Mental break which leads to killing an animal should only work on animals which are not train in obedience. This would still be an annoying mental break but wouldn't be so obnoxious. It would reward us for training animals as well, and would lead to decision if we should train obedience to our herd animals which are used only for food/wool.
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Pages1
#2
Ideas / More complex factions and diplomacy
June 22, 2017, 04:30:41 AM
So I'm pretty sure more complex diplomacy and faction relations are going to improve sooner or later and Tynan has plans for it.
There is a lot of talk about it and I wanted to add my few words to the topic.
So what I think would be really great for both complexity, balance and game immersion, would be different behaviours depending on our colony policy and trading.
What would that mean in practice. First of all we should have way more different types of factions(pirate, outlander and tribe is way too simple).
Different types of colonies would react differently depending on what we produce. The easiest example would be drugs. Drugs wouldn't be nicely seen in eyes of faction with good morality(aka outlanders), factions like tribes wouldn't care about it and factions like pirate bands would be attracted to either attack us more or trade with us. So having drugs would have it's huge downsides. It would work depending on how much drugs we produce/sell and what types of drugs we have/use.
Would work same with slavery but with addition of more factions it could be more complex with who and how much doesn't like or like this idea(for example selling off member of faction who is enemy to our friend wouldn't anger them, but selling their ally who is our enemy would really piss them off).
That way balancing drugs,slavery and organ harvesting(as well as other behaviours) would become easier since doing it would have consequences.
For example some behaviours could lead to temporary effect or would create a need for us to try hard to improve relations which we lost. For example if we sell a slave some factions would lose relation with use and we can't improve it by X value for X time OR we need to compensate for our behaviour - by doing charity work which could work as donating(forming a caravan and going to a location) food/clothes to poor factions(with addition of more factions their value can be different - there could be neutrual hippie-like poor faction who doesn't raid). This would lead to more complex desicions. For example we are in extreme need for cash, rich trader comes to us, we decide to sell banch of prisoners which will anger many of our friends. That way we get quick short time improvement to our base but later on we have to pay off our decision by either having to fight more enemies or we will have to try hard to improve our relations again. It could work kind of like loan in that case - just way more harsh loan like it's usually in Rimworld standards.
It would also lead to many more balance solutions. For example power output and energy is sometimes tricky to balance. Seeing how many mods expand energy output this is something people want. There could be nuclear power plant(one way of balance would be research tree, marterial cost and for example upkeep cost with uranium) and with more complex faction mechanic, there could be a mechanic that any faction which bases are close to us would become angry that they live near power plant - relation with them would be constantly decreasing and we would need to either fight them off or constantly have to keep increasing relations with them.
There could be more intances which would depend on our distance to other factions. This would open the ability to balance setting up near other factions. If we are really close to other faction base we get an opportunity to have fast travel for trade but the downside would be that we can't take certain actions or even build certain objects cos that would angry our near neighbours.
The number of enemies we have(and their distance from us) could result in more frequent raids, also if our enemy has an ally there could be a chance that during a raid his ally joins him(chance of more dangerous raid if we have more enemies). This would create a need for us to keep an eye on who we should try to ally with or at least avoid being enemy with. Also there could be a chance that ally comes to help us(friendlies mechanic) and the chance for it should also depend on how many factions we are ally with and their distance from us. Also if we travel around the map, everytime someones attack us if we are X tiles away from ally territory there is a chance they will come to help us. Frequency and % chance of those things would also depend on how many relation points(or negative points) we have with them.
In short not only number of allies and enemies would affect gameplay but also the distance of their bases to us. Meaning that we should really have to look more where to build our bases, with who we want to ally or fight with, what do we want to sell/build and what policy we want to have.
With that mechanic there should also be a possiblity to wipe out factions for good(not an easy task of course)
There is a lot of talk about it and I wanted to add my few words to the topic.
So what I think would be really great for both complexity, balance and game immersion, would be different behaviours depending on our colony policy and trading.
What would that mean in practice. First of all we should have way more different types of factions(pirate, outlander and tribe is way too simple).
Different types of colonies would react differently depending on what we produce. The easiest example would be drugs. Drugs wouldn't be nicely seen in eyes of faction with good morality(aka outlanders), factions like tribes wouldn't care about it and factions like pirate bands would be attracted to either attack us more or trade with us. So having drugs would have it's huge downsides. It would work depending on how much drugs we produce/sell and what types of drugs we have/use.
Would work same with slavery but with addition of more factions it could be more complex with who and how much doesn't like or like this idea(for example selling off member of faction who is enemy to our friend wouldn't anger them, but selling their ally who is our enemy would really piss them off).
That way balancing drugs,slavery and organ harvesting(as well as other behaviours) would become easier since doing it would have consequences.
For example some behaviours could lead to temporary effect or would create a need for us to try hard to improve relations which we lost. For example if we sell a slave some factions would lose relation with use and we can't improve it by X value for X time OR we need to compensate for our behaviour - by doing charity work which could work as donating(forming a caravan and going to a location) food/clothes to poor factions(with addition of more factions their value can be different - there could be neutrual hippie-like poor faction who doesn't raid). This would lead to more complex desicions. For example we are in extreme need for cash, rich trader comes to us, we decide to sell banch of prisoners which will anger many of our friends. That way we get quick short time improvement to our base but later on we have to pay off our decision by either having to fight more enemies or we will have to try hard to improve our relations again. It could work kind of like loan in that case - just way more harsh loan like it's usually in Rimworld standards.
It would also lead to many more balance solutions. For example power output and energy is sometimes tricky to balance. Seeing how many mods expand energy output this is something people want. There could be nuclear power plant(one way of balance would be research tree, marterial cost and for example upkeep cost with uranium) and with more complex faction mechanic, there could be a mechanic that any faction which bases are close to us would become angry that they live near power plant - relation with them would be constantly decreasing and we would need to either fight them off or constantly have to keep increasing relations with them.
There could be more intances which would depend on our distance to other factions. This would open the ability to balance setting up near other factions. If we are really close to other faction base we get an opportunity to have fast travel for trade but the downside would be that we can't take certain actions or even build certain objects cos that would angry our near neighbours.
The number of enemies we have(and their distance from us) could result in more frequent raids, also if our enemy has an ally there could be a chance that during a raid his ally joins him(chance of more dangerous raid if we have more enemies). This would create a need for us to keep an eye on who we should try to ally with or at least avoid being enemy with. Also there could be a chance that ally comes to help us(friendlies mechanic) and the chance for it should also depend on how many factions we are ally with and their distance from us. Also if we travel around the map, everytime someones attack us if we are X tiles away from ally territory there is a chance they will come to help us. Frequency and % chance of those things would also depend on how many relation points(or negative points) we have with them.
In short not only number of allies and enemies would affect gameplay but also the distance of their bases to us. Meaning that we should really have to look more where to build our bases, with who we want to ally or fight with, what do we want to sell/build and what policy we want to have.
With that mechanic there should also be a possiblity to wipe out factions for good(not an easy task of course)
#3
Bugs / A16 Colony pet appearing as wild after selling
June 19, 2017, 08:05:30 AM
So I'm not sure where to ask if it's a bug or intended feature.
I tamed arctic wolf, had him in my colony for couple of seasons, trained him, he got few pernament wounds. I was in need for money so I sold him to a caravan.
After decent amount of time(few years - maybe around 5) I was looking around map to find things to hunt/tame, then suddenly I saw my old arctic wolf which i sold to caravan. His name was the same, he had previous skills and wounds. There was an option to either hunt or tame him although his name color was different from wild animals. Is it intended or is it a bug?
I use mods but I don't think any mod would cause it.
I tamed arctic wolf, had him in my colony for couple of seasons, trained him, he got few pernament wounds. I was in need for money so I sold him to a caravan.
After decent amount of time(few years - maybe around 5) I was looking around map to find things to hunt/tame, then suddenly I saw my old arctic wolf which i sold to caravan. His name was the same, he had previous skills and wounds. There was an option to either hunt or tame him although his name color was different from wild animals. Is it intended or is it a bug?
I use mods but I don't think any mod would cause it.
#4
Ideas / Armor and weapons mechanics
February 17, 2017, 10:45:10 AM
So I'm enjoying this game for a little while(few alphas and a lot of hours put into it xD). I really like the game and the way it's heading but the thing that I find the most irritating is the armor system.
It just feels dumb, unrealistic and not well made.
So I was thinking how it should look like. The best solution I came up with for now is to make 2 seperates stats for each armor. One stat would be the one that's in vanilla right now, so % of evading and second one should be a hard number reduction.
I find it really stupid that a huge amount of squirrels are usually more deadly than one heavily equipped skilled warrior.
Also I think there should be added more variety to weapons damage.
I thought of something like that:
-Sharp = most ranged weapons - pistols, automatic rifles, bows and swords.
-Blunt = shotgun, clubs, maces, hammers. Maybe it's not perfect for shotgun to do blunt damage but i think it would add diversity(it would be sth like buckshot cloud).
-Piercing = hunting and sniper rifles, daggers, spears, javelins.
-Slash = axes, minigun
The idea is that it would work like that:
-Sharp = good base damage, average armor piercing, high bleeding rate
-Blunt = low base damage, high armor piercing(it's more about avoiding damage, in medieval time weapons like morning star were made to kill people in heavy armor by doing impact damage), no bleeding, chance to stun enemies.
-Piercing = good base damage, high armor piercing, high bleeding rate
-Slash = highest base damage, low armor piercing, high bleeding rate.
Shotgun doesn't really fit the describtion for blunt damage. It doesnt really suit it. It should do high base damage, no armor piercing and have chance to stun.
Names are just an example. Armor and clothing would have two stats, chance to avoid damage(like it has now) and flat reduction.
It would be possible to negate all damage if you are wearing good power armor and you are being attacked by 20 angry naked tribespeople with bare fists. Which makes sense.
It would work like rock,paper,scissors. You want heavy piercing weapon vs someone with armor, but it will be much better to use some heavy flat damage weapon vs someone with light armor.
I think also the chance of avoiding damage should be highly nerfed for armor and clothes, and increaces for the envoirment. So it would be much more important to use covers to avoid damage and use armors to negate or lower damage. It would highly increase the value of good equiped, well trained pawns and importance of using surrodings.
@edit
Also I think there should be added the ability to have a side arm. The game also should have standard shields. Shields wouldn't negate any damage but they would higly increase the chance to avoid damage(they would work more like enviroment than armor)
The melee weapons should be divided into 2 groups - two-handed and one-handed.
Two-handed weapons would obviously do much more damage.
One-handed weapons would give us the ability to use shields and become side-arm.
Side-arm would be secondary weapons that can be wielded with range weapons which colonists would switch to when they get into melee range with opponent.
It just feels dumb, unrealistic and not well made.
So I was thinking how it should look like. The best solution I came up with for now is to make 2 seperates stats for each armor. One stat would be the one that's in vanilla right now, so % of evading and second one should be a hard number reduction.
I find it really stupid that a huge amount of squirrels are usually more deadly than one heavily equipped skilled warrior.
Also I think there should be added more variety to weapons damage.
I thought of something like that:
-Sharp = most ranged weapons - pistols, automatic rifles, bows and swords.
-Blunt = shotgun, clubs, maces, hammers. Maybe it's not perfect for shotgun to do blunt damage but i think it would add diversity(it would be sth like buckshot cloud).
-Piercing = hunting and sniper rifles, daggers, spears, javelins.
-Slash = axes, minigun
The idea is that it would work like that:
-Sharp = good base damage, average armor piercing, high bleeding rate
-Blunt = low base damage, high armor piercing(it's more about avoiding damage, in medieval time weapons like morning star were made to kill people in heavy armor by doing impact damage), no bleeding, chance to stun enemies.
-Piercing = good base damage, high armor piercing, high bleeding rate
-Slash = highest base damage, low armor piercing, high bleeding rate.
Shotgun doesn't really fit the describtion for blunt damage. It doesnt really suit it. It should do high base damage, no armor piercing and have chance to stun.
Names are just an example. Armor and clothing would have two stats, chance to avoid damage(like it has now) and flat reduction.
It would be possible to negate all damage if you are wearing good power armor and you are being attacked by 20 angry naked tribespeople with bare fists. Which makes sense.
It would work like rock,paper,scissors. You want heavy piercing weapon vs someone with armor, but it will be much better to use some heavy flat damage weapon vs someone with light armor.
I think also the chance of avoiding damage should be highly nerfed for armor and clothes, and increaces for the envoirment. So it would be much more important to use covers to avoid damage and use armors to negate or lower damage. It would highly increase the value of good equiped, well trained pawns and importance of using surrodings.
@edit
Also I think there should be added the ability to have a side arm. The game also should have standard shields. Shields wouldn't negate any damage but they would higly increase the chance to avoid damage(they would work more like enviroment than armor)
The melee weapons should be divided into 2 groups - two-handed and one-handed.
Two-handed weapons would obviously do much more damage.
One-handed weapons would give us the ability to use shields and become side-arm.
Side-arm would be secondary weapons that can be wielded with range weapons which colonists would switch to when they get into melee range with opponent.
Pages1