Messages

[was no way]

I love a challenge but non winnable scenarios should not be presented in any game.

Well ... there are a lot of ways to play Rimworld, but you have to understand where the developer was coming from.  The default game mode is essentially intended as "tell a great story about how your colony got killed".  There literally was no way to "win" the game in most of the early versions.

Also remember that the whole basis of the game is non-scripted, procedural systems including frequent random elements to push things off balance.  In a dynamic game with no real scripting, eventually the dice are going to come up unfavorably to you.  Just how it is.  Fight hard, try to save your people, and maybe learn what you might do differently next time around.  Don't get mad if they all get killed.  Instead, try a new colony the next planet over and see if they might be more successful.  That's part of the fun here.

If you want a guaranteed "happily ever after" story, you can play it that way too; crank down the difficulty.  That doesn't make you a bad person or "doing it wrong" - that's why those settings are there.  But the default difficulty is not and was never intended to provide a "happily ever after" experience.

Good luck.

[x]

The operative thing I'm seeing is the truncated x at the end of the line.

It's probably trying to say something like "My proposal was rejected by Mole x8", meaning he kept asking over and over and the rejection debuff continues to stack.  Apparently the two have been lovers for a while, so the game decided they've reached the proposal stage, but it doesn't know how to cope with a rejection, so it just keeps them at that point, spamming proposals until there's acceptance, but dinging the debuff for every failed attempt.  Run-on sentence.

Either the debuff needs to not stack, or there needs to be a reduction in "relationship level" on rejection so they go back to being "just lovers, not thinking about marriage right now", at least for a while.

Rejection does suck and is very depressing ... but it shouldn't be more traumatic than watching your three best friends torn to pieces by killer robots while they scream for you to help them, help them ... but you can't help them ...

An asshole recruit is just another event to deal with, like a robot attack or radiation storm, just less violent.

Can your colony cope with this subtle threat while still maintaining their principles?

Sounds like good story material to me.

"Literally" 

Cool idea Rockbass, regardless of exploiters who like exploiting exploits.

Just saw Tynan's blog post.

Excited about Scenarios and being able to set different game start conditions.  What about game end conditions?

I wonder if there is any chance that victory conditions will be added with A14, or in a subsequent update?

Introducing more hard Game Overs (both winning and losing) would be lovely.  Simple conditions like: original colonists must survive; evacuate 50 people from the planet; create a sustainable colony that lasts for 3 years; ally with x number of planetary factions ... it would be nice to have conditions to try for that were dictated by the game and not just "in my head".  Bad Game Overs would be fun, too.  X character cannot die; protect the flag/building/particular colonist from attackers or game over; build x by such-and-such time or you lose; etc.  The planetkiller asteroid is a great example of this - let's have more!

There are glitterworlds out there with extremely strong broadcast signals.  Done.

Good point @Thane, I forgot we weren't in the Off-Topic thread.

You saying beaten was in a different frame of reference than mine. Referring to straight, not gay. You did not explain "why" someone would wish to "beat" being straight. Which was entirely my point : I think you using the word suppress, contain, control, withhold, or other words would of been more appropriate unless you have a reason it should be beaten. I've already listed reasons the others should be beaten, you can go find them since you seem to love tracking my posts.

So being gay is an aberration, a problem that needs solving.  Got it.

Many =/= most. Many people are gay, MOST people are straight. See?

Oh!  You're right.  I was thinking of something else.  The problem that MOST gay people agree on isn't the need for a "cure"; it's persecution by bigots.

Well, considering you used the word beat, it DID seem like you were anti hetero in that sense.

This was an intentional trap.  If I used that language on a certain group, it would imply bigotry, which you (rightly) called out.  The fact is that I was using your own exact words and applying them to a group you don't hate to see how fast you'd jump on it.  (Pretty fast.)

I'm anti homosexual but I've admitted this pretty openly.

Wow.  OK.  You got me there.  I haven't read your earlier stuff so I must have missed your historical forthrightness.  Not being sarcastic - in a way I have to respect a bigot who wears the t-shirt.  ... But that doesn't mean I'm going to accept bigotry or hold back from fighting it every inch of the way.

Your wording is rather aggressively skewed by the way, "beaten" implies someone wishes to conquer it,

Not my wording, yours.

Gayness CAN be suppressed and beaten.

-----

which many gay / alcoholic people wish.

Wow.  So most gays wish to be "cured"?  Would love to see your source on that.

So does this mean we agree now? Gay, and straight feelings "can" both be suppressed? So you will no longer tell me people cannot help it? Though, I'd like to hear your reasons why straight people should suppress it.

"You" meaning me personally?  I don't recall saying anything about what motivates sexuality.  I also never said straight people "should" suppress their sexuality; I just said they could "beat" it just like you said alcoholics and gays can "beat" their issues.  Interesting that you thought that phrasing meant I disapproved of heterosexuals or that they should be suppressed.  What does that say about the intent of your original statement?

Just to put this sidebar in perspective, by the exact same token, heterosexuality can also be suppressed and "beaten" in exactly the same way.

Yo mumble, you already made a thread for the bathroom question, remember?  You going to stink up every conversation on the board with your bigoted dreck?  We used to have a nice thread here.

Take it this way >>>>>>>>

I would love to see something like this!

are you saying you agree that people with 1 hand are only 50% as effective as someone with 2 hands?

It's not how many you have - it's how you use them.   

Currently animal corpses vanish after 50 days if left unburied or are buried in an unroofed grave. Maybe we should change this rule to "vanish after 50 days if left unburied".

That would be great.  It's weird for a filled grave to suddenly revert to an empty state.

@Zombra, are you setting priorities on your freezer stockpile and/or graves?  I set my freezer to Important or Critical and never have that problem.  (Special-case burials are always right-click prioritize for me, so I can bury the dog if I want to.)

Yeah, I thought of this, but sometimes I have more than one freezer or food storage area, so priorities can get weird.  In one instance I found that the best solution was to change the priorities of my graveyard ... but I dig graves in batches so I had to go through changing the pri for 12 graves at a time ... it got kind of stupid.*  I like the sound of ison's fix better

*Of course, graves don't default to accept animal corpses ... this was an issue with dumping grounds/graves/my incinerator room.