Messages

stop reading everything with a negative voice. which you are doing because of your point by point rebuttal

Sigh.. I'm trying to explain this to you as calmly and kindly as possible in order to help you understand the flaws in your argument and to further your understanding of the subject matter. I'm genuinely sorry if you feel as though I've been condescending or attacking you as that wasn't my intention, you're doing a poor job of interpreting my various forms of emphasis but that in of itself is my fault.

... "it wasn't worth doing even then" thats your view ...

This is less subjective than you're making it out to be. Total circumnavigation of Zzzt events(which is what I was referring to in the first place) required you to use exclusively consistent sources of power (Geothermal/Generators, or an impractical number of wind turbines which I'm going to ignore for the sake of sensibility), the cost in resources and the value of these are both high, as is the manpower requirement of Wood(And now chemfuel) generators.

The result is objectively extremely inefficient due to the cost/manpower/resources and associated raid size increases compared to the comparatively trivial -and completely controllable- small fires.

Its a figure of speech it. Just my observation and opinion you yet again don't need to share my view.

The trouble is that.. again this isn't as subjective as you're making it out to be. You're arguing that changes to the Zzzt event are a slippery slope that will lead to a less desirable gaming experience. That's at best a flimsy argument and at worst deliberately divisive.

I genuinely liked the old Zzzt. It limited battery size, provided a valid use for switches (backup batteries)
---
These are still just as useful. ect.

My original point which I'll reiterate here was that the new Zzzzt event functions almost identically to the old one. Your original point was that it is NOW so harmless that it no longer provides all of the counter play that the original did. I tried my hardest to explain to you why this was not the case by explaining to you that the exact differences mechanically. 

---

At this point you essentially devolve into claiming that I'm trolling and shouting at you rather than having a discussion with you which apparently in your mind means that I'm automatically incorrect and have nothing to contribute.

I genuinely don't know how you came to this conclusion but I'm sorry that's the case. I really would've liked to have been able to continue a civil conversation about this using logic and reason.

I hope you change your mind :/

---

I think the main problem with the conduit overload event is that there's no chance for it to fail. If you have some kind of electrical network containing conduits, it will always happen. So the outcome is mostly the same.

It's a case of, well, it's simple. And simple ideas can work for creating stories, but complicated ideas can be better.

For example, instead of having one overload point on a big network, there could be several, and the amount of damage could be divided between them. On a small network, the overload might be handled better by the conduit, and fail to produce flames of doom.

This sort of nuance means that it feels less like you're being screwed by the game, and more like 'if I make big and complicated electrical networks, I had better be prepared to maintain them.'

I suppose that depends on how you define "Chance to fail".
If you insulate all of your conduits within 1 wide corridors fires can only spread as far as you choose to let them. In fact I think it's theoretically possible to prevent all but a 1x1 fire by alternating doors and open conduits in hallways like that.

I agree that the event is simple, but complexity isn't always the same as quality. A squirrel going mad and attacking you is simple but it can generate an interesting story anyway. As can a small electrical fire which has unintended consequences as a result of poor preparation.

When it comes to nuance though... I feel the level of complexity outweighs the benefits beyond what already exists. As it stands if you store large quantities of electricity you had better be prepared to maintain them. Because 6 batteries worth of electrical fire in a poor location is a fairly serious consequence.

Well no, I am not saying that you should be able to completely deal with it. The old Zzzt you could work around at a huge cost in steal and components.

Right away there's already a stumbling block with this line of logic. That huge cost in steel and components was just that - A huge cost that far out-weighed the benefits. It was already cheaper in manpower, resources, and raid size to circumnavigate Zzzt events by simple base design ( Insulated conduit corridors ) rather than by excessive power generation. And it wasn't worth doing even then.

That, is the SOLE solution that has been removed from Zzzt events. The only way you could mitigate Zzzt events in A17 that you can't in A18 ( by having them not happen at all in this case ) was to not use batteries.

I posted the thread because It feels like we are on a slippery slope from when I started playing in A16.

Trying to think of a kind way to say this...slippery slopes are typically considered a logical fallacy because it's very hard (read:almost impossible) to prove that they will have the doomsday-style consequences people use to justify their concern.

It limited battery size,

Explosion size is still determined by excess power.

provided a valid use for switches (backup batteries)

These are still just as useful.
In fact to save some time - That same cheesy strategy works and the ONLY difference in the intensity (danger/threat) of the event is ONE broken conduit.

Now why bother working it out you cannot avoid it, so meh just build the bloody conduit and sit back and wait.

You're arguing that because something is inevitable that it's not worth reacting to or mitigating. I'd like to remind you that the previous Zzzt event was just as harmless as it is now.

By that logic you shouldn't bother to clean your clothes, they're just going to get dirty again.
Or don't bother drying yourself after a shower, you're just going to get rained on.
Don't bother steering your car, car crashes are inevitable.

Part of the suggested solution I keep on seeing is fire proof your base. Really, fire proof your base you say ?!? Who doesn't fire proof their base it is a redundant argument for a fix for this. Like a Zzzt event is the only thing that could ever possibly start a fire, good grief.

The reason people keep pointing this out is because the ENTIRE event is trivial and your notion that this is a slippery slope feels unfounded to them. They point out that that you can circumnavigate your stated unwanted consequences of this event through simple logical thought because they think you might need that advice.

I.. really can't agree with you on this one Vlad.

For starters I think you're misusing the word "Agency". Your personal definition in this context seems to be "The ability to completely prevent this from happening" which.. is not really what agency is.

There are a wide variety of ways you can impact how Zzzzt events effect you, all of which are active decisions you can make and that will always have an impact on the situation.

The ability to PREVENT something from happening is not the same as the ability to React To, or Modify the results of something.

You can no longer prevent Zzzzt events, but you can still reduce them to their pre-change levels of harmlessness due to the OVERWHELMING amount of agency the nature of the event provides.


---


Additionally I think it's worth pointing out at this stage that Zzzzt events were already essentially harmless even if you did nothing more than build out of stone and not place conduits all over your valuable flammables. And perhaps limit your battery usage to sane levels.

Frankly the largest change to the entire event is that it no longer immediately gibs a conduit forcing you to replace it. Whoopy freaking do.

If someone is genuinely willing to argue that the experience of playing "Where's my broken conduit" after a power fault was what drove their enjoyment of Rimworld then feel free, but I'd be amazed if anyone would beyond simply wanting to be a contrarian.

If you pre-suppose that all objects are in their most manageable form then the question of size is broadly ignorable but I understand where you're coming from.

In my mind the issue isn't so much the question of realism but rather the fact that the manipulation/body size/weight/hauling interactions are incomplete.

From a mechanical standpoint it's more complicated to implement volume in addition to mass for every object and then balance accordingly. Additionally that doesn't add much to the gameplay in question.

For those unaware the carry(hauling) capacity of pawns/animals is affected by their Manipulation and Body size. The default is 75 for humans (and dogs) while larger animals or pawns with higher manipulation (bionics/drugs ect) can(technically) carry more.

The problem is that the vast majority of items only stack to 75 with some rare exceptions like Hay which is not small(Unlike Silver/Uranium/ect which due to their size allow for 750 rather than 75 to be hauled simultaneously).

The result is that large animals such as Elephants who have a whopping 300 potential carry capacity simply can't haul more than 75 of any given item. Which is a real shame given the upkeep involved in keeping a tamed elephant and training it to haul.

---

Now a dirty solution to this ( and one that has been modded ) is to simply increase the stack size of most objects - which does work.

However it doesn't really get to the crux of the problem for me - Rimworld has a bunch of great systems but its storage/stockpile system is really lacking. Throwing everything on the floor is simply bonkers, as is only picking up one shirt and moving it from one stockpile to another when you could trivially carry 10 or 30.

Rimworld really desperately needs a storage and hauling solution and it can be as simple as putting things into boxes which hold more than their tile footprint. And allowing pawns to pick up and carry more than one object/stack of things at a time. Even if it requires something like a wheelbarrow to do it.

Given that every object already has a weight it's especially odd that hauling is limited by stack size instead of by weight.

---

Anyway I'm getting pretty off topic - The long story short is that large animals and bionic limbs don't (in practice) affect the amount a pawn can haul which in the case of larger animals broadly makes them even less useful than their smaller counterparts before you factor in hauling frequency/food intake ratios.

I'd really love to see Scyther blades changed.. They've never worked very well because they destroy the Manipulation ( and subsequently the chance to hit ) of the pawn.

In the vast majority of cases adding a scyther blade is less effective than just using a steel club.. Let alone a longsword. And that's before we even mention plasteel melee weapons.


I love the idea of a maniac brawler with blades for hands but in practice they're barely more deadly than someone with a piece of wood.

It's especially noticeable now that the melee system has more depth to it.

the research requirement of min five to create Vancidium needs to be removed. just increase the crafting requirement because the skill decays and eventually you will no longer be able to make late game bionics because of this

Just use the madskills mod because the current skills decaying "feature" is pretty stupid.

Given that skills only decay when above 10 I'm not precisely sure what the issue is.

The late game nature of Vancidium and the incredible expense involved in crafting it makes it hard to imagine a situation where you're unable to craft Vancidium because you don't have the research skill required anywhere in your colony.

Even if your colonists CONSTANTLY die and skills aren't maintainable AND you've researched everything the low requirement (5) means that a reasonable portion of recruits will be able to craft it anyway. Any recruit with 5 or more research skill can simply skill up crafting to 8.

The only real issue I have with the social fights is that they tend to scar eyes.
It takes a lot of punches to incapacitate someone and social fights only seem to end when someone is down. The chance for some serious eye-gouging is fairly high.

Wouldn't be so bad if there was some form of armor before power armor helmets that actually covered the eyes.
Some sort of Goggle mod may be required at some point

Currently none of the prosthetic legs fit Polar/Grizzly bears.

I can't quite express how sad it makes me that I can't make Robo-Bears.

You can find the exact effects of game difficulty by going to your Rimworld folder.

Mods->Core->Defs->DifficultyDefs->Difficulties

Open that XML folder and you'll get a list of all the difficulty modifiers.

he is human

Have a beer, play some billiards, play some horseshoes, eat some chocolate,  maybe a little chess, take a look for that distant star, enjoy the joy time, for the work schedule is approaching.

Aye, stop eating human flesh, clean up your room, work the fields - All the good stuff

[every]

You're not thinking about this logically. This doesn't negatively affect your game except in very specific circumstances.

Mood states are -very nearly- binary meaning that your colonists are either breaking down (0% productivity) or they're not (Very nearly 100% productivity).
Negative mood modifiers have almost no impact on a pawn unless it directly causes them to break down. The % based workspeed modifiers for very low or high moods are tiny.

Because being hungry is a -8 and eating every day is mandatory it's trivial to assume that eating on the floor immediately and suffering the -4 penalty (which in reality is +4 given the circumstances) is a significant improvement in colonist efficiency.
Walking to a table that is outside a colonist's search area involves a significant portion of time that they could spend doing literally anything else. You have to compare the time spent walking to the efficiency lost due to the tiny mood modifier. It's a non-contest.


For comparison think about comparing your meals being eaten off the ground to NPD meals which are also -4. Colonists won't carry NPD'd meals so they're forced to go back to it and use it every time they need to eat.However this means they'll always eat at a table and chair (Unless your base layout is asinine).
The result is the same -4 mood modifier (For much longer actually - NPD meal's penalty lasts 2x as long as eating off the ground) but you've lost a crapload of time every day because they had to walk back to the NPD to eat.

There's an argument to be made about the quality of the environment that you're forcing your colonists to eat in but most environmental modifiers are incredibly short-lived, their duration is entirely the speed at which it takes a colonist's mood to degrade.
I really don't rate it - especially since as I've already covered the effects of both high and low mood on work efficiency are tiny.
There are really only breakpoints that're worth paying attention to and the level of colony fragility required for eating off the ground to cause a chain reaction breaking everything in a high stress situation is comical.
You're not suffering as a result of this change at all.


Really though I doubt I'll change your mind, you're taking the stance that you're being persecuted for something aimed at other people, might as well convince a wall to fall over.

I like to think that raiders are basically 40k Orks - they just really want a good fight.

Although that whole retreating business is a bit un-orky.

Wargs are just frustrated Wolves. Like, "WAAARG."

Not to be confused with frustrated Orks. WAAAAAGGH!

Corn is now affected by Blights in A11. There might be some other changes but I haven't the time to play at the moment so someone might want to double check.