Messages

Add me to the cases where its hit or miss. I did not get one for a17, got one for a16, did not get one for a15, iirc. Since a quick digging out of my link was enough, it did not bother me, but someone might shoot SendOwl a message telling them their system does not work correctly.

I guess what Rei-No meant is "how to get it if you are not using steam".

I am reasonably sure the sendowl download link now contains the newest version, but we did not get an "Rimworld updated" mail so far. That's where the confusion stems from.

Micromanagement, mostly.

Both managing inventory, and the fact that now when you order an attack you need to specify what kind of attack.

Then there's the AI side.

It's just a lot of work and player burden for a pretty prosaic little feature.

Its not that prosaic, its one of the fundamentally frustrating things about Rimworld combat.

Also, it could be implemented in a very uncomplicated way by following these simple rules:
- If the pawn has a ranged weapon, it uses it.
- If the pawn is engaged in melee, it switches to its melee weapon until it no longer is engaged in melee.

Sorry english is not my best - sorry if i my grammar is terrible .

Its not about the grammar. Its about the waterfall of text. Seperating topics by using paragraphs, lists and indentations is much more important than perfect spelling in conveying your idea.

Already had my 'oh sh!t' moment. Just before the pyschic ship I got raided by about 12 tribals, mostly with rifles. I had grown way too reliant on my turrets and didn't properly prepare for it. Unfortunately I had a solar flare occur about same time and I ended up losing my only 2 crafters.

Tribals are always more than pirate raiders, but they also do not have "modern" weapons. That does not mean a bow shot or thrown pila cannot kill a pawn, but they are much more manageable than "real" raiders that might have a good quality long range gun. The real problem tribals pose in your scenario is the sheer numbers of melees that tend to swarm you when no turrets play decoy.

Yeah, the situation might be slightly sucky for you right now, but its not the end of the world. But if Tynan and his mini-crew of helpers had to handle hundreds of ownership requests like yours every month, there would barely be time to do anything else, I fear. If rimworld had sold 500 copies total on steam, checking a few credentials would be feasible, but luckily, this game was pretty succesful. It is simply a can of worms a small indie developer cannot open.

I think you guys are approaching this from the wrong angle. It's not "it's too easy to build a fortress and bunker down, we need to punish it harder and break it down!" it's "Why do people feel the need to do so in the first place?" People dig in and hunker down because they HAVE TO in order to survive.

They abandon much of the map because of how long it takes for pawns to get there in the first place. On larger maps even a fast pawn will pretty much turn around the moment they reached whatever it is you are constructing because their bars are empty and they want to go to sleep.

Even then, the player has extremly limited resources in terms of pawns. Pawns are the most important resouce the player has and while they can be replenished the player can not take 1:1 losses against the Ai. Even 10:1 will mean the player is being bleed dry. As training and getting a new pawn up to par, after recruiting them takes time and effort.

Fighting the AI, whether animals, mechanoids or humans has to be done in as unfair as possible a way to curb losses as much as possible, keep permanent wounds down who can easily cripple a pawn and to try to avoid entering a downwards spiral.

I almost fully agree with you there. There need to be more incentives in the other direction, too. But that does not mean more diversity in the adversity would be bad.

<furniture breakdown>
That is really not an event that takes any kind of player influence. It merely drains resources. Similar to break downs do now. Pawns fix them automatically given the resources exist and if they don't you likely have worse to worry about.
This is the easy variant of the normal breakdown event, working in the same way but with stuff that does not take components to fix.

Yes. It is exactly that. And since the game has a major lack of ressource sinks, which is one of its main longterm gameplay problems, introducing not annoying not critical but slightly ressource draining events is imho the best way to tackle multiple problems at once.

Its likely their "leader" has some malady that makes him very slow and he just lags terribly behind. Check the way from where they came in to your base.

I agree with what was said in the first few posts here:

Alphabeavers are a tad too common, and what would really help is MORE events of this style, but different. More "fun but not critical" usually-bad events would go a long way to make the game not feel as repetitive and even solve some fluff issues like the too many eclipses :-)

The difficulty is in creating events that work and fill a niche. Some ideas:

- Furniture breakdowns. Sometimes your chair breaks a leg, and it has to be repaired. The door to the barn gets stuck once in a while. Those double beds cannot take the strain of its lovin' occupants forever :-)
This is the easy variant of the normal breakdown event, working in the same way but with stuff that does not take components to fix.
- Sloth drone. Similar to the psychic drones that affect mood, but this just makes everyone slower. Reduces work and move speed for everyone (or everyone of one gender, or about 50% randomly picked colonists) by 25% for a day or so.
- When the medical system is fixed, I would like to see something like a "bacterial spread" or something that makes catching minor diseases more likely for single colonists for a few days. Perhaps tied to how much they are outdoors, making it a kind of weakened fallout event. Alternatively, how about hey fever as a drawback? Makes the pawn seasonally more likely to get slightly ill.
- Work accidents. A pawn injures itself during some activity. Perhaps that tree fell into the wrong direction or that sculpture had a few splinters, whatever the case, the pawn gets a minor injury with minimal bleeding or some bruises.
- More weather based stuff would be possible. How about a monsoon period where it rains almost constantly, but the floor gets swampy (movement penalties everywhere outdoors, less so on "roads" and stone than on other natural tiles). Could be coupled with a minor mood debuff ("This constant rain is depressing. I want to see the sun again." - 3 mood)
Something similar could be built for very cold or hot climates. Snow- or Sandstorms for example lend themselves well to minor hazards that are not total showstoppers but can annoy and hinder.

Is this really a practical effort for not that much of gain, though?

Besides, how does this classify as "no killbox"? It is a very specialized anti-single-animal-killbox.

The one you enjoy. <gasp>

To get rid of a corpse, you would need a stockpile that accepts rotten animal corpses. Your freezer is usually fine for that, but if you want to get rid of it, create a dumping stockpile somewhere.

To make something out of it, you need a butchers table. On that table, create a bill that says "butcher creature" for "forever". From now on, your people will butcher anything they come across when time allows.

While I love your analysis as a well made fun fact presentation, I think searching for too much realism in game environments is prone to fall falt for the aforementioned reasons. Games cannot be to completely scale or they do not work.


Some more examples for that:

- Minecraft blocks are suggested as 1 cubic metre. This holds up with creatures, doors, chests and similar furniture, but breaks as soon as you want to build something "nice". Because then, you will want to make one level of your house about 5-6 blocks high, build "cupboards" out of a few blocks and two doors, and so on. Also, the world would be pretty small. A really huge multiplayer world we mostly played in my store lan for a few years was a handful of thousands in each direction, meaning it was about as big as a small forest if 1 block equals 1 metre on that scale :-)

- Most modern RPGs use a handful of houses to give the impression of a town or large settlement. I actually think most games *could* up the count a bit, but Whiterun in Skyrim is a perfect example of this. Even if you doubled the amount of buildings in Whiterun to make it feel a bit more like a settlement instead of ten haphazard houses below a castle (btw, Edoras in the LotR movies always looked kinda small, too), it would not even be near realistic for a settlement of the size it represents in the fluff.

- Walking from one end of Kalimdor to the other in WoW takes a manageable amount of minutes, even though the continent spans a few thousand miles north-south. If the scale was real, the poor griffins would likely combust from air friction because they fly so fast ;-)


There is a very good reason why many games chose to either detach detailed movement from the global movement (by dividing the game into smaller zones connected by boats or similar stuff, i.e. teleporters) or focus on a small region at a time. And even then, in most games the time scale used during action (combat or whatever) and adventuring/exploring is different.


Btw, this basically *is* the same discussion like the "armor vest vs windmill" one next door. In both situations, there needs to be a medium between not being completely unrealistic and game mechanics. Its a really interesting field and a few well made tweaks to those numbers can make a game be playable but feel much more realistic, but a certain suspension of disbelief is simply unforgoable.

The "friendlies" sub-event should be made part of the actual raid event.
With that I mean that in addition to the usual raid types, there should be cloned ones that are the same but with the added message "but your friends from xyz warned you and followed them to your base to lend a hand". The actual raid would then play out similar to the "help me" event, just that the enemies would come in first and the friendlies later.

[Idea: combine Mining, Tree Cutting and Stonecutting. The new skill would be 'Hard Work'.]

So people think Mining is a bad skill outside of mountain bases, because you will get all that ore sooner or later anyway. They have a point. Outside of edge cases like large maps in cold biomes, mining speed doesn't matter much.

At the same time I'm annoyed pretty much anyone is good at stonecutting or tree cutting. I think tree cutting has been recently linked to Growing skill (again), but it's just trading one bad thing for another. Planting strawberries shouldn't be as physically exhausting as chopping trees.

Idea: combine Mining, Tree Cutting and Stonecutting. The new skill would be 'Hard Work'. It makes quite a bit of sense that a person good at mining would be pretty good at stonecutting or cutting trees. At least this way colonist doing this kind of work will get some related benefits.

I like the idea. Call it "Labor" and make all those "will not haul" guys into "will not do Labor, but do other basic stuff". Solves two things with one change.