Messages

A suggestion for combat, would be to have a multiplier for multiple pawns firing upon a single target. One of my pawns firing at one enemy pawn, the current RNG is fine. But when you have multiple pawns firing at an enemy target you get a multiplier to the success chance. This would be easy to implement I would assume and make things more realistic. Then to keep people from abusing it, have a max number of multipliers (maybe up to 5 or 6 pawns) that way you cant just control 20 pawns and have all of them target one enemy pawn, since if the multiplier went that far it would be way too easy to clear out a big raid.

Like 1.2x the normal % for 2 pawns firing on a target, 1.4 for 3, 1.6 for 4, 1.8 for 5 and 2 for 6+. I think this would have a good impact on the combat.

Also,  additional to that or instead of that, pawns firing from behind sandbags should get a boost to their chances to hit enemy pawn, which would make defending bases better, but also would make sieges far more deadly if you cant get to them before they build sandbags (they build sandbags so quickly that sieges would instantly become more difficult)


The current system for combat and especially hunting truly needs worked on imo.... Hunters shouldn't miss much, it is annoying watching hunters spend half a day firing at something, never hit it and go home cause they have run out of time before bed or something else they need to do. Hunters do not miss often IRL. As for combat, I know that one is tougher to mess with/get perfect, but it is still annoying watching 10 pawns miss 5-6 consecutive shots each, so missing 50 shots from 15 down to 8 tiles away as enemy pawn approaches with his granite club, then manages to actually get to my sandbags and land a single blow to one of my pawns, when 10 pawns (exact number in this scenario) fire.

The AI for the enemy should be different for each difficulty level (not each, but maybe 3 different grades of AI for the 5 difficulty levels, easy and basebuilder have one, medium and hard have another, and intense or whatever the top one is has another.  The difficulty levels are kinda rubbish, they just send more numbers, and change the attack type to "tunnel and sapper" and give slightly better weapons. It kind of sucks to play on high difficulty, not because of the difficulty but because of the way things get tougher. Also, the tunneling and sapper attacks ALWAYS ATTACK THE SAME EXACT SPOT OF BASES, so on my hardest level games, once you get hit once you know where to load up your defenses since 75% of attacks will be of that style.

Better AI could probably be easy to do? (I'm so far from knowledgeable on programming its not funny so I could be way wrong) If you had it to where enemy pawns when they approach bases, could slow down or stop movement when they are at the edge of the players pawns attacking range, allow them to bunch up a bit that way they don't run 1 at a time into a slaughter (this isn't a huge problem on the harder levels since there are so many of them that they don't usually get picked off 1 at a time due to coming in one at a time) I feel like that would probably be pretty easy to implement though and I think just that adjustment would make a ton of difference in the way people would see the AI, its kind of a bummer compared to the rest of the game, the game is so great that the AI drags the experience down when you are defending vs raids. 

All pawns should stay closer together in general when raiding you, they come in sometimes lets say a group of 8 pirates, 1 goes to attack a coduit another goes to attack your geothermal thing another is attacking a wall another is attacking an isolated building that you may not even use hardly anymore, and then the other 4 are going towards the base to raid. The 4 people going after isolated objects can sometimes be spread across the whole map, which is just bad. When enemy pawns target objects they should all be targeting objects within 25-30 tiles of each other.

Just making the enemy raids stay in a tighter formation would make them feel better. The mechanoid raids are fine to spread out IMO, they are strong, have a lot more range etc - ( you should allow for turning mechanoid raids off in the scenario editor though- I have wanted to play a game or two without the mechanoids but there is currently no way to do so, you can turn off the poison and psychic ship but not the mechanoids in general)

All I have, thanks for reading.

Title says it... Would be cool to be able to hire mercenaries to be apart of caravans whether you are going to raid another colony or just to trade. Or maybe sine hiring mercenaries seems like it may not fit, cause where would you hire them from? Perhaps being able to force prisoners to take part of caravan missions would be nice, so long as you have a brawler leading the caravan (or just on the caravan- and for raiding missions I cant imagine anyone would be taking any brawlers with them, so this would add a way to have use for more of your pawns)

Also, just wanna say, Tynan... you hit a home run on this one. I had 200ish hours logged on rimworld, lost interest (I mean, 200 hours is a lot) but I will find another 100 minimal cause of caravans. Superb job. Id pay for this update as DLC tbh. It is that great of an addition and has opened up a lot of possibilities for the next several updates.

Does the unstable test build have the A16 stuff in it? How does one play on it?


NVM, found it... In properties in the steam page, I had never checked there to see if it was an option. I have been avoiding playing rimworld for weeks waiting for A16.

I actually think it is too easy to obtain silver. I mean, if you are playing the game on easy where there are very few raids and stuff, then it is harder to obtain silver, but selling the stuff from raids nets a lot of silver. Selling statues is profitable. Selling any high quality clothing your tailors make. Selling anything you make that is high quality (not weapons obv) is profitable. I can end up with 15k silver plus in a couple in game years and that's while buying every single painstopper or joywire, component, medicine, glitterworld medicine, and even food pending my biome (the pricing for raw food is bad, I buy any premade meals only, buying meat actually costs more than buying premade meals, the meat price needs to go down rather than the meal price to go up IMO- maybe both could change a bit in each direction, but it is not practical to pay 1.60-1.80 for meat and then pay 9-10 for nutrient meals and 14-18 for simple meals and 25ish for then nice meals. So some of the pricing needs fixed.

Also, thrumbos are lucrative. But if you play the game on easy mode, you wont make much silver and there in lies the problem I assume. Even though prices you can sell stuff for are garbage, it is still extremely easy to net silver.

When I did my first and only ship launch I assumed I was moving to a new location with those colonists. I gathered the colonists that I wanted, launched, and game was over..... I was kinda bummed..

Def should be taking you to a new location, and you should have cryopods that contain resources/materials to take with you and there should be a max number of pods you can shoot with one ship (maybe 20- pending how many resources each hold)

Also the new location should be completely random in biome temp terrain type etc.

I have a feeling this will make it in eventually, its too good not to put in.  I haven't been around the game long enough to see if any suggestions make it through, but this is one of the best I have seen and I hope it gets through to being apart of the game, and it probably would qualify as being put into the cheap suggestions. I cant imagine this would be a crazy amount of work to do.

I don't want to see a boss battle, but I would like the late game raids to get tougher for a longer period. Maybe a slower increase to max strength, but to continue on getting stronger as it goes on. All the game does is make all attacks tunnel or sapper past defenses, and that's it. So I agree with the sentiment that it gets easy to deal with them (to an extent - it does take some pretty good planning to build a non mountain base- though oddly enough when you do get the tunneling attackers, on my non mountain base I am currently playing on max difficulty- they literally attack the same spot of my base 100% of the time, so I have just built another wall around it and put some turrets inside that wall and they never make it to my original wall)

So I def think the game needs some work on making the late game opponents tougher/smarter/better but I am not into the "boss" fight unless it is just a hoard of the normal raiders. Keeps the feel a bit more real to me. Boss fights feel like a single player thing (love Don't Starve- love those bosses) but I am sure there are many who feel opposite of me, def would be a popular mod I would imagine.

I started a thread about giving manhunter packs a better warning system instead of springing them on you and its on in an instant, it received no support though.

They can be easily dealt with (with minimal damage and rare death) if you have ANY time to prepare for them, but when you are scattered around the map doing random jobs you are screwed.  It is also super silly that man hunter packs just down pawns rather than kill and eat them. This was basically the jist of my post, they should kill pawns instead of down, and to give a warning system similar to a raid that is preparing before attack (or give half of that time for the manhunter packs)

I like to build a 20-25x 20-25 building that extends off a building that is pretty center in my base, and build 3 doors on the outside wall, and taunt the manhunter pack into coming through the door when I have all my pawns inside on the furthest wall, the pack comes in 1 or 2 at a time, and unless they literally all come at once you can pick them off with pretty minimal damage. It is just having enough time to get colonists into said building, since manhunter packs spawn and instantly head for built structures full speed.

There is absolutely no defense for manhunter packs when you are spread out around the map, I would like to suggest that man hunter packs have a different warning system, such as "a colonist has spotted a large herd headed this direction" and then you are allotted half or equal to the time you are allotted when a raid comes and they "prepare to attack"

There is truly no defense for a man hunter pack when you are mining around the map or hunting already etc etc. I play the game on the perma death mode so I don't go restarting from previous saves, but I will admit to force closing rimworld with the task manager to avoid the man hunter packs that truly will wreck my colony cause half or more are out doing random jobs, I can handle losing one or two, but I think the warning system needs to be a bit better, they are more fatal than mechanoid attacks usually.

In return, I also suggest if there is a warning, that man hunter packs do not just down a pawn, but go for the kill as well, the way they just down pawns is silly. So a better warning system, and to kill pawns not just down them. I think this would make man hunter packs a lot better.

Will this thread turn into the "I want to go full 90s" thread? Lets see if any PC people come out of the woodworks here... Oh wait, this has nothing to do with lbgt/womens rights/minority groups.... Carry on in peace I suppose, this time.

But I agree it would be neat to have colonists who go on food binges fairly often, gain weight. Though in the game, all the colonists are extremely active for the most part, which kind of negates weight gain. People can eat a bunch and not gain weight if they burn the calories (I mean NFL players NBA players athletes in general eat way more than your run of the mill fat person but they are infinitely more active than people who get heavy, becoming over weight has as much to do with the lethargic lifestyle as it does over eating)

However, maybe it could be a new trait, where colonists with the lazy trait, could be prone to getting fat, and people who have the traits that give movement boosts or global work speed boosts could be prone to anorexia, though I don't like the idea of anorexia in the game, I feel like that would just end up being a huge problem with disease hitting that person so much because people who are anorexic usually have poor immune systems because of the poor diet.

I like the idea of having jewelry, though I feel like late game, boosting moods is easy enough... I feel like the moods should progressively get worse for 2-3 in game years. As soon as you get the orbital trader you run into pain stoppers and joywires which make keeping moods in check pretty easy.

I guess I will rephrase, I like it as long as the economic side of RimWorld is improved upon and more necessary to succeed. I like the idea of expanding the number of resources you can use for things, having resources only under ground you find with the scanner etc.

I would like to see a need to have 50k or 100k silver, to give playing files a really long time a bit of purpose. Jewelry could definitely play a part of that objective as a sellable item.

Or if pawns shot more accurately in hunting scenarios than raid scenarios, which is def true IRL. Hunting you sit still, wait for a good shot and rarely ever miss. I would presume war is a bit chaotic and just firing as quickly as you are able to.

Tynan, great post... much appreciated.

Mumble, very eloquent posts in this thread.
Razz, very eloquent posts in this thread.

Its not the 1800s though guys! Women are much stronger today than they were then! (that's what I got out of that) Regardless, you can not argue or debate with those people. They just scream and beat their chests the loudest like cave men while accusing you of being the cave man. There is literally no purpose in engaging, they never have facts, they never have substance, they just tell you that you are a piece of crap and you should not breed, and similar insults. It is absolutely pointless, and they will absolutely positively never ever ever see your side of things, and you will always be a piece of shit for seeing things like you do, when the way you see things is actually the rational way not the emotionally charged way.

My 2 cents.

I'm gonna keep it relatively short.

Technique is referred to the use of weapons, you talk about mma, which is unarmed, and tennis, where strength correctly play a role. We could call that cherry picking.

Rimworld is neither Saudi Arabia or Denmark, my argument is that existing gender roles are not ultimate truths and in a sci-fi setting irrelevant as the development could have gone in any direction.

Isis is known for execution of homosexuels. I'm not talking against Muslims, I'm talking against violent intolerance.
Let.me turn it around, why do you want the gays out of the game?

If you want aspects like the female period to be a debuff in game mechanics, why not young men being impulsive and not think about consequences (look at statistics for fatal traffic accidents), by giving them a debuff to intellectual work.

With the whole Norm aspect, you might as well claim that pawns with darker skin should be less inclined to have high education background...

Umm what? Wouldn't strength be far more important in combat than tennis?

This thread is awesome... Read my first response, since some of the feminist rights activists don't think it should be standard that women get nerfed in combat and other things and buffed in other things and same with men.

This WOULD OPEN more personality traits if done, where you could have masculine women and feminine men, which when considering that would be great and be true.

I don't know why it is so hard for progressives to just say "ok you win, that is correct" conservative minded people always want to use facts and data and liberal minded people always want to use "you should think" or "the correct way to feel about this is"

Personal opinion, and a long history of facts. That is what this is debating, and this thread in no way slanders women, if a woman was to read this and get offended then it is a woman I would never ever want to be around, as everything stated by OP has been true, and there have been several things that women have the perk over men in, buttttt because it is a stereotype that feminists and progressives don't like (when stereotypes are stereotypes BECAUSE THEY ARE REALITY) it is just not politically correct and you gotta CHECK OUR PRIVELEGE!

Also, as for the women endure pain better. I did not look this up but I feel like I have read something about this, it is actually (and I could be remembering wrong and should probably check this) that women and men feel different amounts of pain for the same activity on average. If a woman was to get shot by a .22 caliber rifle in the arm, and a man was to get shot by the same gun in the same exact place, the man would feel more because of what I would guess to be more pain nerves in the body, now that has nothing to do with enduring, as that is just probably going to be dictated by who has dealt with more physical pain in their life, as I don't think anyone who has never been hurt will endure any pain very well, but someone who has been physically hurt a lot will endure it better, and since men are more prone to get hurt I would naturally assume men endure pain better.

Hopefully I remember what I read and that above paragraph is not total jibberish.


"Women are funny, get over it"  - Eric Theodore Cartman, 2016

If this is true, I am pumped for the next update.