMIES ON THE MAP NOT WHEN THEY ARE. Also there are mods like auto-hunt beacon that unforbid corpses on the map. And another example. Player just started building a big something outside his base, after this raid is coming. Do player should cancel all his building plans, or AI should be smarter than this? I will leave you with this.
And when you have a big colony (50+ colonists) you just MUST select hundreds of jobs to be done.
-0.5 for me
Reason :
I don't draft pawn to make them repair turret or fight fire automatically. If they ran away constantly because they are in range of enemy it would be bothersome.
However, I'm ok for them to run away if hit, then actualize...which should lead them to run directly to the infirmary.
Quote from: Adamiks on May 25, 2015, 12:51:20 PM
Quote from: TLHeart on May 25, 2015, 12:38:59 PM
-1000 They are doing what you told them to do... if you are queing up hundreds of jobs to be done, then you deserve to have a pawn walk into the enemy camp.
Going your logic i should cancel all the buidling plans, forbid all items, close all doors and watch everyone even when i play on Rimsenal Storyteller (week=raid)? Nice suggestion, but no. I told colonists to do X when there are NO ENEMIES ON THE MAP NOT WHEN THEY ARE. Also there are mods like auto-hunt beacon that unforbid corpses on the map. And another example. Player just started building a big something outside his base, after this raid is coming. Do player should cancel all his building plans, or AI should be smarter than this? I will leave you with this.
And when you have a big colony (50+ colonists) you just MUST select hundreds of jobs to be done.
Again, no you don't have to select hundreds of jobs, even with 50+ colonists.
It is you who needs to be smart, your colonists do what you TELL them to do. When a raid comes, yes that interrupts your plans, and YOU need to adapt your plans and change them, NOT rely upon the AI to change them for you.
The question is, do you play the game, or does the AI play the game for you?
Rimsenal Storyteller???? have no idea what that means.
Quote from: Kegereneku on May 25, 2015, 01:40:34 PM
-0.5 for me
Reason :
I don't draft pawn to make them repair turret or fight fire automatically. If they ran away constantly because they are in range of enemy it would be bothersome.
However, I'm ok for them to run away if hit, then actualize...which should lead them to run directly to the infirmary.
Except those sniper mechs one-shot your colonists so that they can't run to the medical bed. Why wouldn't you want them to run away before they get hit? If they're building something, what good is it if they continue building only to get downed in one shot?
To the other guy saying they only do what I say, no they don't. Why would I tell them to go eat a random ration on the ground next to a centipede when I have a freezer full of food? Why would I want them to haul junk to the one stockpile next to the enemy when there's more available in safe spots. Prison architect which is a game that Rimworld gets compared to has this; if there's violence in an area then your workmen will not go there to complete a job until it's safe. You don't have to go and cancel everything. This doesn't mean the "ai is playing for you". If that's the case would you prefer it if had to manually tell all your people to go get food when hungry? Or to go play horseshoes for joy and to go to sleep when tired? By your logic, since the game does it for you, the ai is playing for you. I believe it simply takes away unnecessary micro. I'd like to see the same thing for enemies; anything within a certain player-defined radius should be suspended temporarily, that way you can make it "0" and you can micro all you want. There's literally no downside since you don't have to use it.
Quote from: TLHeart on May 25, 2015, 01:47:47 PM
Again, no you don't have to select hundreds of jobs, even with 50+ colonists.
It is you who needs to be smart, your colonists do what you TELL them to do. When a raid comes, yes that interrupts your plans, and YOU need to adapt your plans and change them, NOT rely upon the AI to change them for you.
The question is, do you play the game, or does the AI play the game for you?
Rimsenal Storyteller???? have no idea what that means.
"Again, no you don't have to select hundreds of jobs, even with 50+ colonists."
Please don't tell me things like this, because i already have colony like this and i know better. For example i have colonist who can do X things but can't do A things, so i must select more jobs for colonists/droids (droids can do 1 type of job) if i don't want have 20+ idle colonists. "example job" for this is hunting - i have a lot of colonists who are only soldiers. I use auto-hunt beacon to auto-hunt so they just hunting 24/7 and even when i disable auto-hunt beacon animals are still selected for hunting.
"It is you who needs to be smart, your colonists do what you TELL them to do. When a raid comes, yes that interrupts your plans, and YOU need to adapt your plans and change them, NOT rely upon the AI to change them for you."
AI is for changing things like this for me. Do we need tell colonists HOW/WHEN/WHERE they should go? No, AI do this (mostly). Do i need to tell them to make bills? No AI tell them. Do i need to tell them to attack? No, AI DO THIS.
"The question is, do you play the game, or does the AI play the game for you?"
Ok, from this moment i will control colonists 24/7. They will can't go eat, because i will need tell them to do this. They will can sleep only when i'll tell them to do this. They'll can go take a shit ONLY WHEN I WILL TELL THEM TO DO THIS.
Nice idea!
"Rimsenal Storyteller???? have no idea what that means."
Storyteller from Rimsenal mod. This storyteller will send raiders after 7 days (week). Like you see i just CAN'T change plans after 7 days in game and i don't even should do it, because AI IS FOR THIS. AI is for support. AI should support player, not play game for him. Support = Smart Colonists that are smarter than potatoes that they collect.
I play with colonies of 50+, non modded, and modded. I dont need 100s of jobs qued up to keep them productive, doing what I want them to do.
Wanting the AI to make MAJOR decisions for you, is a stupid idea. A major decision is what do we do when we are being raided?
The colonist do what you tell them to do... it all depends on how YOU set up the bills, set up the stock piles, and WHERE you set them up. They follow your orders very well. They may not due what you expect them to do, until you understand how they determine where to haul something, or where to get the supplies to do their job. The tools are there NOW, in the vanilla game.
Modded games always bring unexpected results, that are not part of the vanilla game, no matter how great the mod is.
You do control the colonist 24/7 now, if you want to. You can even work them until they drop of exhaustion.
I have NEVER had a colonist walk towards an enemy and get killed. Maybe because I control what they do, and NO I do NOT suspend, or cancel plans. I control the work flow.
Quote from: TLHeart on May 25, 2015, 06:34:05 PM
I play with colonies of 50+, non modded, and modded. I dont need 100s of jobs qued up to keep them productive, doing what I want them to do.
Wanting the AI to make MAJOR decisions for you, is a stupid idea. A major decision is what do we do when we are being raided?
The colonist do what you tell them to do... it all depends on how YOU set up the bills, set up the stock piles, and WHERE you set them up. They follow your orders very well. They may not due what you expect them to do, until you understand how they determine where to haul something, or where to get the supplies to do their job. The tools are there NOW, in the vanilla game.
Modded games always bring unexpected results, that are not part of the vanilla game, no matter how great the mod is.
You do control the colonist 24/7 now, if you want to. You can even work them until they drop of exhaustion.
I have NEVER had a colonist walk towards an enemy and get killed. Maybe because I control what they do, and NO I do NOT suspend, or cancel plans. I control the work flow.
"Wanting the AI to make MAJOR decisions for you, is a stupid idea. A major decision is what do we do when we are being raided?"
Oh, yes and colonists that haul items next to the raiders are in my plans, ya know? it's so MAJOR decision....
"The colonist do what you tell them to do... it all depends on how YOU set up the bills, set up the stock piles, and WHERE you set them up. They follow your orders very well. They may not due what you expect them to do, until you understand how they determine where to haul something, or where to get the supplies to do their job. The tools are there NOW, in the vanilla game."
Wrong. I just select the bill. I don't telling them WHEN/HOW they should make these bills. And this is most important part. And if i can't control them in this situation AI should support me (read: no stupid colonists).
"You do control the colonist 24/7 now, if you want to. You can even work them until they drop of exhaustion."
Yes, IF I WANT TO. I can't control 24/7 50+ colonists. In this situation AI is the best player.
"I have NEVER had a colonist walk towards an enemy and get killed. Maybe because I control what they do, and NO I do NOT suspend, or cancel plans. I control the work flow."
I know why. Because you just told them to be in the base, and you closed doors/controled all colonists. If you think this is a good way to play - no comment. If i need to control someone i play in Sims. Rimworld isn't a game about controlling colonists, colonists are just tools for this what you want to do. You don't need to care about every tool. They should KNOW how to care about yourselfs so player will can play in Dwarf Fortress-like style game.
I play with OPEN base designs, and my last one had NO turrets. I lost 5 colonist over 4 years of game play, on cassandra extreme. I had 60 colonist from year 2 on..
But this whole suggestions comes from playing a modded game.
And now you want to change the base game so that you can play easier in a modded game...
NO, sorry but NO....
I have NEVER locked my colonist into a base. Not my style. I will also never play the raid every 7 days mod, again, not what I want to play..
Want changes made so that mod is easier, then make that request to the modder, not to the vanilla game.
And you do tell them when and what to do with the bills, and who does the job, and where they get the supplies, and where the finished product goes... all part of the work flow. And if you have it set up to walk into the enemy camp, that is what they will do, because you told them to. And YOU even decide when the work gets done, by the work flow of supplies, and the time tables.
Don't want to understand how the AI works, that is your problem.... Want to make a suggestion based upon the VANILLA game play, great.
Want to make major changes to the vanilla game, based upon modded play, to only help with the modded play, not good.
Quote from: TLHeart on May 25, 2015, 07:10:18 PM
I play with OPEN base designs, and my last one had NO turrets. I lost 5 colonist over 4 years of game play, on cassandra extreme. I had 60 colonist from year 2 on..
But this whole suggestions comes from playing a modded game.
And now you want to change the base game so that you can play easier in a modded game...
NO, sorry but NO....
I have NEVER locked my colonist into a base. Not my style. I will also never play the raid every 7 days mod, again, not what I want to play..
Want changes made so that mod is easier, then make that request to the modder, not to the vanilla game.
And you do tell them when and what to do with the bills, and who does the job, and where they get the supplies, and where the finished product goes... all part of the work flow. And if you have it set up to walk into the enemy camp, that is what they will do, because you told them to. And YOU even decide when the work gets done, by the work flow of supplies, and the time tables.
Don't want to understand how the AI works, that is your problem.... Want to make a suggestion based upon the VANILLA game play, great.
Want to make major changes to the vanilla game, based upon modded play, to only help with the modded play, not good.
Having your colonists not walk into 3 centipedes is a not a major decision. The dev even said he wanted something like this for a while but didn't know how to implement it. If your base is attacked and things get damaged, they automatically go and fix it. As a result you have to remove the "home zone" from the area. If they're building something and they're closer to supplies that are near enemies who are camping (think crashed ships) they will go there to get the supplies. IDK why the idea of a restricted area is so hard for you to understand or how "the game is playing for you". If you can designate a home region, you should be able to designate a restricted area because they go off and haul stuff across the map when they get around to it and if you pinged it days ago you may have forgotten only to realize they chose to haul stuff when there's enemies there...
I suppose since YOU won't use a feature, then no one can.
Quote from: Tynan on May 11, 2015, 02:12:47 AM
I've had the desire for a long time now to have them avoid this sort of thing. But it's a tricky AI problem to say the least. There's significant geometric analysis that has to be done on a changing situation. So it just hasn't been addressed so far.
Quote from: TLHeart on May 25, 2015, 07:10:18 PM
I play with OPEN base designs, and my last one had NO turrets. I lost 5 colonist over 4 years of game play, on cassandra extreme. I had 60 colonist from year 2 on..
But this whole suggestions comes from playing a modded game.
And now you want to change the base game so that you can play easier in a modded game...
NO, sorry but NO....
I have NEVER locked my colonist into a base. Not my style. I will also never play the raid every 7 days mod, again, not what I want to play..
Want changes made so that mod is easier, then make that request to the modder, not to the vanilla game.
And you do tell them when and what to do with the bills, and who does the job, and where they get the supplies, and where the finished product goes... all part of the work flow. And if you have it set up to walk into the enemy camp, that is what they will do, because you told them to. And YOU even decide when the work gets done, by the work flow of supplies, and the time tables.
Don't want to understand how the AI works, that is your problem.... Want to make a suggestion based upon the VANILLA game play, great.
Want to make major changes to the vanilla game, based upon modded play, to only help with the modded play, not good.
Sweet Jesus..... I think you just don't understand for what AI even is in games like Rimworld. Rimworld isn't Call of Duty. You don't control only 1 person you control +50 people. For this is AI - for "playing" as enemies and for supporting the player, human is just human, we don't have 10 arms, and we can't control EVERYTHING. Goodbye.
Quote from: Stealth on May 25, 2015, 02:22:21 PM
Except those sniper mechs one-shot your colonists so that they can't run to the medical bed. Why wouldn't you want them to run away before they get hit? If they're building something, what good is it if they continue building only to get downed in one shot?
I gave you the reason. It would break pawn predictability and my planning.
Your hypothetical situation is pointless on me because as soon as an attack come I would have drafted anybody at risk and got them somewhere safe. Plus I consider dramatic storytelling for a pawn to not be aware it will be
sniped.
Similarly to TLHeart I also don't pile up thousand of working order then blame the game for problem I was in full control to solve and intended to. The game even have a pause button.
A better failsafe solution I see to avoid unforeseen consequences is to have them refresh task an get back be treated place as soon as they are hurts. Whereas a pawn that with auto-avoid would likely just get stuck in a avoidance loop if the things he want is precisely where hostile are.
Another simple solution to this could be "Forbidden zone" with, say, a special setting to keep a radius centered on some hostiles. Same result, but more predictable.
Quote from: Kegereneku on May 26, 2015, 07:57:20 AM
I gave you the reason. It would break pawn predictability and my planning.
Your hypothetical situation is pointless on me because as soon as an attack come I would have drafted anybody at risk and got them somewhere safe. Plus I consider dramatic storytelling for a pawn to not be aware it will be sniped.
Similarly to TLHeart I also don't pile up thousand of working order then blame the game for problem I was in full control to solve and intended to. The game even have a pause button.
A better failsafe solution I see to avoid unforeseen consequences is to have them refresh task an get back be treated place as soon as they are hurts. Whereas a pawn that with auto-avoid would likely just get stuck in a avoidance loop if the things he want is precisely where hostile are.
Another simple solution to this could be "Forbidden zone" with, say, a special setting to keep a radius centered on some hostiles. Same result, but more predictable.
I think that "beauty-like" button would make it nice working. For example if you have a master plan that include dead colonists you will can just switch it off or the better idea is forbidden zone.For players like TLHeart this would be great, because he would have a simulation that AI don't help him in this situation (when AI also = forbidden zone).
It's easy to agree on "forbidden zone" but the daemon is in the details.
Myself I don't want to have a auto-avoid-enemy that result in more unforeseen problem. (ex : the enemy might FOLLOW your pawn anyway, I don't want to play Yakety Sax (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZnHmskwqCCQ) if an hostile appear.
And given the choice between FIXED forbidden and auto-avoidance of "threat" I would chose the former because I'm the one playing, not the game.
Anothe guy "AI is playing for you!"?
By the way in Rimworld AI is playing for you right now. You can't change it, if you want game without smart AI, play in Call of Duty and better on the multiplayer because singleplayer games are with AI.
The game isn't playing for you, it never is.
Would my colonist self-organize into a AI-built base and decide on their own how the colony is to survive without me pushing any buttons ? No ? Then the game isn't already playing for me.
Rimworld is built around MACRO-management. This is another form of control which rely on the AI doing a lot more work but in a predictable way so we can plan the ORDER, TASK, JOBS we give them.
We know what you want to achieve by having the colonist auto-avoid danger, but put aside that it is probably more complicated than it look to have a colonist flee enemy in a intelligent way that don't bit you in the ass later, I think the concept of FIXED forbidden zone is a much more manageable solution.
So, don't dismiss our legitimate concerns as a stupid confusion of game-style. I would expect a Call of Duty player to know better than that, they too have firendly-AI that need to be predictable and not run away because of a badly calibrated AI.
Quote from: Kegereneku on May 26, 2015, 09:27:26 AM
The game isn't playing for you, it never is.
Would my colonist self-organize into a AI-built base and decide on their own how the colony is to survive without me pushing any buttons ? No ? Then the game isn't already playing for me.
Rimworld is built around MACRO-management. This is another form of control which rely on the AI doing a lot more work but in a predictable way so we can plan the ORDER, TASK, JOBS we give them.
We know what you want to achieve by having the colonist auto-avoid danger, but put aside that it is probably more complicated than it look to have a colonist flee enemy in a intelligent way that don't bit you in the ass later, I think the concept of FIXED forbidden zone is a much more manageable solution.
So, don't dismiss our legitimate concerns as a stupid confusion of game-style. I would expect a Call of Duty player to know better than that, they too have firendly-AI that need to be predictable and not run away because of a badly calibrated AI.
"Would my colonist self-organize into a AI-built base and decide on their own how the colony is to survive without me pushing any buttons ? No ? Then the game isn't already playing for me."
With auto avoid system AI also don't pushing buttons for you.
And i'm agree with forbidden zone, but why you guys think that AI would play for you? This don't have any sense at all. Do auto-avoid system will make your colony running 24/7? No.
This what i want (zone or auto avoid) isn't really matter now, when someone is using expression like "AI is playing for you".
You didn't understood and "AI is playing for us" is becoming a thought-terminating cliché.
The point is : we consider the automated-AI-solution to "keep non-drafted pawn safe" flawed, and so argumented against it using parable.
That's all.
The whole "Do you play RW or is RW playing you ?" is a sad example of the limit of purely textual communication.
It seems to me that what would be the ideal situation, then, would be a state change affecting all your colonists that you could toggle.
A while ago, on the Reddit, I suggested a beacon system based on the camp fire which I think could be used for this (bearing in mind that I am a congenital idiot with regards to the specifics of coding).
So, my idea is that you be able to build a fire basket beacon outside (it can be in your courtyard, say, but it will need to be unroofed). This construction would cost steel and wood and would sit there ready to be used. Should an event occur where you want non-drafted colonists to be 'safe' you would send a colonist to light the beacon. This would burn for a set time, like the campfire but probably for only 12 to 24 hours, and be totally consumed whether it runs through the timer or you extinguish it early.
While the beacon is alight it sets a 'state change' on colonists who are not specifically drafted to other tasks. Whilst the fire burns, your civilians would take gathering by the beacon as a prioritised task (sort of a cross between the 'gather' function of the campfire and the 'priority' function of the Fire Alert). In its basic form, your colonists then abandon any current tasks and head to the gather point. In an ideal system, non-drafted personnel outside the home region would abandon their current task and head home, those inside would finish their current task first - but I realise this would be difficult and annoying if they had just started a haul task on something in the danger zone.
So, I hear you ask, what does all this teal deer have to do with auto avoidance? Well, I imagine leveraging the sapper/AI pathfinding system except that where they will be looking for turrets your colonists will be reading enemy pawns as danger zones.
Logically, the problem here is that taking a running tally of all those pawns' positions on the fly is going to be hugely problematic. Therefore, I wonder if you could maybe set the path of avoidance based on a snapshot of the battlefield when the beacon is lit and your colonists set off. This would, in effect, simulate the colonist's first choice for a headlong rush for safety. If they are unlucky, the raiders will be on an intercept course and all ends badly; if all goes well, they made a good choice and get home intact. A vastly more complicated system would be to take a 'snapshot' every nth tick (how many ticks would be a matter for Tynan and his balancing act) and have the colonist adjust their courses appropriately.
This system, were it possible (and it probably isn't), would, I think, address some of the issues that have sprung up.
As the beacon is toggled at will, you can, in effect, choose to play with avoidance on or off as you prefer.
Basing the path to safety on a snapshot will not provide a perfect return for every colonist, but it would, in a way, be closer to simulating a realistic response: the alarm goes off, you know where you are, you know where you need to get to, and you make a best guess on the safest route there then cross your fingers and run.
Because we are not looking for a 'perfect' AI pathfinder, using the basics of raider AI pathing for your colonists (with raiders/mechanoids replacing turrets and the beacon as the objective) would probably be enough to prevent at least the most egregious instances of wandering into a fire-fight in search of fresh strawberries.
rimworld is very much the same as managing 50 minimum wage workers at a fast food... they don't think for themselves, except about what they are going to do after work. They don't care about danger, or the long term goals, just about right now....
As the manager, or the overlord of the colony, it is up to me to keep them safe, on task, and to be sure they have the supplies and equipment to do the job at hand.
And I can predict what each pawn will do each day, by the way I have set up the time table, the work schedule, the bills, limits on range on the bills, limits on skill level, and where I have placed my stockpiles, the priority system, the sorting via quality and durability....
Trying to program an auto avoid danger, will overwhelm any computers processing power and the game will slow to a crawl and be unplayable. Are you going to check every colonist every step, and recalculate their route each step?
Are you going to only check at the beginning of the route? which means they will still walk into the danger. Check every 5 steps? and what is a danger zone, 5 cells away, 10 cells away, or the distance the enemy can fire, which can be 45 cells away... or in the case of mortars, the entire map.
Or as I prefer, I choose the path of the colonists that are close to the danger... I also KNOW what colonists may be headed towards the danger, before they head there. All because I manage the daily work flow, and do NOT set up hundreds of job ques.
Danger arrives, I draft my attack group, and out they go to take down the enemy. I do not wait for them to attack. Those colonists that are out and about on the map, become the flanking crew, to come in behind....
The entire colony goes into danger mode, doctors prepare for incoming wounded, nobody continues on with their everyday task. No need for an ai controlled avoid danger, that is MY RESPONSIBILITY.
I will spend an hour or more of my time engaged in ONE battle, as I control where I will engage the enemy, how I will engage the enemy, who I am flanking them with....
I do NOT hide behind a kill box, filled with turrets.
There is NO need for a danger zone, a do not go zone.
For those that NEED a danger zone, you already have it, build your walls, and lock the doors.
- I like the idea of a manually set/toggled forbidden zone and/or forced gather point, similar to what is described by Frankenbeasley.
- I find it curious that those most opposed to fog of war (because they fear it would introduce micromanagement) are also opposed to this idea, because it would reduce micromanagement!
- To those opposing the concept - would you also fully oppose an optional tool?
a zone that you set as forbidden, is not going to work as everyone in this thread thinks it will.... pathing is the most intensive cpu use in a video game... currently, the pawns, select a job, calculate the path, and that is it. The path is not recalculated until they reach their destination, or are blocked from reaching their destination. Tynan has stated that for alpha 11, they will be interrupting their current task to check their status's. He did not say how often.
Until the pawn hits that interrupt state, which we force now with a recruit, unrecruit, they will still walk into the danger zone you have set.
And for tynan to spend programming and debug time to something that is not really needed in the game, is a waste of resources.
The ability to already create your own danger zones exist, it just is NOT handled by the AI.
And then we will get all the complaints that it does not work, as my pawn still walked into the line of fire.....
What about a simple command that all undrafted pawns go to their bed and wait in it until danger is cleared (perhaps with a "Danger!" toggle)? More broadly, a "safe" zone rather than a danger zone. Undrafted pawns outside the safe zone prioritize walking there, and undrafted pawns within the safe zone only consider tasks also within the safe zone.
Again, fully optional, and I guess that pathing to their bed and/or reducing the effective map size they can path within is not more CPU intensive than the current game design. (I admittedly am not a programmer.)
Finally, keep in mind that just because you think the idea is a waste of dev resources, does not mean it actually is.
Quote from: Kegereneku on May 26, 2015, 07:57:20 AM
Quote from: Stealth on May 25, 2015, 02:22:21 PM
Except those sniper mechs one-shot your colonists so that they can't run to the medical bed. Why wouldn't you want them to run away before they get hit? If they're building something, what good is it if they continue building only to get downed in one shot?
I gave you the reason. It would break pawn predictability and my planning.
Your hypothetical situation is pointless on me because as soon as an attack come I would have drafted anybody at risk and got them somewhere safe. Plus I consider dramatic storytelling for a pawn to not be aware it will be sniped.
Similarly to TLHeart I also don't pile up thousand of working order then blame the game for problem I was in full control to solve and intended to. The game even have a pause button.
A better failsafe solution I see to avoid unforeseen consequences is to have them refresh task an get back be treated place as soon as they are hurts. Whereas a pawn that with auto-avoid would likely just get stuck in a avoidance loop if the things he want is precisely where hostile are.
Another simple solution to this could be "Forbidden zone" with, say, a special setting to keep a radius centered on some hostiles. Same result, but more predictable.
I didn't say i have 1000 things queued up. Im talking when they're auto doing their jobs, they go off and do whatever. When an attack comes i don't just draft everyone. I have people taking care of things. If you don't want the feature then feel free to post elsewhere. IDK why you feel that If YOU don't want a feature it can't be in the game. The game isn't made for YOU. Sorry, but you're not special.
Also, when i said sniped it's not some dramatic story, my colonists literally got sniped and downed in one shot...
Quote from: TLHeart on May 26, 2015, 07:18:10 PM
a zone that you set as forbidden, is not going to work as everyone in this thread thinks it will.... pathing is the most intensive cpu use in a video game... currently, the pawns, select a job, calculate the path, and that is it. The path is not recalculated until they reach their destination, or are blocked from reaching their destination. Tynan has stated that for alpha 11, they will be interrupting their current task to check their status's. He did not say how often.
Until the pawn hits that interrupt state, which we force now with a recruit, unrecruit, they will still walk into the danger zone you have set.
And for tynan to spend programming and debug time to something that is not really needed in the game, is a waste of resources.
The ability to already create your own danger zones exist, it just is NOT handled by the AI.
And then we will get all the complaints that it does not work, as my pawn still walked into the line of fire.....
As mentioned in another thread, a restricted zone can act like a walled off box. It would be pathed around like any other obstacle on the map.
Quote from: TLHeart on May 26, 2015, 07:18:10 PM
a zone that you set as forbidden, is not going to work as everyone in this thread thinks it will.... pathing is the most intensive cpu use in a video game... currently, the pawns, select a job, calculate the path, and that is it. The path is not recalculated until they reach their destination, or are blocked from reaching their destination. Tynan has stated that for alpha 11, they will be interrupting their current task to check their status's. He did not say how often.
Until the pawn hits that interrupt state, which we force now with a recruit, unrecruit, they will still walk into the danger zone you have set.
And for tynan to spend programming and debug time to something that is not really needed in the game, is a waste of resources.
The ability to already create your own danger zones exist, it just is NOT handled by the AI.
And then we will get all the complaints that it does not work, as my pawn still walked into the line of fire.....
Because you play like "pro" this means that Tynan shouldn't improve AI? And i don't think you understand how AI of colonists really works. Do colonists walking through walls? No, so this zone would works like normal walls and this wouldn't be hard to make. Example? Unfinished walls, but with resources. They works like normal walls (they are impassable), but they aren't finished.
Quote from: TLHeart on May 26, 2015, 07:18:10 PM
pathing is the most intensive cpu use in a video game...
While that is true, a danger zone wouldn't use that much CPU if handled correctly. Currently, there are already areas in the game which cannot be reached (think about rooms without a door). Pawns check if they can do a job in there and then cancel it if they cannot reach it.
This will be different for our 'danger zones'. They might block the only exit out of the colony, since a lot of players build walls around their colony. The problem is that many jobs will be placed outside of the danger zone and cannot be reached unless the colonists are able to climb over walls. The game has to try to find a path many times to find away around the danger zone and this will take up a lot of CPU.
Or it can be programmed more easily. Imagine the first path for a hauling job encounters the 'danger zone' (which is automatically generated between the raiders and the drafted colonists they target). The path finding AI will have to recalculate a new path, following the outer lines of the 'danger zone'. If this is still blocked (by a wall for example), it will try to calculate a path one last time in another direction. If this doesn't work, the hauling job will be postponed until the raid end. This way the AI won't start calculating different paths for other hauling jobs and the pawn will find a job with less priority to do.
To satisfy everyone, this should be an option which can be turned on or off. But the game needs this future to eliminate more micromanagement and to speed up the flow if action during combat. Also, for people playing with a huge number of colonists and only draft half to fight during raids.
I'm sorry for my long post. I can also try to show my theory in screenshots if it isn't clear for you guys or Tynan.
Quote from: Play2Jens on May 27, 2015, 10:43:14 AM
Quote from: TLHeart on May 26, 2015, 07:18:10 PM
pathing is the most intensive cpu use in a video game...
While that is true, a danger zone wouldn't use that much CPU if handled correctly. Currently, there are already areas in the game which cannot be reached (think about rooms without a door). Pawns check if they can do a job in there and then cancel it if they cannot reach it.
This will be different for our 'danger zones'. They might block the only exit out of the colony, since a lot of players build walls around their colony. The problem is that many jobs will be placed outside of the danger zone and cannot be reached unless the colonists are able to climb over walls. The game has to try to find a path many times to find away around the danger zone and this will take up a lot of CPU.
Or it can be programmed more easily. Imagine the first path for a hauling job encounters the 'danger zone' (which is automatically generated between the raiders and the drafted colonists they target). The path finding AI will have to recalculate a new path, following the outer lines of the 'danger zone'. If this is still blocked (by a wall for example), it will try to calculate a path one last time in another direction. If this doesn't work, the hauling job will be postponed until the raid end. This way the AI won't start calculating different paths for other hauling jobs and the pawn will find a job with less priority to do.
To satisfy everyone, this should be an option which can be turned on or off. But the game needs this future to eliminate more micromanagement and to speed up the flow if action during combat. Also, for people playing with a huge number of colonists and only draft half to fight during raids.
I'm sorry for my long post. I can also try to show my theory in screenshots if it isn't clear for you guys or Tynan.
I think i know about you think (yep ;D). But i don't think this:
"This will be different for our 'danger zones'. They might block the only exit out of the colony, since a lot of players build walls around their colony. The problem is that many jobs will be placed outside of the danger zone and cannot be reached unless the colonists are able to climb over walls. The game has to try to find a path many times to find away around the danger zone and this will take up a lot of CPU."
would take so much CPU. You can already do situation like this without danger zone. Just lock 50+ colonists in small room/big room without tasks = 50 colonists idle.
Danger zone on whole map = 50 colonists idle (if danger zone will be just "wall" for colonists then they just would stop moving).
I don't know if i'm right but this is how i understand whole danger zone (danger zone = impassable cells).
Quote from: Adamiks on May 27, 2015, 09:10:51 AM
Quote from: TLHeart on May 26, 2015, 07:18:10 PM
a zone that you set as forbidden, is not going to work as everyone in this thread thinks it will.... pathing is the most intensive cpu use in a video game... currently, the pawns, select a job, calculate the path, and that is it. The path is not recalculated until they reach their destination, or are blocked from reaching their destination. Tynan has stated that for alpha 11, they will be interrupting their current task to check their status's. He did not say how often.
Until the pawn hits that interrupt state, which we force now with a recruit, unrecruit, they will still walk into the danger zone you have set.
And for tynan to spend programming and debug time to something that is not really needed in the game, is a waste of resources.
The ability to already create your own danger zones exist, it just is NOT handled by the AI.
And then we will get all the complaints that it does not work, as my pawn still walked into the line of fire.....
Because you play like "pro" this means that Tynan shouldn't improve AI? And i don't think you understand how AI of colonists really works. Do colonists walking through walls? No, so this zone would works like normal walls and this wouldn't be hard to make. Example? Unfinished walls, but with resources. They works like normal walls (they are impassable), but they aren't finished.
I understand how the pathing works, and doesn't work. And a danger zone will NOT protect your pawns from being sniped by the enemy, unless that danger zone covers 45 cells away from every enemy....and is updated every step the pawn takes, and every step the enemy takes, and that will overwhelm many processors.
And for the wall type idea to work, you are still going to have to pause the game, draw the wall, draft and undraft all pawns, so that they recognize the changes, and don't walk within sniper distance, and hope the enemy stays within the wall you drew... all to keep a pawn of two from walking into the area for a very short time.
Civilians, ie non military pawns, do stupid things, danger is not their concern, their concern is getting their job done, the job YOU have told them to do.
And tynan has changed the AI code so that when a pawn gets injured, that interrupts the current job tasks. Will have to see what that change does.
Quote from: TLHeart on May 27, 2015, 12:00:52 PM
I understand how the pathing works, and doesn't work. And a danger zone will NOT protect your pawns from being sniped by the enemy, unless that danger zone covers 45 cells away from every enemy....and is updated every step the pawn takes, and every step the enemy takes, and that will overwhelm many processors.
And for the wall type idea to work, you are still going to have to pause the game, draw the wall, draft and undraft all pawns, so that they recognize the changes, and don't walk within sniper distance, and hope the enemy stays within the wall you drew... all to keep a pawn of two from walking into the area for a very short time.
Civilians, ie non military pawns, do stupid things, danger is not their concern, their concern is getting their job done, the job YOU have told them to do.
And tynan has changed the AI code so that when a pawn gets injured, that interrupts the current job tasks. Will have to see what that change does.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"I understand how the pathing works, and doesn't work. And a danger zone will NOT protect your pawns from being sniped by the enemy, unless that danger zone covers 45 cells away from every enemy....and is updated every step the pawn takes, and every step the enemy takes, and that will overwhelm many processors."
Next example. Colonists want to "escape" from your base. Other colonists is building a wall. Wall finished = colonist that want to go out DON'T GO TO THE WALL he just stop moving. If danger zone would work like walls = same result.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"unless that danger zone covers 45 cells away from every enemy"
Oh, so you think that AI SHOULD PLAY FOR YOU?
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"and every step the enemy takes"
Danger zone will can affect only ColonistDef PawnKindDef (or Colony in general). Example? Stockpiles. Player stockpile NOT = enemies stockpile.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"And for the wall type idea to work, you are still going to have to pause the game, draw the wall, draft and undraft all pawns, so that they recognize the changes, and don't walk within sniper distance, and hope the enemy stays within the wall you drew... all to keep a pawn of two from walking into the area for a very short time."
So again you think that AI SHOULD PLAY FOR YOU? Ok. And this wouldn't work like this. Example = fresh wall/door locking. I NEVER had situation when colonists decided to DON'T change his path while i builded a wall/locked door.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Civilians, ie non military pawns, do stupid things, danger is not their concern, their concern is getting their job done, the job YOU have told them to do."
Civilians = military pawns in Rimworld. They shouldn't do stupid things and (again) small example. God told you to pick up wooden logs 10m away from you, do you will do this even when 20 mechanoids will try to kill you? Yes? Ok, this is your (short) life.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If game wants make pawns so fucking stupid these pawns shouldn't be humans (from 5000 year) but cows (cows are smarter than this anyway)!
Quote from: TLHeart on May 26, 2015, 07:18:10 PM
I understand how the pathing works, and doesn't work. And a danger zone will NOT protect your pawns from being sniped by the enemy, unless that danger zone covers 45 cells away from every enemy...
First of all, the CPU argument is totally invalid and you just admitted that. Like Adamiks said, locking 50 colonists up in a room is the same and already proofs that this wouldn't slow down the game.
Second, the chance that a sniper will attack your workers is very slim because they will already be aiming at the people you drafted to fight the raid. Even if that would be the case, there is nothing to stop the game from generating a temporary danger zone with a radius of 45 blocks around an enemy equipped with a sniper rifle. I'm not saying that the game should do that, but at least a danger zone between your drafted colonists and a charging raid. This danger zone would be update every few seconds (not even frames, so it wouldn't slow down the frame rate one bit).
Third, I don't know why you say we have to draw a wall? the walls are already there. A lot of players build walls around their colony, you know? Other players build their base inside a mountain or surrounded by mountains, bit it will still be the same concept. Remember, the 'danger zone' is a temporary zone that will be generated automatically by the game engine itself, and not drawn by the player himself.
Fourth. It is correct that every job is given by the player. But the way your colonists does it, isn't up to the player. The AI/game decides that. You just don't get this suggestion because you never needed an impassable danger zone for you undrafted colonists. But there are tons of people out there with different play styles who could have a huge benefit from this.
I feel like this should be a tryout for a mod. This way many arguments could be debunked regarding general gameplay or related problems.
Quote from: TLHeart on May 27, 2015, 12:00:52 PM
I understand how the pathing works, and doesn't work. And a danger zone will NOT protect your pawns from being sniped by the enemy, unless that danger zone covers 45 cells away from every enemy....and is updated every step the pawn takes, and every step the enemy takes, and that will overwhelm many processors.
And for the wall type idea to work, you are still going to have to pause the game, draw the wall, draft and undraft all pawns, so that they recognize the changes, and don't walk within sniper distance, and hope the enemy stays within the wall you drew... all to keep a pawn of two from walking into the area for a very short time.
Civilians, ie non military pawns, do stupid things, danger is not their concern, their concern is getting their job done, the job YOU have told them to do.
And tynan has changed the AI code so that when a pawn gets injured, that interrupts the current job tasks. Will have to see what that change does.
IDK why you keep talking about steps. Stop using strawman to win your arguments. It's no different than setting a home region and a stockpile... set a big box that you want them to stay away from and boom problem solved. I'm not talking about raids and sieges. Those are easily dealt with and they go to your base so you have to fight. I'm talking when a ship crashes and you have to fight 3 centipedes and 2 of the sniper mechs with 7 colonists. They don't head straight to your base, rather they camp around the ship. While I slowly take care of them over the course of a few days with my snipers, I don't want the working colonists to go there. IDK why this concept is so hard for you to understand. Nothing needs to be recalculated. Unless you have a cpu from the early 90's, your cpu should be able to acknowledge a no-go zone as if it were walled off (like it already does and has been stated by several others).
You keep saying that they do the job we tell them to do yet we have no control over their direct movements. There's things to haul all over the map and they scatter in all directions to go get it. Instead of forbidding everything in an area, removing stockpiles, home regions etc, it would be a lot easy to just place a single restricted zone...
To all Rimmers, I would like to point out there is getting too much passive aggressive implication here, when not straight personal attack.
To defuse it I suggest to simply say in as few words as possible what you really want/accept.
For me :
- a
player-controlled way of keeping non-drafted pawn safe.
- Pawn that go back to base/infirmary if
hit seriously threatening injury.
- Pawn that DON'T fear going near enemy if player consider they shouldn't.
- a solution that make pawn run in loop because the enemy is where their job is.
Then we can work an idea that satisfy as many as possible.
Now, if you excuse me...
Quote from: akiceabear on May 26, 2015, 06:31:19 PM
- I like the idea of a manually set/toggled forbidden zone and/or forced gather point, similar to what is described by Frankenbeasley.
- I find it curious that those most opposed to fog of war (because they fear it would introduce micromanagement) are also opposed to this idea, because it would reduce micromanagement!
- To those opposing the concept - would you also fully oppose an optional tool?
Oh please, don't play the "victim who is denied a cheap optional feature", FoW is a game changer and would require careful balance
even if it was 'optional'. You should know it by now.
On subject :
"because it reduce micromanagement" is certainly not a reason I get out of my or TLHeart's criticism. Please don't make up Strawman argument.
Our point of disagreement is that such automation make less likely for pawn to react in a way the players' intended (including avoiding enemy and staying safe), leading to
more micromanagement as we try to make up for AI unpredictable behavior.
Lastly, I suggested a 'Forbidden/don't-cross zone' that you could auto-center upon entity
if you wish and can double-use as work-zone or even (as I imagine it) corridor.
That's nine hells more optional than some other suggestions.
Quote from: Stealth on May 27, 2015, 02:15:54 AM
I didn't say i have 1000 things queued up. Im talking when they're auto doing their jobs, they go off and do whatever. When an attack comes i don't just draft everyone. I have people taking care of things. If you don't want the feature then feel free to post elsewhere. IDK why you feel that If YOU don't want a feature it can't be in the game. The game isn't made for YOU. Sorry, but you're not special.
Also, when i said sniped it's not some dramatic story, my colonists literally got sniped and downed in one shot...
Sorry, but to me you are the one acting like an entitled person.
I
understand your problem, even if I don't share your method of dealing with it.
But we pointed a few potential flaws with the original suggestion.
So here you are the one telling me/us we should give up features we already have because you want yours.
Nothing else (edit : for me) to say on the topic if it don't concern a solution that satisfy everybody.
Quote from: Kegereneku on May 28, 2015, 06:22:28 AM
To all Rimmers, I would like to point out there is getting too much passive aggressive implication here, ...
You might be right. Let's just settle this by rational arguments. I perfectly get why you are opting for a player controlled 'forbidden zone'. It makes sense because you still want your undrafted colonists to put out fires and repair stuff.
In my opinion there still is a problem here. Case 1: Imagine if you've a designated hauler and you have you colony entrances blocked by 'forbidden zones'. He would probably be cleaning at the moment because he's out of hauling jobs. Suddenly, an alpha 11 wall gets breached by a sapper raid. The first thing he would do is run through this (unforbidden) hole and do hauling jobs outside of the colony. Same goes with hunters.
Case 2: Imagine you want to hunt. you have to to remove the 'forbidden zone' every time you want your colonists to leave the colony, adding much more micromanagement.
I wanted to state that I didn't want to attack anyone personally, I just thought there were a lot of irrational arguments by other players beside you. I don't care what the final outcome will be, I just hope there will come such a future in the game and that it will be optional so everyone will be kept happy. As I see it, this doesn't change the perspective of the game, and FoW indeed does.
Here is a suggested solution to our conundrum, it is made of idea I gathered around, like this one (https://ludeon.com/forums/index.php?topic=13301.0)
Quote
Talking of zone, we know a zone that accept/deny item in it : Stockpile. So the difference between a 'Safe zone' and a 'Forbidden zone' might be a mere checked case away. It could eventually fuse with the concept of "workzone".
In short :
- you created a zone (on a different layer like home-region), which "accept nobody". That would be our 'forbidden zone', ideally it forbid any path or job to be created/stay in it.
- it is fixed, but making a dynamically moving zone around a raider should still be feasible (after all the pawn recognize their combat range), UI-speaking it could appear on raider like the "create zone" around trading beacon, but moving.)
- Next : What if you could change the zone into "Safe/workzone" which would force selected colonist (not drafted) to go in it and never leave it. That would be your safe zone, you activate it just by selecting a pre-made zone, change it from "neutral" into "safe".
note : So far I only see a limitation with overlapping and making contiguous zone. which could require an UI that isn't one we are used to. But if we can at least get a basic "safe zone"
If it can inspire any of us.
Quote from: Play2Jens on May 28, 2015, 08:13:08 AM
In my opinion there still is a problem here. Case 1: Imagine if you've a designated hauler and you have you colony entrances blocked by 'forbidden zones'. He would probably be cleaning at the moment because he's out of hauling jobs. Suddenly, an alpha 11 wall gets breached by a sapper raid. The first thing he would do is run through this (unforbidden) hole and do hauling jobs outside of the colony. Same goes with hunters.
Case 2: Imagine you want to hunt. you have to to remove the 'forbidden zone' every time you want your colonists to leave the colony, adding much more micromanagement.
Case 1 : Baring the idea above, I see no reason you couldn't extend the forbidden zone over the wall like a continuous immaterial wall.
Other way I think the idea above could give you at least a possibility. Maybe Home-Region could be (as suggested before) turned by a click into "must go into" zone for your undrafted colonist.
Case 2 : To be sincere, I don't see why you would forbid all the time everybody to go outside. And even then, erasing one authorized place don't seem to hard.
Still again, being able to define as a whole if the selected zone is authorized or not could be our solution.
"a player-controlled way of keeping non-drafted pawn safe."
Danger zone is the best solution.
"Pawn that go back to base/infirmary if hit seriously threatening injury."
Alpha 11 for this.
"Pawn that DON'T fear going near enemy if player consider they shouldn't."
Danger zone is the best for this - they don't fear going nera enemy + player decision.
"a solution that make pawn run in loop because the enemy is where their job is."
Danger zone.
Quote from: Play2Jens on May 28, 2015, 08:13:08 AM
In my opinion there still is a problem here. Case 1: Imagine if you've a designated hauler and you have you colony entrances blocked by 'forbidden zones'. He would probably be cleaning at the moment because he's out of hauling jobs. Suddenly, an alpha 11 wall gets breached by a sapper raid. The first thing he would do is run through this (unforbidden) hole and do hauling jobs outside of the colony. Same goes with hunters.
Case 2: Imagine you want to hunt. you have to to remove the 'forbidden zone' every time you want your colonists to leave the colony, adding much more micromanagement.
Case 1 - i think the better option is to just select range of raiders/mechanoids guns as danger zone, so everybody will can do his job and be safe (of course you'll think about ranges etc - AI isn't playing for you).
Case 2 - Everything in Case 1.
And sorry for being little aggresive, but when someone is telling me that colonists going into the enemies camps is my fault, because i can't tell them what they SHOULDN'T do is just.... bullshit.
Quote from: Kegereneku on May 28, 2015, 09:42:07 AM
Case 2 : To be sincere, I don't see why you would forbid all the time everybody to go outside. And even then, erasing one authorized place don't seem to hard.
Still again, being able to define as a whole if the selected zone is authorized or not could be our solution.
This works the other way around as well. If you never forbid anything, but only when you get attacked, you have to add a 'forbidden zone' every time there is a threat AND remove it afterwards.
I would guess that half of the players wouldn't mind the extra micromanagement. But the other half, players like Stealth, Adamiks and me, do mind. I lost too many colonists because I forgot to forbid resources or deselect mining areas outside of my colony because I was too focused on fighting a raid or another threat.
That's why I'm still opting for an automated danger zone which can be toggled. Then, everyone will be happy.
Actually i don't mind the extra mcromanagement.
Select danger zone -> Remove danger zone. This can't be easier (and more useful)!
On other hand automated danger zone or something like that will create a new bunch of players that will say "Danger zone is so fu***** dumb!11!1!11!!!11" and this who will say "You're fu***** dumb! This is awesome!"
Quote from: Adamiks on May 28, 2015, 12:49:44 PM
Actually i don't mind the extra mcromanagement.
Okay, so let's agree that a danger zone, automated or not, will be useful for most of us.
I still see no need for a DANGER zone. So I disagree. all in how YOU choose to manage your colonists, and actually understand what they are doing.
I do see for people who play at speed 3, and don't pay attention to what their colonists are doing, would want to be able to restrict whole sections of the map.
Quote from: Kegereneku on May 28, 2015, 06:22:28 AM
Sorry, but to me you are the one acting like an entitled person.
I understand your problem, even if I don't share your method of dealing with it.
But we pointed a few potential flaws with the original suggestion.
So here you are the one telling me/us we should give up features we already have because you want yours.
Nothing else (edit : for me) to say on the topic if it don't concern a solution that satisfy everybody.
Ok so requesting a feature is "entitlement" now? Nice use of strawman there to try and win an argument. Saying that you should "give up your features so I can have mine". GJ twisting my words there. Don't come in here acting all self righteous, I never said my idea was flawless but so far there has been lots of suggestions and most of which would work. Where did I say they wouldn't?
Quote from: TLHeart on May 28, 2015, 02:43:11 PM
I still see no need for a DANGER zone. So I disagree. all in how YOU choose to manage your colonists, and actually understand what they are doing.
I do see for people who play at speed 3, and don't pay attention to what their colonists are doing, would want to be able to restrict whole sections of the map.
It's not because I play at speed 3, but because I have a lot of colonists and do not draft everyone to fight the raid. And because, as stated before, I'm too focused on fighting the raid, that I forgot about that mining expedition I planned a few rim-days earlier. I'm too busy with commanding my fighters at that time. Simple as that. The game gets to complex anno alpha 10 and with more than 12 colonists to look after all the time.
As the option doesn't bring disadvantages to players like you who wouldn't use it, may I know why you oppose this feature so much?
(edited future to feature)
Quote from: Play2Jens on May 28, 2015, 11:05:32 AM
Quote from: Kegereneku on May 28, 2015, 09:42:07 AM
Case 2 : To be sincere, I don't see why you would forbid all the time everybody to go outside. And even then, erasing one authorized place don't seem to hard.
Still again, being able to define as a whole if the selected zone is authorized or not could be our solution.
This works the other way around as well. If you never forbid anything, but only when you get attacked, you have to add a 'forbidden zone' every time there is a threat AND remove it afterwards.
I would guess that half of the players wouldn't mind the extra micromanagement. But the other half, players like Stealth, Adamiks and me, do mind. I lost too many colonists because I forgot to forbid resources or deselect mining areas outside of my colony because I was too focused on fighting a raid or another threat.
That's why I'm still opting for an automated danger zone which can be toggled. Then, everyone will be happy.
Exaclty. When I'm attacked, I already have to re-adjust what they can and cannot pickup as well a change up my "home" region so they don't run in the line of fire to put out a fire when undrafted. Simply having one danger zone will negate all this since it will take priority. It will actually reduce micro.
Poor Tynan, if he has to read through all of these arguments and little fights ::)
Quote from: TLHeart on May 28, 2015, 02:43:11 PM
I still see no need for a DANGER zone. So I disagree. all in how YOU choose to manage your colonists, and actually understand what they are doing.
I do see for people who play at speed 3, and don't pay attention to what their colonists are doing, would want to be able to restrict whole sections of the map.
"I still see no need for a DANGER zone. So I disagree. all in how YOU choose to manage your colonists, and actually understand what they are doing."
Jesus... Are you a bot or something? WE ALL understand what they are doing and how they are doing anything, we also can tell them what they should do, BUT we can't tell them HOW THEY SHOULD DO ANYTHING. We can't choose they paths, ANYTHING, only LOCKING DOORS is a good idea.
Because i know what you will say - no, this isn't my fault that i select hundred of jobs, i don't know how you're playing, but i know how i (and most of the players) are playing, we playing with action not like fu***** grandmas. When i'm building a big wall around my base i don't build it by sections, no i plan every section of the wall NOW, not 1 hour later or something.
"I do see for people who play at speed 3, and don't pay attention to what their colonists are doing, would want to be able to restrict whole sections of the map."
Ok, it's seems like you're really playing like grandma. My 4-5 years old colony = 120-168 hours of playing on 3 speed! I don't know how you life looks like, but i don't have time to play like month on 1 colony (like 70-90% of players).
In general:
If you like playing without 3 speed this is yours problem, because most of the players are playing at 3 speed and these players need DANGER ZONE. Ahh.... It is meaningless, i will say this you will say this and so on. We all knows that you disagree and even great ideas will be useless for you, because YOU don't need it.
Quote from: Play2Jens on May 28, 2015, 03:34:30 PM
Poor Tynan, if he has to read through all of these arguments and little fights ::)
People seem to have a notion that if they don't like an idea, it shouldn't be in the game regardless of it being optional.
As I said, adamiks, I can see how people who play at speed 3 could need a danger zone.
I also see the problem from other posts, about I set that job 2 or three days ago.... yep cueing up more jobs than they can do leads to not knowing what is going on.
The thread has went from the title of Auto avoid, to a user defined area, big difference from auto avoid.
And I stated I can see why you want a user defined danger zone. I still won't use it, as I don't need it.
Yes I play at speed 1, as I enjoy the small things that happen. The game is not all about how quick I can construct a colony, and how many raids I can survive in an hour.... And Yes I have the time to play that way.
Different play styles for different people.
Stealth,
there is ONE and ONLY one programmer, and that is a limited resource, and an OPTIONAL idea takes time to implement, debug, adjust due to community feed back, debug, finalize....
I would rather see the time spent on expanded events, and interactions with the other factions.
Quote from: TLHeart on May 28, 2015, 10:57:47 PM
As I said, adamiks, I can see how people who play at speed 3 could need a danger zone.
I also see the problem from other posts, about I set that job 2 or three days ago.... yep cueing up more jobs than they can do leads to not knowing what is going on.
The thread has went from the title of Auto avoid, to a user defined area, big difference from auto avoid.
And I stated I can see why you want a user defined danger zone. I still won't use it, as I don't need it.
Yes I play at speed 1, as I enjoy the small things that happen. The game is not all about how quick I can construct a colony, and how many raids I can survive in an hour.... And Yes I have the time to play that way.
Different play styles for different people.
Stealth,
there is ONE and ONLY one programmer, and that is a limited resource, and an OPTIONAL idea takes time to implement, debug, adjust due to community feed back, debug, finalize....
I would rather see the time spent on expanded events, and interactions with the other factions.
Again it's always what YOU want. All features are optional. Just because you don't want it, there are others that do. Like i said, the dev himself said he wanted to add it... You think expanded events and faction interactions won't have a testing period as well? I can bet it would be even longer so what's your point?
Also i said auto avoid in the title but w/e accomplishes this is fine. A danger zone would. Allow users to set their own restricted zone which can be good for many reasons.
Quote from: Play2Jens on May 28, 2015, 11:05:32 AM
This works the other way around as well. If you never forbid anything, but only when you get attacked, you have to add a 'forbidden zone' every time there is a threat AND remove it afterwards.
I would guess that half of the players wouldn't mind the extra micromanagement. But the other half, players like Stealth, Adamiks and me, do mind. I lost too many colonists because I forgot to forbid resources or deselect mining areas outside of my colony because I was too focused on fighting a raid or another threat.
That's why I'm still opting for an automated danger zone which can be toggled. Then, everyone will be happy.
I think you misunderstood the idea.
What take long is to draw the zone. But if region-zone could be individually toggled into neutral/safe/forbidden with 2 click, the micromanagement is (in my mind) less than what we risk from having to negotiate with a too automated danger zone.
Though, the earlier idea was also aiming at maximizing the amount of possibility, beyond "keep non-drafter pawn safe".
Quote from: Stealth on May 28, 2015, 03:21:46 PM
Ok so requesting a feature is "entitlement" now? Nice use of strawman there to try and win an argument. Saying that you should "give up your features so I can have mine". GJ twisting my words there. Don't come in here acting all self righteous, I never said my idea was flawless but so far there has been lots of suggestions and most of which would work. Where did I say they wouldn't?
That's not what a strawman is...
You are acting like an entitled person in that you act as if what you want is more importance than other's, or compromise.
To get back on more friendly base. Since everyone is stating what he want to see accomplished on the "keep non-drafted pawn safe" topic, you now know that some of us still want non-drafted pawn who don't care about being at shooting range of an enemy.
Se we can work at making it optional, and ideally an effective use of Tynan's time.
Quote from: TLHeart on May 28, 2015, 10:57:47 PM
The thread has went from the title of Auto avoid, to a user defined area, big difference from auto avoid.
And I stated I can see why you want a user defined danger zone. I still won't use it, as I don't need it.
[...]
there is ONE and ONLY one programmer, and that is a limited resource, and an OPTIONAL idea takes time to implement, debug, adjust due to community feed back, debug, finalize....
I would rather see the time spent on expanded events, and interactions with the other factions.
TLHeart, I know there's hostility building up for no good reasons but still.
- You do agree that it can interest people.
- But you fear it will take valuable time over Tynan's time.
Considering that Tynan will decide himself it it's worth his time, what about proposing a way you consider efficient/multi-use in case Tynan decide to address the subject ?
Who now if creating user-defined <safe/neutral/forbidden> zone couldn't benefit events or factions interaction ? Take the incoming fallout, wouldn't it be cool to easily keep non-drafted colonist indoor ?
Quote from: Stealth on May 29, 2015, 02:16:42 AM
Quote from: TLHeart on May 28, 2015, 10:57:47 PM
As I said, adamiks, I can see how people who play at speed 3 could need a danger zone.
I also see the problem from other posts, about I set that job 2 or three days ago.... yep cueing up more jobs than they can do leads to not knowing what is going on.
The thread has went from the title of Auto avoid, to a user defined area, big difference from auto avoid.
And I stated I can see why you want a user defined danger zone. I still won't use it, as I don't need it.
Yes I play at speed 1, as I enjoy the small things that happen. The game is not all about how quick I can construct a colony, and how many raids I can survive in an hour.... And Yes I have the time to play that way.
Different play styles for different people.
Stealth,
there is ONE and ONLY one programmer, and that is a limited resource, and an OPTIONAL idea takes time to implement, debug, adjust due to community feed back, debug, finalize....
I would rather see the time spent on expanded events, and interactions with the other factions.
Again it's always what YOU want.Look in the mirror Stealth All features are optional. Just because you don't want it, there are others that do. Like i said, the dev himself said he wanted to add it... You think expanded events and faction interactions won't have a testing period as well? I can bet it would be even longer so what's your point?
Also i said auto avoid in the title but w/e accomplishes this is fine. A danger zone would. Allow users to set their own restricted zone which can be good for many reasons.
If tynan said he wants to add this feature, show the quote from tynan. I have never seen such a quote.
I bolded where I again said, I can see where some people want it.
Here I will say it again,
A user defined zone, that you the player must define the size of, define the area of, turn on or off, for some people is a good option, based upon their play style. This is NOT auto avoid. This makes the player have to think about the area.
And yes we both make our ideas about ourselves.
Quote from: Kegereneku on May 29, 2015, 07:44:15 AM
Who now if creating user-defined <safe/neutral/forbidden> zone couldn't benefit events or factions interaction ? Take the incoming fallout, wouldn't it be cool to easily keep non-drafted colonist indoor ?
The fallout event is there to make you the player think and react to the event, and keeping non drafted colonists safe from the fallout automatically, defeats the purpose of the fall out event. Why even have an event if it is EASY to counter?
Quote from: Kegereneku on May 29, 2015, 07:44:15 AM
Who now if creating user-defined <safe/neutral/forbidden> zone couldn't benefit events or factions interaction ? Take the incoming fallout, wouldn't it be cool to easily keep non-drafted colonist indoor ?
I really like this idea. I did indeed not think through the concept of keeping the zone drawn, but just toggling it to make it "active" and "inactive". But what will be the difference gameplay-wise between a zone which is toggle "safe" and "neutral"?
Quote from: TLHeart on May 29, 2015, 09:04:02 AM
The fallout event is there to make you the player think and react to the event, and keeping non drafted colonists safe from the fallout automatically, defeats the purpose of the fall out event. Why even have an event if it is EASY to counter?
- Completely untrue. Mate, I don't know if you noticed, but since alpha 10 there are new activities where colonists AUTOMATICALLY go for a walk or pick a spot to sky gaze. How would you counter this without a safe zone?
- Also, it's not really fun for the average player to forbid everything from hauling, deselect mining zones, suspend jobs, etc. every time there will be an incident like fallout or a raid. This way these events will become less fun because you have to do a lot of micromanagement which could have been solved much easier with a forbidden zone.
Implementing a forbidden zone doesn't make the game easier, it just gives to player an option to handle the situation more efficient. The player still has to think things through and place the zones on strategically selected spots. And manage them.
- Last argument that proofs that Tynan doesn't think that the player should handle every action the pawns do theirselfs with every event. Remember when temperature got implemented? At the release of that alpha, pawns were more prone to get a temperature-related medical condition when an 'extreme temperature' event arrived, because they stayed outside to do their job. So he implemented an AI change that pawns seek save temperatures automatically whenever this happens. Imho, this isn't any different from events like raids or toxic fallout.
I would just like that if an enemy is near a colonist, they will avoid the incoming fire.
Having 15~ people is hard to manage when defending
Quote from: TLHeart on May 29, 2015, 09:04:02 AM
The fallout event is there to make you the player think and react to the event, and keeping non drafted colonists safe from the fallout automatically, defeats the purpose of the fall out event. Why even have an event if it is EASY to counter?
To me, drafting all colonist and keeping them in safe place knowing they will never move again look easier that the potential in this idea.
Also, there's more to it than keeping colonist drafted and safe.
Ex : What if your settlement is made of separate building and you have to decide between letting safe-zone between building or having to occasionally draft them to make them cross swiftly to another building ?
Think of it as being able to have the colonist sleep/eat and go on other occupation during fallout without having to micromanage any lemming you catch outside and reprogram it.
That aside, my point still stand :
Who now if creating user-defined <safe/neutral/forbidden> zone couldn't benefit events or factions interaction ?I bet I can make a few events and faction-relation that require to have togglable-zone where pawn regroup.
Quote from: Play2Jens on May 29, 2015, 09:29:02 AM
I really like this idea. I did indeed not think through the concept of keeping the zone drawn, but just toggling it to make it "active" and "inactive". But what will be the difference gameplay-wise between a zone which is toggle "safe" and "neutral"?
I admit the name I gave them are a little misleading, they don't actually need distinct name.
- 'safe' zone would be a zone that attract pawn (or selected one).
- 'neutral' zone would be a zone with no 'toggle' waiting to be used, like a stockpile with nothing authorized.
- 'Forbidden' is self-explaining from here.
That is, its because I tried to also mix in a 'workplace' idea from others suggestion to make it more interesting. But you could probably have a more basic 'safe zone' that is kept drawn (like any clean/clear snow region) but toggled on by an outside button.
Quote from: Play2Jens on May 29, 2015, 09:29:02 AM
Quote from: Kegereneku on May 29, 2015, 07:44:15 AM
Who now if creating user-defined <safe/neutral/forbidden> zone couldn't benefit events or factions interaction ? Take the incoming fallout, wouldn't it be cool to easily keep non-drafted colonist indoor ?
I really like this idea. I did indeed not think through the concept of keeping the zone drawn, but just toggling it to make it "active" and "inactive". But what will be the difference gameplay-wise between a zone which is toggle "safe" and "neutral"?
Quote from: TLHeart on May 29, 2015, 09:04:02 AM
The fallout event is there to make you the player think and react to the event, and keeping non drafted colonists safe from the fallout automatically, defeats the purpose of the fall out event. Why even have an event if it is EASY to counter?
- Completely untrue. Mate, I don't know if you noticed, but since alpha 10 there are new activities where colonists AUTOMATICALLY go for a walk or pick a spot to sky gaze. How would you counter this without a safe zone?
I have noticed, and YOU have to allow the time for them to do that activity in the time table. And with alpha 11, if it is work time, that is all they are allowed to do, work.
Again it is about MACRO management of the colony.
I have stated, I see where some players need and would benefit from a "safe" zone, one that they have to create, and think about, I said I support, but will not use.
Some people want an easy to play game. I do not want it to be easy. Events need to upset your plans, and activities, and force you to respond, to make HARD decisions, that affect the survivability of the colonists and the colony as a whole. Otherwise it just becomes another boring simulation game, where what the player does has little impact upon the outcome.
Quote from: TLHeart on May 29, 2015, 01:59:48 PM
I have noticed, and YOU have to allow the time for them to do that activity in the time table. And with alpha 11, if it is work time, that is all they are allowed to do, work.
So let's say a toxic event takes longer then a few days. I shouldn't allow my colonists to have joy in the time table for all those days? that just seems illogical. And would probably cause a few of them to have a mood crash.
Because if I would let them participate in joy activities, they would just wander outside and get struck by some fallout... Or do you suggest that I let them have joy, but play a babysitter during those events and draft them every time someone is about to walk outside?
TLHeart, just try thinking outside the box here. I bet a huge amount of silver that you will ever need a 'forbidden zone'
Quote from: TLHeart on May 29, 2015, 01:59:48 PM
[...]
Again it is about MACRO management of the colony.
[...]
Some people want an easy to play game. I do not want it to be easy. Events need to upset your plans, and activities, and force you to respond, to make HARD decisions, that affect the survivability of the colonists and the colony as a whole. Otherwise it just becomes another boring simulation game, where what the player does has little impact upon the outcome.
Just to say.
1) This is precisely MACRO management to give a global order to stay at safe place or avoid selected danger-zone.
2) I disagree that such things will make the game easier, on the opposite it would be what allow you to take more risk than you would by drafting everybody to safety.
This topic is going to have a better ground for discussion when A11 comes out, trust me guys... toxic fallout....
QuoteStarted work on arbitrary area restrictions for colonists: basics, designators, icons, drawing, selection for colonists, coloring, feedback on inspect pane.
It's there, guys. Case is closed for now ;D
He heard us! ;D
All praise the Tynan Christ!
Quote from: Kegereneku on May 29, 2015, 07:44:15 AM
That's not what a strawman is...
You are acting like an entitled person in that you act as if what you want is more importance than other's, or compromise.
To get back on more friendly base. Since everyone is stating what he want to see accomplished on the "keep non-drafted pawn safe" topic, you now know that some of us still want non-drafted pawn who don't
care about being at shooting range of an enemy.
Where do you get this from? When did I imply that what I want is more important? When did I reject someone's idea. You put words in my mouth then argue point. THAT is strawman
Quote from: Play2Jens on May 29, 2015, 07:35:30 PM
QuoteStarted work on arbitrary area restrictions for colonists: basics, designators, icons, drawing, selection for colonists, coloring, feedback on inspect pane.
It's there, guys. Case is closed for now ;D
Link or it never happened!
Quote from: TLHeart on May 29, 2015, 08:57:31 AM
Quote from: Stealth on May 29, 2015, 02:16:42 AM
Quote from: TLHeart on May 28, 2015, 10:57:47 PM
As I said, adamiks, I can see how people who play at speed 3 could need a danger zone.
I also see the problem from other posts, about I set that job 2 or three days ago.... yep cueing up more jobs than they can do leads to not knowing what is going on.
The thread has went from the title of Auto avoid, to a user defined area, big difference from auto avoid.
And I stated I can see why you want a user defined danger zone. I still won't use it, as I don't need it.
Yes I play at speed 1, as I enjoy the small things that happen. The game is not all about how quick I can construct a colony, and how many raids I can survive in an hour.... And Yes I have the time to play that way.
Different play styles for different people.
Stealth,
there is ONE and ONLY one programmer, and that is a limited resource, and an OPTIONAL idea takes time to implement, debug, adjust due to community feed back, debug, finalize....
I would rather see the time spent on expanded events, and interactions with the other factions.
Again it's always what YOU want.Look in the mirror Stealth All features are optional. Just because you don't want it, there are others that do. Like i said, the dev himself said he wanted to add it... You think expanded events and faction interactions won't have a testing period as well? I can bet it would be even longer so what's your point?
Also i said auto avoid in the title but w/e accomplishes this is fine. A danger zone would. Allow users to set their own restricted zone which can be good for many reasons.
If tynan said he wants to add this feature, show the quote from tynan. I have never seen such a quote.
I bolded where I again said, I can see where some people want it.
Here I will say it again,
A user defined zone, that you the player must define the size of, define the area of, turn on or off, for some people is a good option, based upon their play style. This is NOT auto avoid. This makes the player have to think about the area.
And yes we both make our ideas about ourselves.
I'm making a suggestion, YOU'RE turning it down because YOU don't like it. In case you didn't notice, this is the SUGGESTION sub-forum so you're SUPPOSED to suggest things. There are other people that want this too but you seem to be the only one who doesn't so I don't need to be looking in any hypothetical mirror bud...\
Here's the quote you asked for...
Quote from: Tynan on May 11, 2015, 02:12:47 AM
I've had the desire for a long time now to have them avoid this sort of thing. But it's a tricky AI problem to say the least. There's significant geometric analysis that has to be done on a changing situation. So it just hasn't been addressed so far.
Link if you don't believe me...
https://ludeon.com/forums/index.php?topic=12994.0
Satisfied?
Quote from: Adamiks on May 30, 2015, 12:19:48 AM
He heard us! ;D
All praise the Tynan Christ!
Praise the Godeveloper!