Messages

It's not a "new" idea. This gets suggested literally every week.

The answers every time are:
1. (as has already been posted) It's still just an alpha, this is WAAAAY down the line
2. Tynan has said that multiplayer is low priority if it even happens

I would like to see priorities go up to level 5 or 6 though.

There's no point in discussing how the game needs to change for multiplayer when it's so far down the line.

The only part of multiplayer that's remotely worth mentioning is how it will be done, ie: game mode, since it's not like you can just go "hey, free for all mode!" and that's only to see if there's even a good way to make it worth doing.

King-sized beds for more happiness. Just put 2 beds next to each other.

A simpler approach would be to build a shrine for a specific god. You can order a sacrifice (corpse, raw food, cooked food, metal) or a ritual of some sort (with a variable amount of people participating in it). Whoever is in charge of "Worshiping" follows these orders.

Certain factors influence your relationship with that god that you are worshiping. If you sacrifice something valuable, such as a minigun or 200 metal, or follow the god's commands, your reputation with that god increases. However, if you are violent, sacrifice only worthless things, such as squirrel corpses, then that god will be unhappy with your colony. Also, if you make the room in which the shrine is in spacious and clean, then the god will be somewhat more pleased.

When you pray to the gods, your reputation with them decreases a bit, and they will respond with either a blessing or "the wrath of the gods" based on your reputation with them. They also affect your colony's karma, which changes incident frequencies.

I disagree. Having actual, interactive gods in the game isn't what the game needs. I think that being blessed by the goddess of farming or having a curse placed on your populace takes away from the feel the game currently has and is cultivating. "Oh no, we're being overrun by bandits" being magically fixed by the god of war smiting them in a thunderstorm, to me, really is not in the best interests of this game, which is focused on people doing their best to get by on just what they find in the wild, trying to start up a little town.

That's not good. Which version is this? Can you upload a (zipped) savegame where it's about to happen?

I grabbed the screenshot first, then it resolved via a hauler bringing it away before I could save. It was on the version released April 10th, not the most recent one (I didn't yet know there was already another release)

One of my colonists grabbed some muffalo meat, went to a table to eat it, and wouldn't eat it, but the "crunch" sound that's made when someone starts eating was looping over itself several times per second. The issue was later fixed when I drafted him, had him run away, did the same for another colonist who tried to eat it and did the same thing, and my hauler brought it away.

I grabbed a screenshot of how things looked when it occurred. (Keiko is the bugged eater in question)

Being outside in the rain should reduce happiness, at least while sleeping. Also, another thought: for a colonist's first few days with the colony, they should get a "happy for shelter" sort of bonus to happiness during rain if they're inside, to reflect the fact that they may not have had shelter before. The things you take for granted...

Am I the only one who feels that the stockpile system as-is is extremely inefficient?

This is especially frustrating with a launch pad, as there's no way to move things from one stockpile to another without changing priority then placing an order to haul those resources, then changing the priority lower so that they don't use the launch pad as your primary stockpile. I feel like it should be much easier to have resources go where you want them to go.

Co-Op is awesome, Ty, If you are going to make a game like this one, PLEASE have Co-op, i dont care for pvp, but if there is i want it by choice of options

That provided an amazing idea. What if there's a multiplayer option where you open a world with friends, and each person just controls one character? Then it provides very much the idea that you're just a bunch of people trying to survive, coming together to build this colony. Either additional colonists are all completely autonomous (one player elected overseer to hand out orders) or it runs persistently, and a character sleeps when his user is offline, and a new player joining the game is represented by a wanderer.

The latter gives a grand thought: What would happen if a RimWorld colony had 50 colonists, all run by 50 players? All doing their work to keep the colony alive, and fend off raiders?

It may be WAAAAAY down the line that this is even considered, but it doesn't hurt to dream.

I know that assuming that an engineer with knowledge in weaponry (enough to build an highly advanced automatic turret) can use his skills and knowledge to tinker weapons is incredibly far stretched. (really?! -__- )

Knowledge in one area of weaponry, not another.

During WW2, who made most of Germany's small arms? Mauser
Who made most of their artillery? Krupp and Rheinmetall
Who made their aircraft? Focke-Wulf, Messerschmitt, and Heinkel
Who made their warships? Blohm & Voss

And yet, one guy is supposed to have a more varied skillset than several enormous state-funded companies? Different weapons require different knowledge, often even if this involves just the tiniest variation between them.

Right, but our colonists are able to fly a spaceship and can build complicated high tech buildings in a few hours.

We also have a lot of people today who can use the internet but can't run a telegraph line. We have people who can fly drones but couldn't operate a steamboat. Just because it's more high tech doesn't mean that it's harder to learn to use.

Having planets that are stuck in the middle- or industrial age sounds plausible for me. People being able to build and fly spacecrafts, communication devices and automatic turrets being stuck with weapons from the wild west era is what bothers me.

Again, technology isn't linear. It's entirely possible that some human civilization exists a billion lightyears from here that figured out how to get into orbit without ever creating gunpowder.

If they can build an automatic turret with a highly advanced neuronal network as artificial intelligence, that also must have some highly advanced sensors(!) then building a machine gun, tank or even a gunship shouldn't be much of a problem for them.

The turret is not fully automatic, it's in bursts with a long reload time, as opposed to the pistol providing a more steady rate of fire. Mayube they haven't developed a rapid-feed system yet for large-caliber guns such as those turrets? Also, do you see raiders land on the surface in ships? No, in drop pods. There is no implication that anywhere in the universe there exists a ship capable of breaking out of the atmosphere and into orbit, yet also able to just hover within the atmosphere. That's rather high-tech aeronautics. If you look at what we have today, the idea of the space shuttle hovering or landing carefully on the surface is laughable. So saying "a gunship shouldn't be much of a problem" is again poorly interpreting technological advancements.

And also, let me say that saying "it's not really a big step" to go from remote-triggered explosives to artillery because they know how to make burst-fire turrets is completely wrong. The study of firearms is much more complex than "put it down a barrel and shoot it". Firing arrows required a bow, yet firing boulders required a catapult. The two have entirely different firing mechanisms because the projectiles are entirely different. A small stone required a sling, an arrow required a bow, and a boulder required a catapult or trebuchet. Like this, firing bullets and firing bombs are completely different things, and as I've said multiple times, technology isn't linear. It's possible that they have gunpoweder knowledge forever without ever discovering rocketry.

And it still sounds ridiculous to me to fly from solar system to solar system in a highly advanced spaceship to buy pistols.

If a ship specializes in weaponry, and it takes a long time to travel, they want to have ample variety to have the largest possible consumer base. They're not going to exclude potential customers and not stock something just because they feel a gun doesn't have enough firepower when it's still an effective gun. That's just a poor business model that alienates their target consumer-base for no real reason, considering a full ship of arms would have plenty of storage space to have such variety. That's like running a bicycle shop and refusing to sell cheap bicycles fitted with training wheels just because they aren't as good as your carbon-fiber $3000 sports bikes.

You seem to be entirely missing the point that is the fact that space travel takes a very long time, so new ideas and technology don't spread very quickly. Figure it like this: as the whole world is inter-connected now with the internet, in the 1800's a village in the American Wild West suddenly had a magical barrier seperate it from the rest of the world.  What are the odds that they keep moving along at the same pace? What are the chances that the next Tesla or Einstein is born in that specific town, rather than being cut off from it?

For that matter, who's to say that tech will even develop the same way? The Byzantines used "Greek fire" a thousand years ago and we still have no idea what exactly it was. Technological advancement is not linear, so just because something seems nearby for us does not mean that it's nearby for anyone with a similar tech-level, or even a higher tech-level. We haven't been able to replicate Damascus steel, the Roman secret of concrete wasn't done again for a millenia, etc. It's entirely possible to have a Greek phalanx with laser beams (and they may have even had a death ray, if you believe the legend about Archimedes doing it, another example). You should not judge all technological advancement for all cultures based on the way that specifically ours has gone.

A target or shooting range type of thing for colonists to raise their shooting skill in between fights with raiders. Right now, all that would really need to be done is to take a colonist model, make some small change to the skin (maybe put a red X across their torso), and make it unresponsive to stimuli, and immune to hunger/rest.

They will also be able to get rid of some of the busy work (in this case, repairs,cleaning,hauling) at the cost of efficiency

They should not be allowed to build,fight,grow things, or mine.

So the colonists can mass-produce Roombas?