Messages

My thoughts are... This is the perfect sort of situation for a proof of concept mod. If it's really good, maybe tynan will see the value of adding it to the game, but honestly it seems like a lot of time investment for a feature that many people might never see (if you never settle in an "urban" tile and never raid one).

I could see some potential for linking it to various world events though. It'd make sense for various "stash" events or "psychic wave" type stuff to come from cities specifically.

[edit:]

I pirated the game originally back in A4 when there wasn't enough content to justify a purchase. Since then, I've bought it, my girlfriend bought it, three of my friends have bought it and at least one of them has had three of her friends buy it. (and yes, a few of these people pirated it to try it out before buying it themselves)

This isn't the first game that I can tell this sort of story about (I pirated FTL and have since bought 12 copies of it over the years). I don't give a shit about anti-piracy arguments because those arguments are directed at children who don't have money and wouldn't buy video games anyway.

The opposite of piracy is not "sale". The opposite of piracy is "playing a different game instead".

edit:

What ever happened to shareware?  I thought it was a great idea.
...
Why did this model never take off?

Main reason: Game devs aren't marketers. So AAA studios hate pirates because their games typically aren't worth asking price, and indie studios hate pirates because they heard they're supposed to hate pirates. Doesn't take much marketing know-how to understand WOM is the most cost-effective and lust-worthy marketing on the planet (there's a reason it's all about "viral marketing" these days... instead of paying people to advertise for you, pay one person to advertise in a way where the people who see the advertisement do the rest of the advertising for free).

Hell, it has taken off. That's what Let's Plays are. You think most LPers on youtube buy their own games? Sometimes they do, yeah, but if a dev shoots them a free title and says "I'm a fan and I'd like it if you'd try this out and consider a video on it"... They're seeking some powerful WOM marketing.

In my friend group that plays, we've always viewed biome as a sort of "map difficulty" (separate from storyteller) and agree that forests are "easy mode". Nothing wrong with that, we also enjoy playing on basebuilder sometimes, because that can be fun in a different way than playing on super harsh settings.

Play temperate forest if you want a relatively easy map that helps you out. Play rainforest if you want disease to be the main map difficulty and occasional heatwaves. Play boreal if you want cold snaps and early food supply to be the main problem. Play arid if you want heat and wood to be problems. Play a flat map if you want metal to be more precious, and a mountainous/hilly one if you want it to be easy. If you want to grow potatoes in gravel and question your decision-making capabilities, play ice sheet.

Essentially I'm repeating what Limdood said: The map difficulty is what it is, if you don't like the convenience of plentiful wood, play a different biome.

Am I correct in assuming that manhunting pack numbers are scaled according to at least their size, or their attack power? It seems something along that line, but not sure as it could just be a coincidence of Randy being random or my memory not being too good. But either way, oh boy, the faster smaller animals are WAY more devastating than the slow large ones when they arrive in a huge zerg that my colonists can't run away from (especially true when not on base), lol. Just thought I'd throw that out here since we where on the subject of manhunting animals. xD It makes it a nice two in one event, where one with large slow animals = free meat and leather event / while one with small fast animals = hide or get ganked event, or dwarf fortress level of FUN if you like xD

My thoughts on how to deal with this (haven't experienced it so just ideas): Forced-target with auto turrets individually, they'll die in the explosion when they horde on top of them.

Alternatively you could possibly handle them with a molotov, assuming your base doesn't go up in flames it might work? Depends on the situation.

I can fully agree with the cannibalism being resorted to too quickly. The problem isn't that humans resort to cannibalism, it's that they resort to it as soon as they're at the level of "starving", meaning as soon as their food gauge is empty. That's easy to do when you're on a "as soon as it comes in it goes out" level of colony early on.

What would make more sense to me would be for them to eat prepared human meat at the current stage, and then be willing to eat a corpse raw at say 30% malnutrition. I can understand it as a last resort, but it doesn't feel like my colonists are using it as a last resort.

Also I still think that acquired traits would be cool and that cannibalism would be a prime example of a good one to do.

This is the point. Animals don't refrain from incest. They have no idea of the concept.
But this will stop your animal production.
Taming isn't useful anymore.

Yeah it is, it's useful to get your initial specimens for a population of a native species. Just like always. The animal handling skill is still used for training intelligent beasts though, so one function serves one purpose and another serves another purpose.

[EDIT:]

I just want to comment real quick that the idea of people caring about sexuality in a year past 3000 is ridiculous. People will have fucked things so much stranger than an ass or a pussy by then.

EDIT: From a game design perspective, make it not count towards the limit on traits and I think you're fine.

I think everyone's realized in some respect or another that social needs adjusting. So far I've just noticed that once the wedding fever starts, it won't stop until everyone's paired up.

you shouldnt be naysaying design suggestions just because they can be exploited, its like saying you wont eat food because it can spoit :\

No, it's like saying you shouldn't eat arsenic because it's not very healthy.

well the main exploit has often been that enemies rarely recognize trap areas and killboxes.
sapper raids were supposed to tackle this AI derp, but sapper AI can easily be exploited as well since they tend to ignore ambushers. (edit : sapper raids also tend to have fewer raiders and they often send them in waves, which makes them easier to deal with)

so i think every raid should just always have sappers (ie : sapper AI for grenadiers would only activate once they are already inside home zone of player, but act like normal raider AI prior to this. they would also have the added bonus of having tons of fellow raiders in a normal raid).

i also think bows and thrown weapons should be able pass over walls in any unroofed area (but with an aim penalty).

i also think raiders should be more able to recognize killboxes by checking number of deaths of each location. this AI death map will tell raiders which areas to avoid, like making "restricted zones" for raiders. this death map will be updated after each raid.

and since every raid is gonna bring sappers with them, it doesn't matter if players hide under a mountain or if they use power hatches or whatever. raiders would always path using the death map as a guide.

I like the idea of a deathmap, especially as a component to a larger AI overhaul. Another problem is raiders sending absolutely silly people at you that add "fuzz" to the point value used for raids. The smarter the loadouts are about distributing points, the less raids where a dozen people with excellent shivs and superior shields try to dig through a wall.

Better loot for the player is easily matched by smarter AI and better loadouts for attackers. I'd be much more intimidated by three assault rifles held by competent marksmen than the current "brawler with a sniper rifle" randomness. And it's much easier to balance the game around consistency in threat level at point thresholds.

I think the easiest and best way to handle the "increased willpower" over time would just be a blue event: "[Colonist] has hardened up over the seasons and gained the _____ trait.".

Which really could be used for a lot of things for colonists to gain positive/negative traits as time goes on, using the same type of "memories" used for art. Forcing cannibalism might prompt someone to go cannibal, installing a prosthetic on someone in a horrible mood might make them revolt it, etc.

I generally go for marble because it's got a slightly higher beauty modifier for art/craftsmanship bonuses, everything else being equal. I also will favor slate higher than the others because I like how dark it is (I also like sandstone's look but usually play on colder maps without sand).

For comparison for your parents, it's based heavily off of Firefly, and I'd say that Firefly is in all respects less child-appropriate than Rimworld is. Firefly is rated TV-14, though I wouldn't necessarily let every 14 year old watch that show. I'd be fine with most 14 year olds playing rimworld though.

The trick to melee is damage thresholds. Because the melee'd body part is random, taking out a hit location is what's important. 19 damage is significantly less than 20, because 20 removes a hand that 19 damaged. Melee weapon damage is partially based off of quality, so good crafting can bring worse materials (i.e.: Steel) into the range of feasibility. An excellent quality steel longsword still does (IIRC) 24 damage, and melee accuracy is skill-based.

http://rimworldwiki.com/wiki/Table_of_Human_Body_Parts

This table shows you the thresholds. As you can see, 30 damage is the most important threshhold to hit (especially for deadfall traps, if you choose to use them).

Something important to keep in mind is that damage reduction is not a concept present in rimworld. If an attack hits, it hits for full damage. So some well armed melee units in a group can very quickly sweep through some raiders if you kit them out properly. (That said, I only use melee as a supplementary tactic, charge/assault rifles are my mainstay).

[you have decided]

A foregone conclusion isn't really drama, it's just a different death.

It's not a foregone conclusion.  It's just what you have decided you'll always do because it's "game-optimal".  I suppose you also always murder lone travelers to steal the fillings in their teeth, just because you can get away with it i.e. "game-optimal".

If you're not interested in the meaning of the lives and deaths of your "pawns", if you think of them as nothing more than pieces on a game board, tools to help you "win", you just mayyyybe have missed the point of the game.

You keep insisting I've missed the point of the game because you've got some need to be mightier than thou on an internet forum, but you're not interested in me saying there's drama in "do I work to save them or get rid of them now". You're just keen on playing general hospital and need to be condescending about it for some reason.

Wow ... the decision to euthanize a functional vegetable, or keep them alive and as comfortable as possible ... some of you don't think that's dramatic?  You guys are freakin monsters.

I'm using vegetable interchangeably. A brain-injured colonist can still move around and do stuff (though at levels like 3/10, they might starve to death if too far from the food), but a shattered spine leaves them paralyzed in bed. And like I said in my post above, a foregone conclusion isn't really drama, it's just a different death.