Messages

Well, boars are a pretty good pet if you have the capability of feeding them. Although their stats are normal, I have noticed that my colonists tend to be feeding them more than other animals. Also, the baby boars are quite annoying, as they are useless for about a year, before becoming a little bit less useless for another year. That's 2 years of feeding, keeping safe (Possible Colonist Loss) and taking up space before they actually become useful. I would definitely choose the husky over the boar.

You are mistaken I'm afraid.

Hunger rate:            boar: 0.35,      husky: 1.5
Gestation Period:      boar: 26 days, husky: 45 days.
Maturity age:           boar: 0.5,       husky: 1+
Offspring/gestation:  boar: 1,          husky: 1-3

Boars eat less, mature faster, and I'm not sure about reproduction rate, I'd have to do some math there.

I've been trying to modify Defs, and some things are self-explanatory, but some things aren't really.

Is there a site where things are explained?
Or are some things hard-coded?
e.g. I'm trying to add a creature, and so I copied an existing creature's def, and am modifying it now.
What is <baseBodySize>? What does it affect? How do I increase or decrease meat yield? And total "health", the resilience of a creature? Offspring count?
How do I change carrying capacity? Because there's nothing like <carryCapacity> or <meatYield> to find.

Answering these questions would be appreciated, but again, I'm primarily looking for a site, or a downloadable Readme or something, where such things are explained. If there's such a thing.

Thank you!

Pigs are surprisingly good! They breed fast, the are quite easy to train. They haul very well. The downside, they're a bit vulnerable to cold. -15*C bothers them.
Wild boars have -20*C tolerance, but are much harder to train and haul only about 53. The cheapass option.

I had several pigs, labradors and two huskies in my colony. Half of labradors joined in an event, the rest was bought. I had HAULING TRAINS with no effort! Snow or no snow, deconstructed mortars, remote cargo drops, remote mining sites, they did practically all hauling for me.

Investing in hauling dogs REALLY pays off in the long run.

I found boars to be the best pets, at least for me.

They are as fast as Wargs (5),
they are cheap as hell (a downside if you're trying to sell them),
they don't eat much,
they live for 12 years (like everyone's favorite, the huskies)
they mature fast (half a year or so)
they breed (relatively) fast,
they are omnivores,
their damage is 9, about 1-2 less than Wargs',
they can stand cold relatively well,
they can be trained to haul/rescue,
they yield only 10 less meat than pigs.

Downsides? Not really efficient keeping them for food, they are as hard to train as wargs, and they can't haul full stacks.

Still, they're the jack of all trades, good at everything, best at nothing. Pretty damn useful, to my experience.
Before downloading combat realism, I released about 30 of them, only a few died, a couple were healed, and they killed nearly 20 attackers. I butchered the dead, got meat, in a month I had 35+.

Though I do not understand why boars would yield less meat (63) than huskies (90)...

You can find a table here:
http://rimworldwiki.com/wiki/Animals
And it's sortable! I'm welcome to feedback about it. I want more info in the table but I'm afraid to make it any wider lest it run off the screen.
I did not write the lead paragraph though. It sorely needs some massaging.

Below it I will add another table for animals that provide milk, wool, and/or eggs.

I'll also greatly expand the page with sections for talking about taming, training, naming, breeding, life stages, health, needs, and trading.
Remember, *anyone* can contribute to the wiki but there doesn't seem to be many people that do, just some minor corrections here and there, which is still great.

Not sure if it was mentioned yet (haven't read through all the comments yet), but I'd love a "average number of offspring(s) / month (or year).

Literally the only difference between flyOverhead and non-flyOverhead is whether thick roofs are hit and what arc the projectile flies in. EVERY projectile can freely intercept ANYTHING and the only additional check is whether that intercept is at the correct height or not.

There is no reason to add flyOverhead to weaponry, basically. I don't get how it would at all fix your problem with the strength of mechanoids (which are resilient to many damage types).

Look, I might not be able to tinker with codes, but observation is something I can do.
Without flyOverhead, I couldn't shoot grenades over walls. With it, I could.
Again, I do not know what's in the code and how it should work, but those are the results I've observed.

The benefits are self-explanatory.

If you're trying to nerf Mechanoids, why aren't you changing, you know, the actual Mechanoids? I'm currently working on other projects but once I get back to CR one of the things on my to-do list is revisit Mechanoid balance.

I'm not trying to nerf Mechanoids, probably that's why.

The defining characteristic of a mortar is that it fires at elevations of 40°+

Yes, and another defining characteristic of a mortar is that it can be easily carried by a single person. The reason for them usually not being able to fire below 40 degrees safely is because the ground supports it, below 40 degrees it becomes unstable. At least generally, because there are different kinds of mortars. In Rimworld, we have a 2x2 tiles big mortar emplacement that doesn't look like, nor acts like your regular mortar.

No matter, I'm not here to tell you how it works or how you should change things, I'm here to ask if it's possible to change, without bathing myself in confusing computer magic. A question you have not answered.

Though based on what Alistaire said, I'd guess it is not.

The design choice is rationalized quite well in my opinion but of course whatever you were trying to do by setting flyOverhead to true in CR will not work. I don't know why you would want Rimfire grenade launchers to fire overhead since CR already implements projectile heights and hitchecks will only be performed in sensible locations due to that.

Whatever I'm trying to do? Well, I'm trying to give myself the ability to fight mechanoids of course! I've already changed the projectile to shoot EMP nades. Them being as tough as they are, equipped with weapons with more range and damage, I've lost 7 and managed to recover 2 colonists out of 11, against 4 centipedes and 6-7 scythers, after an "ancient ship" event.
Not sure which one is worse, schythers essentially one-shotting my colonists from behind cover, or centipedes downing them in one burst.
I'm changing that, that's what I'm doing.

Back to mortars; I had 4 (since I could not build howitzers [not sure if possible, even if it is I wasn't there yet], and not one trader sold them), but those nimble centipedes dodged the mortar shells effortlessly. Not using mortals, or only using them against sieges would be fine by me, but with the new flyOverhead, I've lost my best card against centipedes, and it's quite frustrating.

Travel times depend on the steepness of the trajectory. For the mortar that means engaging closer targets produces longer flight times since it fires in a steep arc. It also has multiple charges with different muzzle velocities so you probably just fired close to one of the breaking points and got a very steep trajectory of 70-80° or something. The grenade launcher is just comparatively slow in general.

MY MISTAKE regarding the grenade launcher; I've set <flyOverhead> "true", which resulted in the speed drop due to this angle thing.

I'm starting to understand the mechanics behind it, still, it makes very little sense to me.
It's not my place to tell what should and should not be, so I'll just ask:

is there an easy way to reduce, or remove this effect without setting <flyOverhead> "false"?



Now I'll rant a bit;

Mortal's max range is 700, that's over twice the size of the maps I'm playing on. That's not a problem, but I do not understand why would anyone point it for example 75° upwards to target something 350 tiles away, when 15° would be the desired angle, which has the same range, but essentially reduces traveling time by 3/4.

That is, unless the target is behind a wall.
Then a 75° would be preferred, but then again, for maximum range (700 here) 45° is the angle, whit which it would be impossible to hit anything behind the wall, but the wall itself. This feature doesn't exist in the game, so IMO it's unreasonable to use high angle shots for close-range, especially without any obstacles in the way.

Especially when my crippled pawn can fire the mortar, run to the targeted location with peg legs, eat his last meal and die from the just-arriving shell.

As it is, I might just set <flyOverhead> "false" for every weapon that has it.

I have a strange problem with mortals. I've been CR and CR defence and noticed that mortal shells move extremely slow, little more than 1 cell/second.

Not only that, but I've downloaded Rimfire recently, and noticed that the grenades the launcher shoots behave the exact same way.

All other weapons, including CR defence turrets (the big one too), seem to behave as intended.

Is there a reason for that behaviour? Any way to fix it?

Thanks!

But I always use SBO I guess if I upload source someone might change to non-SBO?

I have no idea what SBO or non-SBO is. o.o

Second download, "Slightly Bright Overcast".
It might not be different within map conditions however.

And here goes the Darkness for A12, with darker eclipse, toxic fallout and volcanic winter:
https://dl.orangedox.com/AnOb3KiiIsYcfp2aTj/DarknessA12.rar
To use with non-SBO, simply copy-paste WeatherDefs directory from your Darkness to A12-ed Darkness.

This is the tits!
Thank you!

I haven't noticed tamers feeding eggs to animals in my own games, but I do think I can help you.


Problem:
Tamers keep using fertile eggs to tame animals.

Facts:
1. All colonists take whatever resource is closest.
2. Tamers pick up animal feed when they are simultaneously:
    2.1. Out of animal feed
    2.2. Starting a taming job
3. These situations are most likely in the following 4 scenarios:
    3.1. Tamer just woke up
    3.2. Tamer just finished eating
    3.3. Tamer just trained an animal in your animal area
    3.4. Tamer is outside of your base taming a wild animal

Solution:
Construct a hatchery that is not near any of the following:
1. Tamer's bedroom
2. Dining room
3. Animal area
4. Where The Wild Things Are

Then you can have it in your home zone with all the benefits that brings.

Boar woke up and consumed eggs for those were closer than hay. Boars are now in a separate pastry, which took time and resources to build.
Handler finished carrying hay for the chicks, decided to train a boar next, picked up eggs. Moved hatchery to another location, which took time and resources to build.
Handler finished carrying fertile eggs to the remote hatchery, decided to train a boar next, picked up eggs.

FML.

While I'm grateful for your suggestions (I really am!), none of these roundabout ways are anywhere near perfection. That's why I'm here, suggesting this feature to make it perfect and user friendly.

Even colonists with "hauling disabled" will haul:
- animals they killed via hunting
- construction materials to construction zone
- stone chunks to stonecutting table
- food to cooking table
- food to hoppers (count as Cooking)

While it makes those restrictions less harsh, sometimes I really just want to make sure the person walks as little as possible. Rimworld may as well be called Crippleworld. Half of colonists come with afflictions, the other half gets leg and torso scars from gunshots. I would really like an ability to just let a colonist only construct or only do the shooting. Let someone else haul the materials. I've had my share of colonists who are excellent builders but move at a turtle's pace.

This change would make cooking really, really bad without hauling, but that can be improved too. Bulk cooking. Similar to brewing (25 hops produces 5 beers). Less hauling this way. Or, colonists with hauling disabled would have maximum hauling distance. If a construction requires hauling farther than 15 squares, he won't haul. He will try to choose a construction which already has materials.

Thoughts ?

By the way, enabling Growing without Plant Cutting is dangerous: if such a colonist replants, he doesn't harvest the plant that was there before. For example when you switch 75% grown Potatoes to Corn, he will destroy the potatoes. He won't harvest what's possible.

If haulers would automatically haul materials to the placed blueprints, that'd be good, as construction workers often have to walk around for more materials.

I don't think this feature would add any complexity to the UI. I support that idea.

But that's where the benefits end.

- Hauling food for the cook would be hard to code imo (what stops another hauler to haul it back to a stockpile?), and the cook would have to wait for the next haul, or worse, would run off in the meanwhile. Bulk cooking would merely decrease the pain involved.

- Hauling material to worktables would have the same issues,
- hunting would make the (even busier) haulers have more running to do, while the hunter is already there,
-maybe more I haven't realized yet.

In the end, it would improve construction time, but would make other jobs painfully slow and complex.

It's quite a headache trying to make my handlers not use fertilized eggs as a taming tool, not one method I thought of so far was free of extra micro management (TL;DR at the end).

1) If eggs are laid outside of the home zone, they're forbidden by default, but then colonists cannot interact with these items at all.
If laid outside (of an enclosed, roofed building), carry them under roof for them not to degrade and vanish, or be eaten by wild animals before hatching is a must.
Inside a building or out, in the end certain pawn-related automatic features (such as cleaning or putting out fires) are disabled, leaving the need for more micro management...

2) If eggs are laid inside of the home zone, they're unforbidden, and so tamers just feed them to animals.

3) Restrict handlers from that zone; handlers are responsible for training (or just slaughtering) chosen animals, but most I had are capable of  hauling (eggs, hay, animal corpses) and cleaning; completely forbidding them to go anywhere near the egg-laying animals' zone leaves me with more micro management, and possibly more problems:
If I want pawns to tame animals in the same zone, I can't,
and since pawns are usually capable of multiple things (see above, hauling), restricting them from the animals' zone increases the workload of non-restricted non-handlers.

4) Allowed zone, but not "home zone";
Eggs are forbidden which is good, but if this zone is outside, the same degrading issue comes up,
but even inside, colonists' auto-features (putting out fires, for example) are disabled still.

Perhaps there are many more problems and/or options, but I'm tired of thinking about it, so here's the general idea/suggestion and

TL;DR

Restricting colonist(s) to use certain types of things (like forbidding them to wear certain kinds of apparel) would be great when it comes to animal husbandry, for example.
Not only would it save fertile eggs from handlers, but often meat is hard(er) to get than anything green, so again, tamers giving meat to an omnivore is but a waste.

Other applications of this feature would include (but probably not limited to) anything pawns otherwise use automatically (consumables) to be preserved; selling beer or other things would become much more profitable.

I remember being able to use sand piles to fill in shallow water, is this tool no longer accessible?

E.: Yes I am aware I can build sand terrain using sand piles, but I can not build it over shallow water or marsh.

E.2: Found the problem; Core\Defs\TerrainDefs\Terrain_Water.xml
    <changeable>false</changeable> needed to be changed to "true".

It took me more than an hour going through all (seemingly) relevant defs trying to make heads or tails of it, changing various things which resulted in the total chaos of these rules and restrictions, but at least I found it.