Topics

I'm curious why you haven't immigrated to europe, and how many of your friends have....genuinely curious.

Then again, attitudes are changing : I wonder if perhaps lack of mental health services may indeed be a glaring weakness in the system : refugees who go through nasty crap are not stable, similar to a colonist suffering from several family deaths always burning down the colony.

... This is certainly something to consider.

EDIT : for the record, this was snipped and moved from another post somewhere else, where someone spoke about being in syria and not being able to buy rimworld due to syria being at war, or something.

Currently the damage types are almost entirely similar : cuts, bullet holes, burns, bruises.

The only real difference I've noticed is rate of bleeding for certain things, possibly infections : but blunt weapons for instance, rip things off very easily : even fists. A punch in the finger can rip off a finger on a bad day, when in reality, it would break out of the socket, and be unusable, but not ruined.

I wonder if a larger difference could be made, simulating perhaps chance to penetrate deeper tissue and rip things entirely off, based on damage and damage type, and different effects on different body parts depending on type. Like I think a knife to the gut would be more effective than a club, while a club would be more effective than a knife : sharp vs soft tissue, blunt vs bones, all that jazz. This could diversify issues I think, with broken bones, mishealed bones, neurological damage from cuts, sort of diversifying the effects of "scars".

The health system is certainly complex, but the differences between cuts, bullet holes, burns, laser blasts, and bruises, is only the bleeding rate and title as far as I can see, as well as internal organ damage risk, for blunt weapons, since blunt weapons do not penetrate skin : but I feel it could be revamped some.

Currently infected wounds have 3 options. Wait and see if its survived, amputate the ENTIRE region, or let them die : only problem is, this does not help with things like brains, torsos, necks, or other elements

So I propose another option : scooping out / excising the infection. Similar to amputation, except harder, riskier, higher risk of infection (ironically) and takes whatever percentage the infection is, and subtracts that percentage from the body part (a torso at 50% infection would lose 20hp). Possibly even make it 66% percent of the infection rate, so trying to scoop on a 80% infection isn't immediately a failure for an already injured part.

The area would then have a long term wound with it, very likely to scar over, but not entirely impossible to heal up.

In essence this would give us a chance for core infections, of vital organs, or the torso, brain, neck, or other parts : far from ideal, very messy, but leaves us with a plan D to use for colonists IF you are quick on it. It would also give a chance to save limbs, except it would end up being a waste of time and resources if it fails, or gets infected again, as eventually the limb runs out of flesh to scoop out.

Theres a lot of talk here and there about issues with the relationship system, and also the faction system, of things like looks mattering so much, and how factions can be made best buddies with money, and recently comments over a17 where the price of a caravan was raised, compared to the old means, and how this compares to donating money to BUY relationship points to then ASK for a caravan.

These issues all stem from 1 issue in my opinion : both these systems are somewhat 1 dimensional.

There is no really situational aspect to any of the things which effect these things : A donation to a faction will make them just as happy the first time, as if you kill and cannibalize their caravan just for kicks, then release prisoners and pay them to be buddies again : something both unrealistic, and static.

I personally think something which would be useful to apply to factions, relationships, and thoughts, is perhaps modifiers, and thought types : similar to the treatment that was given to joy hobbies and drug resistances.

My idea is, certain thoughts, events in relationships, and to factions could have modifiers to others, so having a deep conversation with an ugly person might reduce the penalty of them being ugly, and a lover might be harder pressed to dislike their lover for petty things, and also include a sort of history aspect to things so history has an effect beyond just long expiring effects like deaths are now.

But regardless of my ideas, I think its a cause of concern going forward, that over-simplicity is causing problems themselves : You cannot add more complicated game-play to these aspects when the mechanics to do so are still so very simple which seems to be a problem slowly creeping up on rimworld for those 3 elements. And this is why you get for instance, a staggeringly ugly person who, even if he cured cancer, people would only mildly tolerate : which is a bit odd.

What do you guys think? Is there an issue with these mechanics being over simplistic, leading to these problems? How could we improve these things? What ideas or thoughts do you have? I know it would be a lot of work to change these things, but frankly my concern is these problems might keep growing further in the longer this is left.

I'd love to hear what you have to say about this.

This isn't new, but this article made me shake my head...

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/11/us/michael-brown-ferguson-police-shooting-video.html?src=trending

Essentially it argues there was a time the day of, where brown entered the store he later robbed, and was.. ...trying to sell weed for cigarillos?! Except this isn't even the case : he got told to put the shit back, and it wasn't agreed upon. They say this was "omited evidence" : but what is it evidence of? Him trying to sell weed for cigarellos? I don't see the point....

....I wish people could be reasonable and actually LOOK INTO THINGS, and do research. Like see the original video, which happened later, of him robbing the place..

This case should be dead : its been years, and this is the WEAKEST criticism of this case : its trying to say the robbery later didn't happen because well... I guess he tried to buy it with weed?

Its such an incredibly weak argument, and trying to dredge up a case which already came to resolution...

... nytimes really is fake news

and a reminder, brown assaulted the cop before being shot...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UMnMmxZgTlg

Today I learned, "full colony" debug function also summons in tons of fertilized eggs of all those creatures.

I figured this out because I was goofing around with full colony (saves time for testing) and then when I came back after playing with fire, they were EVERYWHERE.

I took a total of 10 minutes using the lightning strike tool just to clear all the buggers out

Mass spawning animal eggs...not even once 

I got this idea after playing a bunch of xcom, and had an idea : What if mood was 2 things : short, and long term?

Long term could be more or less as it is now, slow to change, a culmination of factors determining ones LONG TERM mental health

And a new one : short term.

Basicallys someones nerve in any given situation, raised by many factors, and lowered by other, but in more IMMEDIATE ways. Fed, clean, unharmed? nerve is good! hungry, bleeding, in combat? Nerve lowers. Just killed an enemy? Nerve goes up! ally killed? Nerve down.

In addition, starting nerve is based  upon ones long term mental health.

so a guy whos canabalizing, had his wife die, and is sleeping on the floor will be easier to crack under pressure than a person getting 3 squares a day, warm clean bed, with friends and family, with time off.

it could ALSO have unique combinations, like something RAISING nerve, but lowering mental health, or raising mental health, but lowering nerve (think someone facing their fears, and collapsing due to fear, but being a stronger person for it)

This would be real nice, and could help the mental health game being almost entirely static, right now, like a digital pet, and more like someone who its helpful to keep happy, but its not strictly needed, so much as it makes you more flexible.

You could also potentially add performance modifiers for nerve levels, which would be interesting...

And, as an added benefit, you could add XCOM esq combat panic, without someone having a long term meltdown.

This would help the reactions be more realistic, breaking from actual EVENTS, rather than just having a shitty day overall.

How I imagine it to interact, is MOST things effect nerve, providing either an ongoing hit (like "cold" or "hot" now) or a short term hit, with limited stacking (attacked, ect). But before this, total nerve is calculated by mental health, being slightly more, or slightly less, depending on the mental health of the pawn.

Mental health effects are more rare, and generally more long term effects : nothing shorter than a day, for instance, but also effected by drugs. Deaths, victories, relationships, medical stuff, all effects it.

In turn, this would also provide 2 means of breaks : psychosis / sociopathy, or similar stuff, JUST for mental health being low (stuff like self harming habits, outward aggression, ect) and actual BREAKS, from immediate stress.

This would mean getting shot at could make one hunker down, go berserk, freeze up, while they would normally be mentally well, OR, a person whos high off flake being good to go for a fight, but also a bit less controllable in smaller ways, due to fucked up mental health from drugs.

Basically an idea for treatment of wounds to help flesh out the fleshy damages coding to damaged flesh : Make it so wounds can have their infection / scar chance lowered when cleaned, or otherwise tended to. Essentially, its an ongoing treatment, daily, to clean the wound, which provides a bonus against the scar / infection chance, but on the down side, is very time consuming, essentially multiplying the treatment time needed by doctors, by how many times they are cleaned.

On one hand, early on, without medicine, you have a chance to really heal someone reliably, and the rush for herbal meds, and others is less severe.

On the other, latergame, medicine becomes EXTREMELY important for a bustling colony, BUT, players still have the option to clean up open wounds to help with surgery, nasty wounds, or other issues

In other-words, basically implement the "disease" treatment to wounds, as another factor in healing quality.

For those who have not heard, in chigago a young white man, whom was mentally disabled (with ADD, schizophrenia) was kidnapped, beaten, tortured, lacerated in his face, forced to drink toilet water, by 4 black adults, whom said "fuck white people" and "fuck donald trump" during the torture.

Thankfully it SOUND as if these idiots will be charged, but its disturbing at this happening...

This, and similar crimes have been surprisingly common (though not this severe) directed at white people, or those who do not meet left leaning views. Racism towards whites has ramped up, been excused, been promoted, and the media seems to not give a damn in many cases. ( people on CNN said it shouldn't be called a hate crime and it was just kids (young adults) being rowdy. )

We really need to call out, and punish these aggression : we should treat people equally. This also means equal punishment, and equal sympathy of victims.

Surely, if the races were reversed, there would be a public lynching.  Yet people defend the attackers.... Things are insane, and it NEEDS to change, before things go anarchistic with backlash. And certainly the general "fuck white people" sentiment does not help when it comes to preventing this.

So looking on the health issues long and hard, I've noticed several things....

-Torso has the SMALLEST health, for how likely it is to be hit...most deaths are from a "destroyed torso" whatever that means
-theres a line between being able to walk on a mangled leg, and having it straight RIPPED OFF... Really, while legs can be ripped off, I think 1, legs would be more durable, and being unable to walk would happen long before a leg got blown off
-scars seem like an arbitrary dice roll

This is why I suggest this...

-health of all externals is increased, while the effects of damage is INCREASED....so a leg can be damaged with say, 2 shotgun blasts, and TECHNICALLY be connected by a few shreds of sinnew, but be completely useless. It would be attatched, and you could have someone in the hospital for several days trying to let it heal, but they WONT be walking for a while
-Torso would have much higher health, and the damage done would be expressed in bleeding, and manipulation / moving hits. Rarely would you see the torso "broken". but a dozen shots in the torso would still cause bleed out, and organ damage.
-Large traumatic injuries, going to the point of severe incapacitation (leg falling under say, 30% of new hp limit) would have a very high chance of developing a scar, not because of "bad medical care", or a dice role, but because it was THAT fucked up by the injury. Because, you know, generally extremely traumatic injuries means the body never QUITE works right again.
-If treated badly, mangled, badly damaged extremities will be useless, and will REQUIRE amputation, to prevent infection, or just to chop off a useless, mangled piece of flesh which isn't working anymore, and slowing the colonist down. This would also make severe injuries more severe, so even if you bandage someone, that MIGHT not be the end of it.
-It will take several days to tell if a limb is badly screwed up enough to need to be amputated, so theres a very real issue on "should I wait for the best, or cut my loses?"

This way one, death by "torso destruction" is less of a thing, and 2, amputated extremities are less likely, but FUCKED UP extremities are more common. That and the medical system is more long term injury risk, and less "immediate maiming / death risk" for injuries. Most injuries could be survived, unless something essential was hit, or bleed out / infection set in.

[FREEDOOM IS AN ALTERATION OF DOOM 1 / 2 WITH ENTIRELY NEW ASSETS AND EFFECTS, ENTIRELY LEGAL TO DISTRIBUTE AND COPY, FOR THOSE WONDERING. FREEDOOM IS NOT PIRACY, ITS A DIFFERENT, OPEN-SOURCE GAME USING THE SAME CODE LANGUAGE]

So someone made a doom mod out there for donald trumps campaign, and its pretty damn brilliant, especially for anyone who at all detests SJW bullshit.

To run it, you will need doom 2 (freedoom 2 will also work, but its a little wonky, for anyone whos broke but still want a look, without spending money. FREEDOOM IS AN ALTERATION OF DOOM 1 / 2 WITH ENTIRELY NEW ASSETS AND EFFECTS, ENTIRELY LEGAL TO DISTRIBUTE AND COPY, FOR THOSE WONDERING. FREEDOOM IS NOT PIRACY, ITS A DIFFERENT, OPEN-SOURCE GAME USING THE SAME CODE LANGUAGE)

Mod is pretty brilliant, contains plenty of sound clips from bernie sanders, clinton, trump, as well as plenty of real stuff from sjw snowflakes. Not only that but it has a difficulty called "social justice warrior" where no monsters attack "safe space rooms" are available to the player, and the player gets a harmless squirtgun instead of the standard pistol. on-top of that all trump supporting posters / fliers are replaced with hugbox sjw stuff, like privilege checking pamphlets, my little pony posters, steven universe posters, kill all men posters, ect.

whether you see this and get triggered, laugh your ass off, or have a good time, its worth checking out.

FREEDOOM LINK (yes, this is legal, before anyone tries to get on me for it)

GZDOOM (its a source port, allowing advanced effects, needed to run trump doom.)

TRUMPDOOM

Instructions for running : put gzdoom EXE in a folder, along with doom2.wad or FREEDOOM2.wad if you dont have the real doom. Click and drag trump doom onto gzdoom EXE, it should run fine.

Well worth the 2 hours I spent exploring it, gotta say... By the way, at least try SJW mode, and try the "last level" in sjw mode... (level 16?) its pretty funny. And its honestly not bad game-play either.

Ok so, I've noticed something...a bit disturbing.

Staggeringly ugly is -80 (?) social, and its almost impossible to recover from. More importantly, this is already past the thresh-hold of enemy. This provides an extremely DISTURBING effect.

If you get a random wanderer to join, whom is staggeringly ugly, you can  STRAIGHT UP MURDER THEM, and everyone gets an instant mood bonus for "rival died". Sure, a small "colonist died" hits first, but this expires first, and is left with a large bonus, and you can even use this to make people like someone who is otherwise hated colonist to do the job, which I think also gives a relationship buff (woah, steve who killed my wife? well he killed this ugly bastard, so I guess hes ok!)

I know looks are important, but I don't think people would QUITE react this way... In general, looks /  breathing / ugly / any of that needs re-balance I think, at least slightly. I know someone so ugly wouldn't exactly be embraced by open arms, but even on a rim-world, I doubt EVERYONE would be happy if you bashed a random persons face in with a mace just because they were ugly, much less to the point they were happy for weeks.

Its actually enough that, buying a discount staggeringly ugly slave and burning them alive is TOTALLY VIABLE as a strategy for mood, 500 or so gold for several weeks of mood boost is not a terrible idea

I fired an incendiary mortar at filthy tribals, and noticed an odd effect : The continuous seeds coming from the map edge mean the patch of flames never goes out.

there WAS a toxic fallout not long before, which wiped out most plants, which keeps it from being a big sweeping fire, instead its a handful of bushes and trees, with plenty of gaps for seeds to go through.

The end result is a patch of land endlessly on fire. This picture is it being on fire for about a week.

http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=790639426

I can post a saved if absolutely needed, but will have to do it tomorrow.

Birthing currently just involves quickly spawning a few little ones from the pregnant animal, and removing the pregnancy...only this is...really anticlimactic. I noticed this mainly when my sow birthed 3, 3!!! piglets in the middle of hauling a stack of lumber on her back, without skipping a beat. Just shoved them out in the middle of the woods and kept walking.

Really, this got me thinking...birthing could use a bit more detail, at least a brief incapacitation of the animal as its water breaks, and being briefly stuck as it slowly births it, and perhaps a period where the animal just nuzzles and bonds with its child, and possibly a period where the child follows the mother for a few days exclusively.

I'm not sure if any of that sounds like too much, but at least having the "labor" be more laborious than blowing ones nose would be great.

I expected killing someones rival would make someone else like them, considering it gives a mood bonus, but when I killed someone staggeringly ugly (-80 to everyone) nobody liked this person better...shame, because I wanted people to like them.


I expect that, like lovers or family, a social hit would be taken for killing enemies as well as friends.

I find this odd, that human pain would be enjoyable, but not animals... shouldn't there still be a small bonus?

it strikes me now, that body heat is non existent in the game...in reality, its a pretty big factor, closed rooms with no ventilation and lots of people are incredibly hot, which can be either a pain, or very helpful in the cold.

Really, I doubt it would be TOO hard to do, to make humans, and animals generate a very small heat signature. Would be interesting, especially a pack of animals making a barn hot.

Need, choice and consequences!....3 words which are very important, used a lot, and many will say, and agree, we all "need"!

However, I think many misunderstand both of them. Lets dive into them!

First, need. Need is highly subjective. Why? Because the entire concept pretty much comes down to a computer argument of "if x is true, y happens, if x is untrue, z happens".

Stop all the stupid garbledegook and get the point!

patience, the best concepts take longer than 2 minutes to learn. Quite simply, any need in the world, ANY need, can be forgone IF the consequence is accepted. This is a CHOICE. These 2 are linked. See, think of any situation as life like a branching pathway. 2, possibly more paths. IF you go down 1, other paths open, others close. None is one which allows all paths, so you must CHOOSE your path.

You might say you have many needs.... Food...water...friends... respect... dignity... freedom from discrimination... work...

All of these CAN be done without, but have consequences.

Lack of food brings malnutrition, health problems, death. lack or water means dyhydration, health issues, death. Lack of friends and respect limits happyness, and ones social circle, lack of dignity lowers self esteem, discrimination causes social friction, lack or work means a less reliable income...

Every SINGLE thing in life has a need for it, and this need must be filled to attain it, and if the need is NOT filled, there is consequences. Even something as mild as having hotsauce in your fridge is a "need", but the consequence is very low.

These all said, nobody is FORCED to do such things, and can, and do go without, and can cope. Even with something as extreme as death as a consequence, they are not ever FORCED to eat or drink, death is a consequence. This does not prevent someone from CHOOSING say, to forgo eating and dying for a better cause (see the rimworld video "why did it have to be squirrels" where one guy DIED to save others, dying from starvation).

This brings me to the next one, CHOICE. Choice is something we all have, but they always conflict. My choice might effect someone elses choice, just as someone elses effects mine. I can choose to ask a girl out, and she can CHOOSE to reject me. This does not mean I was not given the choice to ask her out, this means I merely had a choice which did not match hers.

This can lead to conflicting situations, but this still does not limit choice. Lets say an employer says you must be a certain way to work in the company. This is not saying the person DOES NOT have the choice to be that way, but merely is given a consequence for failure to GO with such a choice. The person is free to quit the job, find another, or do anything else, but the "need" of work will be compromised by the person. This in and of itself is not bad, as the interaction was voluntary.

The only times this is really immoral is if NEEDS are taken away without any voluntary entrance into social contract. For instance, getting into consensual fights is legal, and moral. Both parties accept terms and conditions, and accept risks (bruises, cuts, injuries) and thus it is fine. Now, if someone BREECHES the contract, this is generally perceived as immoral. If a rule is for "no bellow the belt hits", and a party member kicks someone in the junk, this is a violation. And obviously, people cannot go around beating up people without asking.

Theres also the issue of choices reciprocating. One can choose say, to try and steal my stuff. This is a choice, one that they can make, and I cannot stop them. However, theres a consequence to it. Their needs WILL be altered, due to my choice, and the choice of the police. If someone grabs my bag, and tried to run past, I would tackle them. This is my choice, but as a reaction to theirs. Them complaining for "he hit me!" would fall upon deaf ears, as he had a choice to steal or not, which was not heavily enforced by a large amount of need. If it WAS out of intense need, it would still be reacted to, but with explanation, it might win more sympathy. One stealing to provide for kids when there's no other options is much more sympathetic than one providing for drugs. But regardless, choices make others make THEIR choices. They can choose their choices, but are still put into a place where they are forced to choose.

All of these, make for a very dynamic system. Anyone can make any choice, but others will give consequences. All consequences limit needs,  but choices can be made to best fill these needs.  And again, these choices have consequences.

In the end, being controllers only of ourselves, our bodies, minds, voice, hands, are best controlling OUR choice to either push forward a belief (which is a need) or to satisfy our base needs at the expense of other needs. Going to work takes our need for rest, freedom, but fills our financial need. Eating sweets fills our need for comfort, but takes from our need of a healthy diet. Being in a relationship fills our need for companionship, but takes from our need of freedom.

So rather than focus so much on others and trying to change them (this is THEIR choice, NOT yours) consider the needs of your life, consequences of the world that you might see, and carefully choose. No matter what, there will be consequences, and some needs will not be met SOMEWHERE, but you go for the best hand you can deal with WHAT you are dealt.  You can make gambles, risks, make choices to try and fill other needs, but you put others needs at risk no matter what you do.

So carefully address your needs,  quantify what needs are more, or less important, consider the consequences of all choices from all parties, and make the choice you must. And when it comes, face the consequence.

Oh and remember, consequence is not a negative only thing, being hailed as a hero is a consequence of rescuing a small child. Its still a consequence 

I recently had an interesting exchange on here, where me and another user had a suprising exchange, on the topic of rape, and suicide as a possible addition to rimworld.

What made this interesting, is both of us were VERY pleasant to each other, and both were very SURPRISED by this. Both of us disagreed, both of us had different views, but neither of us insulted, called names, and were very pleasant to each other despite apposing viewpoints.

I will say, this came to make a realization for me : It was NOT so much that neither of us insulted each other, so much as neither of us PERCEIVED criticism as an insult. We both pointed out flaws in each others ideas, different opinions, different views on points we made, but at no point did it get hostile, and the perceptions of the arguments is the reason, I'm certain.

What do I mean by this? Here is an example.

Heres bob 

Bob is a nice guy overall, but dresses badly, not fitting, ect, not out of money being tight, but simply being unaware.

His friend, jim, might notice this, and as a friend, INFORM him of this.

Now, bob can take this 2 ways. One, bob can get highly offended that jim is suggesting he cannot dress, and cause a ruckus, OR, 2, Bob can take the criticism to heart, examine it, perhaps criticize the criticism, thank jim and move on...

This is the fine distinction I think MANY do not understand : The concept of "only a friend will tell you when your face is dirty". A friend has 2 choices in this scenario, to either tell you that your face is dirty, or leave you oblivious. Now yes, the friend COULD be mistaken, bob COULD be wearing clothes funny due to an injury or something, but should criticism be withheld on the off chance of these kinds of situations? NO! Such things cause highly superficial, and opaque relationships, where stuff is just not talked about, and nothing deep is mentioned. In a situation where bob say, has injuries which he dresses funny because, he can just sit jim down, and explain the situation.  Yes, this is scary, yes this makes bob  vulnerable, but it also makes bob and jim closer friends.

I think more people need to think this way, even for ideas which seem  offensive so long as they aren't presented in a vile way (ie "fuck you faggot" or "kill yourself retard") Should be considered. EVEN IF THEY ARE INCORRECT, or PERCEIVED as incorrect, this shouldn't shut down discussion. The best ideas come from discussions and an open marketplace of ALL ideas. The worst that might happen is someone is incorrect, you point out why, having a long discussion about it. And the person being criticized should take any points brought up into consideration as well, not as a personal afront to THEM, but a flaw of the IDEA being pointed out. Most importantly, objective things such as facts (water freezes at 32 degrees) Should be considered more than subjective opinions (this is offensive!), but even things PERCEIVED as facts should not be immune to testing. lets say a guy said he had proof he could get water to withstand  temperatures as low as -10 c without freezing using say, radio wavelengths... I would be skeptical, of course, but I would consider the information, and ask for results. I wouldn't IMMEDIATELY say "wow, you retard you think water doesn't freeze at 0 c? moron!", I would hear him out first, see his observations and findings, and go from there.

Guess this is a bit of a rant, relating to how I've been treated on other sites for a few of my opinions, but its still good to share I figure. Always examine new information people. As Einstein said, "many tests can prove my theory right, but it only takes 1 to prove me wrong".

An idea for a very late game event, where an astroid hits part of the planet, and sends it in a different direction, with a different tilt. the effect of which being changing the entire planets seasons and temperature ranges permanently. In the desert? might slowly turn into the jungle. In the artic? Might slowly turn into the tropics. In the tropics? Might freeze up into an ice sheet...

Would be neat as an EXTREMELY late game event, like MINIMUM 1.5 years in.