New wealth and raid system is not very good. Detailed way how it can be abused is described here: https://ludeon.com/forums/index.php?topic=45664.0.
So here is a list of changes that can make balance very good (cool thing about them that they won't make game of average player harder but it will remove all main weaknesses of previous system):
1. Rework wealth generation. Make ancient ruin floors claimable like ancient ruin walls (it's stupid that you can and should deconstruct them in order to make raids less powerful). Add efficiency to most of the items dependent on the health. Weapons should have less accuracy, food should have less nutrition, art should have less beauty, workshops should have less work speed and so on. For those items where changing efficiency is a bad idea (see erdrik reply below) remove wealth reduction.
The way you can now reduce wealth without any drop in utility of items is ridiculous.
2. Rework minimum wealth threshold. Make it dependent on difficulty. Make it 28k on peaceful, 14k on rough, 0k on merciless or something like that.
3. Make threat multiplier that increases with time! Make an option to choose between raid strength that scales based on wealth and raid strength that scales based on time. You can choose one of them or both (in that case raid strength should be increases by both multipliers). You can change that multiplier for different difficulties (with 1 for lower ones). It should be the case that you can't just chill indefinetly on low wealth levels, you HAVE TO develop your colony.
4. Make an option to add raid strength/wealth with new research. You can count it as 0 on lower difficulties, but on higher difficulties it should be a factor. It's not good that I can basically research ship without making complex base. It should be the case that if I'm progressing with research (which represents progress in the game) I HAVE TO face harder threats and develop my colony accordingly.
Other than that I really want to see rework on cleaning mechanic. It's so annoying that there is a gap between time mess appears and time that you can actually clean that up. Please, please remove that gap, it creates nothing other than frustration.
Melee skill is one of the easiest skills to train in the game actually. Just force attack dumb animals that aren't prone to attacking back. You get a huge amount of XP for that and can eat the animal after. Melee hunting is quite, quite effective.
Quote from: vzoxz0 on September 18, 2018, 03:27:37 PM
Melee skill is one of the easiest skills to train in the game actually. Just force attack dumb animals that aren't prone to attacking back. You get a huge amount of XP for that and can eat the animal after. Melee hunting is quite, quite effective.
All animals are attacking you when you melee attack them. And in those fights you have risk of scars and infection later. But you are right, in b19 you get xp fast that way and scars are not so often and scary as before. Because of that I will remove that suggestion from original post.
I guess they changed it. Still works when animals are sleeping though, they usually die quick and give a nice XP boost.
Quote from: vzoxz0 on September 19, 2018, 10:03:36 AM
I guess they changed it. Still works when animals are sleeping though, they usually die quick and give a nice XP boost.
There is literally no difference if animal is sleeping or not. It respondes same way after first hit. You just have to choose weaker animals when you have little skill. Alpacas or bucks work fine because they leave bruisers that can't get infected or get scarred (instead of scratches).
By the way, I'm willing to participate in making game challenging for good players for free. Because I think that it's challenging for average and casual players but it's waaaay too easy for good and hardcore players because of flaws in balance that can be easily fixed (and thosw fixes won't affect average and casual players almost at all).
Quote from: BLACK_FR on September 19, 2018, 02:13:08 PM
By the way, I'm willing to participate in making game challenging for good players for free. Because I think that it's challenging for average and casual players but it's waaaay too easy for good and hardcore players because of flaws in balance that can be easily fixed (and thosw fixes won't affect average and casual players almost at all).
Then you want to go to the modding forum.
Free balance changes that cater to your needs and excludes others is exactly the kind of changes that modding is well suited to support.
I sadly don't write code, I just have good understanding of how to make good balance. I also understand that those changes are in different structural places and there are quite a few of them. So even if they would be done in mod they would probably conflict with future updates.
Also I think that vanilla should have good balance, so that more people enjoy it.
While i agree with almost everything in this post.
I don't know about decreasing weapon accuracy. I don't want everyone in my colony or even my allies or even my enemies in the game to act like stormtroopers from starwars or XCOM rookies or even start shooting like they can't hit a broadside of the barn like an muffalo on front of them with an shotgun.
Why not instead make shooting or melee hard to train to gain another level?
Quote from: Kirby23590 on September 20, 2018, 12:41:24 AM
Why not instead make shooting or melee hard to train to gain another level?
Why not just make or buy or choose not damaged weapons? There will be a reason to make weapons yourself (now I never make advanced weapons and just take them from raiders).
Quote from: BLACK_FR on September 19, 2018, 10:28:47 PM
...
Also I think that vanilla should have good balance, so that more people enjoy it.
What you think is good balance is not what others think is good balance.
You will not end up just making it so more people enjoy it.
You will end up making it so more people enjoy it in exchange of more people hating it.
For example:
I disagree with 1.
- Floors originally did not have wealth. It led to spamming gold floors.
- Deconstructing ancient ruin floors is not stupid. It is no more ridiculous than finding still usable "compacted steel" in mountains.
- While I would like to see more items get reduced item efficiency as they are damaged, it should not be added to every item. An organ's health is an abstraction of the box it is in, so it's reduction in health should not effect the organ's efficiency. A light stand's health should not effect it's light range or intensity, since most of the light stand is the stand and not the light bulb. (damaging a light fixture very much has a binary affect on it's ability to produce light) The same for conduits, and most other appliances that deal with electricity.
Frankly, I trust Tynan's sense of balance way more than yours.
Man I wrote complete guide to how beat merciless naked brutality with no risk with 1 pawn with no micro-managing. I pointed out to weakness in balance which can reduce ALL big threats to laughable degree. You don't have to trust anybody, you can just check this to understand that current balance is bad for good players.
Also my suggestions are careful enough to not affect average people, only make game of good people more interesting.
To your example. I think that solution to floors is to make ancient ruin floors claimable like ancient ruin walls.
Deconstructing ancient ruin floors for resources is not stupid. Deconstructing them so you can get rif of resources to make raids smaller IS stupid.
I agree that some items should retain their efficiency independent of their health. But those item should retain their value/wealth as well. That would be even better system that I proposed (and better than current system).
Overall my idea is to fix wealth exploits and add some challenge to hardest diffuculty. If you can play merciless with same engagement as peaceful difficulty - than balance is in need of improving. Spamming gold floor was an exploit. You don't need to trust anyone to see that. So with other proposals - you don't need to trust Tynan or me to see if they are good. It's not rocket science, just check them yourself (your idea of retaining efficiency for some items works very well with my idea to retain wealth for those items).
QuoteI sadly don't write code, I just have good understanding of how to make good balance. I also understand that those changes are in different structural places and there are quite a few of them. So even if they would be done in mod they would probably conflict with future updates.
Also I think that vanilla should have good balance, so that more people enjoy it.
Just learn it then? It's not hard.
Quote from: BLACK_FR on September 20, 2018, 11:53:20 AM
... I wrote complete guide to how beat merciless naked brutality...
Beating the hardest difficulty or identifying exploits, does not make someone good at balance.
It helps, but it is not what makes someone good at balancing.
Also, I have heard this argument for decades. The idea that being a top tier player makes that player good at balancing the game for the lower difficulty levels is BS. You
think you can account for the "average" player but the very fact that identifying those exploits and playing merciless naked brutality as if it were "laughable", is what ensures you
don't know how to balance around the average player.
Not every player reads guides. Not every player is observant enough to identify exploits(or even when they should be used). Not every player knows how to beat the "Rough" difficulty, let alone merciless naked brutality. Even more so merciless naked brutality "with no risk with 1 pawn with no micro-managing".
Quote from: BLACK_FR on September 20, 2018, 11:53:20 AM
...
To your example. I think that solution to floors is to make ancient ruin floors claimable like ancient ruin walls.
...
I see you edited you OP to reflect this.
Before the edit, and to which I was responding, it simply stated "wealth should be removed from floors".
Also, your solution is not a balance fix. It is a mechanic fix.
AFAIK, The only reason Tynan has not implemented claimable floors, is because floors count as terrain and
mechanically terrain can't be claimed. Changing that is going to require either a complete rewrite of floors to be a different class than terrain(which means also rewriting how literally everything else in the code reacts to the new floor class), or a complete rewrite of terrain(which require rewriting how literally everything else reacts to claimable terrain, and ensuring there isn't another avenue for exploits as a result).
Im not saying I don't want to see claimable floors.
Just that the change is
not a balance change it is a mechanical change. And the change would require
significant dev time to implement.
I provided those details only as a reply to your statement of your lack of trust. You are right that you can be good at game and bad in balance (but at least you can identify exploits). That's why my main argument is that you can (and should) asses details of proposed changes independently of any other points. And make assesments based on their merits and not based on your trust or distrust to the author.
I can imagine how average player is playing, but may be I'm not best in it because of my mindset. But that's easily solvable problem (if it even exists which I have no evidence for yet).
With regard to examples. In me post before editing there was suggestion that "wealth should be removed from floors OR floors should become claimable". After your point about gold floors I decided that second option is strictly better and deleted first one. It's not like second option wasn't there before editing.
I don't understand difference between balance fix and mechanic fix, it's same to me.
Also I don't understand why you think that making floors claimable will require significant dev time to implement. I don't know how excatly it's working now but I imagine that there are different terrain classes with different properties. You just add property "claim" to that like you added property "wealth" before. It's no big deal.
You say that mechanically adding this property is hard. On what information you base that statement?
Also are you satisfied with my correction on link between health and value of the item?
Quote from: BLACK_FR on September 20, 2018, 02:02:23 PM
...
Also I don't understand why you think that making floors claimable will require significant dev time to implement. I don't know how excatly it's working now but I imagine that there are different terrain classes with different properties. You just add property "claim" to that like you added property "wealth" before. It's no big deal.
You say that mechanically adding this property is hard. On what information you base that statement?
First off let me add a disclaimer in that Im not fully familiar with Rimworld's code, and trying to learn/explain programming
in detail is not easy(it can be self taught, but there is schooling for it for a reason). So take what Im about to say as a general idea.
I am a programmer, as a hobby since I was in high school back in 1996, and recently Im attempting to develop my own game. Ive also looked into modding Rimworld and its code. (I admit I haven't looked since alpha13)
Programming is not as simple as "just adding a property" and expecting everything to start working with it.
Anything and
everything that you want done, must have code specifically telling the program how, when, and where to do it. And each class needs equally as extensive code relating to how to interact with the property of other classes. OOP(object oriented programming) allows "child" classes to "inherit" functions of the "parent" class, but that still means you have to specify how classes outside that hierarchy interact with the hierarchy's properties and functions. (and you may want specific classes to interact with existing inherited functions differently than its siblings, which will require a manual rewrite specific to that child class)
Rimworld has passed
many iterations and at this point likely has
many specific interactions with its various class hierarchies.
As a small example:
You suggested simply adding "claim" property to terrain.
But you can only "un-claim" or "claim" by first selecting an object, or with the "claim" tool.
The "claim" tool doesn't interact with terrain, and you can't select terrain.
So you would need to add "selecting terrain" functionality to the game.
Don't forget to add a "selected Terrain info panel", like how a normal selectable object gets.
How do players select terrain that a normal selectable object is on top of?
Now that terrain is selectable, how does a player "deselect" or clear all selections? (since they can't simply click empty terrain space anymore)
Should terrain be included in band box selections?
How should terrain selection handle selection through double clicking?
This is just the tip of the iceberg. Nothing in programming(as complex as most game programming) is
ever as simple as "just add property". Programming is like trying to build your own custom reality. You have to literally create your program's "physics", and manually build
every interaction. If you don't,
it doesn't happen. You can setup emergent behavior and reacting interactions. But the more complex those interactions become the more difficult it is to keep them in check when you add anything new.
In general, if you don't know how to code something yourself yet think it'd be easy, it's actually hard. If you think it'd be hard hard, it's impossible.
This is my experience over decades and it is just about 100% true.
Guys if I'm not coding myself that doesn't mean that I don't know how it works (I learned python for example). I've participated in development of several programs. I usually write algorithms for them and suggest ways to circumvent problems. Sometimes it work, sometimes it doesn't. In cases when it doesn't work you just need another solution. When I said about participation I meant that.
Quote from: 5thHorseman on September 20, 2018, 06:53:32 PM
In general, if you don't know how to code something yourself yet think it'd be easy, it's actually hard. If you think it'd be hard hard, it's impossible.
I had
many instances when there was a problem that my hired programmer thought was very hard to solve. But when I suggested solution that he didn't think before he replied like "oh,
that would be easy to do". Too much expertise allows you to evaluate option correctly but it doesn't help you to generate those options.
@erdrik
I understand what you are saying, as I said I was participaiting in development of software. But I'm willing to identify problems and suggest solutions. If there is problem with that solution you just need to generate another one to solve problem. That's not easy but that's the right way in my opinion.
So in your example:
Easy way to circumvent that problem (if that's a real problem that exists in Rimworld code) is to make unclaimed ancient ruin floors not a terrain but a structure (like walls). When they are claimed they should become "normal" floors.
Problem solved)
Any other problems?)
QuoteI am a programmer, as a hobby since I was in high school back in 1996, and recently Im attempting to develop my own game. Ive also looked into modding Rimworld and its code. (I admit I haven't looked since alpha13)
Programming is not as simple as "just adding a property" and expecting everything to start working with it. Anything and everything that you want done, must have code specifically telling the program how, when, and where to do it. And each class needs equally as extensive code relating to how to interact with the property of other classes. OOP(object oriented programming) allows "child" classes to "inherit" functions of the "parent" class, but that still means you have to specify how classes outside that hierarchy interact with the hierarchy's properties and functions. (and you may want specific classes to interact with existing inherited functions differently than its siblings, which will require a manual rewrite specific to that child class)
Rimworld has passed many iterations and at this point likely has many specific interactions with its various class hierarchies.
As a small example:
You suggested simply adding "claim" property to terrain.
But you can only "un-claim" or "claim" by first selecting an object, or with the "claim" tool.
The "claim" tool doesn't interact with terrain, and you can't select terrain.
So you would need to add "selecting terrain" functionality to the game.
Don't forget to add a "selected Terrain info panel", like how a normal selectable object gets.
How do players select terrain that a normal selectable object is on top of?
Now that terrain is selectable, how does a player "deselect" or clear all selections? (since they can't simply click empty terrain space anymore)
Should terrain be included in band box selections?
How should terrain selection handle selection through double clicking?
This is just the tip of the iceberg. Nothing in programming(as complex as most game programming) is ever as simple as "just add property". Programming is like trying to build your own custom reality. You have to literally create your program's "physics", and manually build every interaction. If you don't, it doesn't happen. You can setup emergent behavior and reacting interactions. But the more complex those interactions become the more difficult it is to keep them in check when you add anything new.
You realize there are such things as terrain-specific tools already, right? There is a lot of stuff already in place that would let Tynan and his team do this with ease.
Programming is easy. Balancing is hard.
if you wanna play around rules like here https://ludeon.com/forums/index.php?topic=45664.0 (https://ludeon.com/forums/index.php?topic=45664.0) well... do it ?
and if you don't want to, well... don't do it ?
Some ppl play whit infinite savegame, some not, etc etc ...
This game is a HUGE sandbox and nobody is here telling you how to play x_O If you find something imbalanced it's up to you not to use it ?
Quote from: Actarion on September 21, 2018, 12:40:43 PM
if you wanna play around rules like here https://ludeon.com/forums/index.php?topic=45664.0 (https://ludeon.com/forums/index.php?topic=45664.0) well... do it ?
and if you don't want to, well... don't do it ?
Some ppl play whit infinite savegame, some not, etc etc ...
This game is a HUGE sandbox and nobody is here telling you how to play x_O If you find something imbalanced it's up to you not to use it ?
I answered that question already in my topic that you gave link. Reason why it's not possible is because if you intentionally play game badly - it's not interesting. And if one of the mechanics of the game is badly balanced - you can't just "consciously don't use that". Because you will play
worse than casual players. If that's your solution (just play worse than bad players) - it's bad one. My solution is to fix the balance/mechanics (still don't see a difference).
And also I really don't understand why you oppose balance changes in
suggestion section of the forum. Especially with argument like "game don't need balance improvement ever because people can just not use bad balance to their advantage".
Quote from: BLACK_FR on September 21, 2018, 10:45:57 AM
Quote from: 5thHorseman on September 20, 2018, 06:53:32 PM
In general, if you don't know how to code something yourself yet think it'd be easy, it's actually hard. If you think it'd be hard hard, it's impossible.
I had many instances when there was a problem that my hired programmer thought was very hard to solve. But when I suggested solution that he didn't think before he replied like "oh, that would be easy to do". Too much expertise allows you to evaluate option correctly but it doesn't help you to generate those options.
Well then you should definitely become a programmer. There are a lot of problems that a lot of non-programmers think are easy and a lot of programmers think are hard. Think of all the joy you could bring to the world.
I have had many instances of convincing my boss he had my good idea. I think that's what you experienced BLACK_FR.
@5thHorseman
You have limited time in the world. I'm more interested in developing my thinking than developing my programming skills. And posting on forum of the game I like of course.
As long as I can get what I want by making good specifications there is no need to change my work for programming (amount of money you earn is important after all).
@vzoxz0
Do my solution to erdrik's problem of terrain seems like he convinced me about his good idea? Because that's the example of how I suggest solutions to "hard problems" that I was talking about.
You don't have to guess how that work. You can just check examples in this topics (both on proposed changes and on solving problems). If after that you still would be thinking that those ideas come from "smart subordinates that have to convince their boss to make changes"... I still would be thinking that you are wrong but won't argue because it's offtop already and because arguing in internet is not very productive.
Quote from: BLACK_FR on September 21, 2018, 09:13:29 PM
@5thHorseman
You have limited time in the world. I'm more interested in developing my thinking than developing my programming skills. And posting on forum of the game I like of course.
As long as I can get what I want by making good specifications there is no need to change my work for programming (amount of money you earn is important after all).
Sounds good let me know how that goes for you. My time too is limited and I've spent enough of it on this topic.
so, playing around rules is normal, and trying to enjoy a game like he should be played isn't ?
nobody (except yourself) force you to stop building art right before finishing it. And why in hell whould you do that in first place ?
only cause you can "play around the rule" that give value to it only when it's finished.
It's like someone told you to "stir the salad" so you take the bowl and shake it... You played around the words, you'r somewhat right, but that's the wrong way to do it.
Your reply is more appropriate in my topic in general discussion (where I listed all available tactics), not in this topic in suggestions, where I suggest how to fix those things (unless you oppose the idea to fix them).
But anyway. You have to decide if using that trick is ok or not. If it's ok - then there should be no objections for using it. If it's not ok - then you should agree that fixing it is a good idea.
Also you took least consequential point that doesn't change much. If you don't use that you still don't pass minimum wealth threshold, so it's not a solution. Most consequential points are how health of items affect wealth and idea of raid multiplier based on time.
And even in this example you assume that you and only you know how game should be played. Why you think that your vision of how this mechanic should work is right? If I don't finish bill with 10% work remaining - is it ok? If I stop working after 1% completion - is it ok? Can I start new bill if I didn't finish last one and why?
All this statements are arbitrary. It's like saying "you play too well, just play bad like me and you will have challenge". It's like saying to chess grandmaster that you can't use certain moves because they are too good.
Again, I want to play on the hardest difficulty possible and use all mechanics that are availible in the game. If I see that some mechanics are poorly balanced - I write about that in order to make them better. But your idea "dont improve anything, just play badly". May be you can enjoy game by intentionally playing it badly, I can't.
"you assume that you and only you know how game should be played."
Not really, i just want to say, ppl play the game the way they want, and nobody have to tell them how to play it.
If you wanna play around rules and optimise every aspect of the game, do it, if you enjoy it that's great !
If you wanna play in basebuild just to enjoy building something whitout any seatback, do it !
It's a game, the only point of it is to enjoy your time, and you do it your hown way.
My problem whit that topic is that you say "YOU ABSOLUTLY NEED TO REBALANCE THE GAME CAUSE...." but, no, for you it's crucial, but mostly for you...
If you can play merciless naked brutality like regular peaceful game after first year - than there is clearly a problem with balance. Hardest possible difficulty should be at least a little bit hard. Do you disagree?
Also do you think that my proposed changes are bad?
Rimworld's threat generation is a central game mechanic and its proper functioning is essential for the bulk of enjoyable content in the game. It makes sense to eliminate exploits that take away from that experience. No, partially crafting a hundred items to subdue enemy raid points is not fun and there's nothing intuitive about it. It won't be missed.
In some way i disagree , cause you complain that the hardest difficulty is not difficult enough, but, you still try to use and abuse every little gamedesign mistake.
Back in A12 you could wall and cook a psychic ship, You COULD, you didn't HAD to
If you want challenge why not just don't use it ? that what i don't understand.
Honestly i have no opinion about your changes, cause i would never do such thing, i play rimworld for living a story, not for challenge. Stoping building piece of art right before the end have no sence for me.
Now you could say that there is not point in arging, but we are still playing the same game. And for me i would rater see tynan concentrate on other thing than fixing those thing that you point out.
So you think that it's gamedesign mistake but you don't want Tynan and crew spend time to fix it. Got you. Makes sense don't fix mistakes in most important mechanic in the game.
there is bigger problem to solve imo
in fact, our debate is more or less like that (https://plumechocolat.files.wordpress.com/2016/11/le-6-9.jpg?w=487&h=420)
so let's stop here and let the designer do there job and settle what should be fixed.
i just hope that you finally understand that your way of playing the game isn't the only one...
Yes, there is also the way to not fix the problems with most important mechanic of the game.
I always knew that there are other ways. I just don't think that most of them are valid.
QuoteIf you want challenge why not just don't use it ? that what i don't understand.
Existing mechanics are made to be used. It is dumb to expect players to close their eyes and pretend that exploits don't exist.
Sometimes an exploit creates a wacky, wild new way to play a game and that's okay. But if the most compelling argument is "I use it to win, don't use it if you don't like it" then it's probably not good.
I think that the biggest thing is to just assume an item or building's value at 100% HP, rather than current market value, when the storyteller looks at how much wealth you have.
Quote from: bobucles on September 26, 2018, 01:43:12 PMIt is dumb to expect players to close their eyes and pretend that exploits don't exist. [...] But if the most compelling argument is "I use it to win, don't use it if you don't like it" then it's probably not good.
You're assuming that players who are trying to cheat don't value their own time. The exploits that are being argued over in this thread are extremely tedious, and are obviously cheating. If players are willing to cheat, there's a way to do that without wasting their own time - turn on dev mode. There's no reason to fix something which itself disincentivizes players from using it.
The other changes, I agree with, for the most part. Completed research should affect difficulty, since it gives the player power through flexibility. Adding an option to disable time- or wealth-based difficulty would be pretty cheap to implement, and gives players more options on how they want to play, so I can get behind that. Threat level changing with the difficulty is something I assumed already happened; It's possible it's at a flat value right now, to avoid some other bad situation, like easy difficulties allowing players to avoid combat too far into the game, and die quickly to their first raid.
I see that many people assume that taking advantage of current health/wealth mechanics is exploit or cheating.
That is wrong. Current game is intentionally designed this way, it's not some bug or exploit that cheaters abuse. It's like saying that making turrets is cheating because they make defending raids so much easier. Or making art is cheating because it gives so much money for free. You have to distinguish between using more effective ways to play and cheating. If you call all effective ways to play cheating - than it's something wrong with you.
Quote from: bobucles on September 26, 2018, 01:43:12 PM
Existing mechanics are made to be used. It is dumb to expect players to close their eyes and pretend that exploits don't exist.
Using mechanics and using exploits is a different thing. I think using any confirmed exploits is a bad idea, it steals fun from the game, so exploits are NOT ok. But we are talking not about exploits, but about taking advantage of current game mechanics which is
equal to just good play.
Quote from: MarvinKosh on September 28, 2018, 01:56:54 AM
I think that the biggest thing is to just assume an item or building's value at 100% HP, rather than current market value, when the storyteller looks at how much wealth you have.
That's too cheap solution that distorts gameplay, because it's not distinguishing between new item and item with 1% helath. Why do you think that health of the items should not matter? It seems to me that dropping utility of item with health and wealth is better idea (and use your idea only for items where dropping in utility isn't appropriate).
Quote from: AileTheAlien on September 28, 2018, 02:02:21 AM
You're assuming that players who are trying to cheat don't value their own time. The exploits that are being argued over in this thread are extremely tedious, and are obviously cheating. If players are willing to cheat, there's a way to do that without wasting their own time - turn on dev mode. There's no reason to fix something which itself disincentivizes players from using it.
The other changes, I agree with, for the most part. Completed research should affect difficulty, since it gives the player power through flexibility. Adding an option to disable time- or wealth-based difficulty is pretty cheap, and gives players more options on how they want to play, so I can get behind that. Threat level changing with the difficulty is something I assumed already happened; It's possible it's at a flat value right now, to avoid some other bad situation, like easy difficulties allowing players to avoid combat too far into the game, and die quickly to their first raid.
You are very confused about main problem in this topic. Main problem is that health of the items and buildings don't affect their utility but affect their generated wealth. And managing items and buildings health is NOT tedious and also not cheating. So your statement that using that mechanic have disencentive is wrong.
Also I don't understand what you mean by "threat level changing with difficulty". It wasn't discussed here at all, may be you got something wrong from the original post?
Main reason why this changes are important is that current mechanic allows to win the game (in normal sense, I don't understand why anyone considers using dev mod as possible "winning option") on the hardest possible difficulty with no risk and on autopilot (just like on peaceful difficulty). That's not ok and that's why I made suggestions in OP.
Quote from: BLACK_FR on September 28, 2018, 09:14:27 AMAnd managing items and buildings health is NOT tedious
I think you and I differ on what "tedious" means. In the other thread where you describe how to easily win, you say
Quote from: BLACK_FR on September 16, 2018, 07:32:56 AMSame goes for buildings. You should melee attack them a little (not too much because of zzzt events).
Manually,
individually damaging all of your items and buildings, is exactly what I would call tedious. Players
can use this tactic to win the game, and it is
easy, but it takes a lot more time than just playing the game normally, or playing with cheats. It involves repeating the same task (damaging items), for little gain (compared to just playing the game normally, or using proper cheats). That's the dictionary definition of tedium - doing something which is monotonous to the point of boredom (https://www.dictionary.com/browse/tedious). It also seems very obvious to me that this is not the intended way to play the game, which is why I called it an exploit.
Quote from: BLACK_FR on September 28, 2018, 09:14:27 AMAlso I don't understand what you mean by "threat level changing with difficulty". It wasn't discussed here at all, may be you got something wrong from the original post?
Isn't that what you're describing in this next quote - the (minimum) difficulty of raids changing with the difficulty setting of the game? From what you wrote, and what I read in a post you linked, where it discusses how enemy raids scale with various things in the game (time, wealth, etc) it seems to me like what you're describing.
Quote from: BLACK_FR on September 18, 2018, 02:20:52 PM2. Rework minimum wealth threshold. Make it dependent on difficulty. Make it 28k on peaceful, 14k on rough, 0k on merciless or something like that.
@AileTheAlien
In your definition building the base is tedious or growing food is tedious. It requires work, yes, but to become tedious it has to be monotonous (we can use dictionary definition you provided, I think it's ok).
The reason why damaging your buildings is not tedious is because you have to do it once. It's like making your base - you also do it once.
It's not "a lot more time than usual", but it's "more time than usual". And gains are very big. It depends on how wealthy is your colony. For my base it cuts 1-2 raiders from the raid, for big colonies with 10+ people it can cut dozens of raiders. So gain is very big for the once-only activity.
Also it's definitely not an exploit. You can say that it's taking advantage of poorly balanced mechanic, but to be exploit the usage has to be that was not intended on micro-level. Burning poison ship is exploit, not completing apparel to hide wealth is exploit, damaging your items is not an exploit.
Proof of that is that last change in that mechanic was that utility drop of weapons and apparel ware removed in B19, while wealth drop wasn't changed. So dev team looked into this mechanic and how it was used and decided that it should work the way it works now.
Regarding your last question. I was talking about new feature in B19 - minimum wealth threshold. Now if you have wealth in range 0-14000 it doesn't count at all to raid strength. My idea was that on higher difficulties that minimum wealth threshold should be reduced and on merciless it should be removed. Merciless should be hard as hell, not suitable for 95%+ of people.
I get what Black_FR is saying, in a game designed to be IMPOSSIBLE to win, you are going to use every avenue to win, EVERY AVENUE.
How many ppl have completed naked brutal or what ever?
Due to the tactic that Black_FR is talking about people can coast through, come out to brag by essentially cheating, exploiting. It is supposed to be a feat, a badge of honor, but ppl can exploit it and the wow is lost.
Your supposed to use every thing to your advantage but some things should not be there to take.
Ignore them and die or use everything given to you to survive..
The changes that he is talking about don't effect the casual player as they would not be doing those things anyway, hell they wouldn't even notice, but when you play the 'you will die' level and don't die because the game allows loop holes it's a bad thing.
Ppl have had a go at him for his play style, if you ask me, that is not his play style, (in my opinion) sounds to me his play style is 'you're gunna die' , but he doesn't.
The loop holes allow that skill level to be negated by options that should not exist and there for points out that the 'ima fkn die skill lvl isn't, actually, ima fkn die.
And we are talking about the top hardness level, not the 'casual player' skill level, where again the balance issue would not even be noticed. I'm sure very few do what has been mentioned to be fixed, i'd say a lot of ppl haven't tried that skill level either..
I'm all for things loosing there ability to work their best when it degrades in quality it makes sense (but not all items) as Black_FR and others have said. at present there is absolutely no reason to build new weapons for your self when the garbage raiders drop is just as good
Look, you shouldn't be able to do those things to win, you shouldn't have the option, i know for a fact that in the same situation, you'd fight for survival, what ever it takes.