Show posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Show posts Menu

Messages - ShadowDragon8685

Quote from: Mathenaut on October 15, 2014, 09:32:01 PMNeed to make outside more appealing, not just make mountains suck.  Latter won't work.

This has been the entire crux of my argument. Making the mountain suck won't make people move outside. People are willing to endure any amount of suck if it's the difference between living (and sucking) and dying (maximum suck.) If the mountain becomes so sucky that it becomes impossible to survive in, people will just stop playing because fuck that noise.
Quote from: Noobshock on October 15, 2014, 08:23:37 PMAs I said, combat wise it's substantially less forgiving than your average raid in DF (at least if you send people out to fight), for a number of reasons.

Right. Therein is the problem. Fights are ultra-deadly, enemies come in just laughably huge waves, colonists are very hard to replace. and, most damningly of all, we have no choice but to fight, because these colonists are apparently incapable of engineering a drawbridge and a moat, or of simply buying the enemies off.

Whereas in DF, you can say "Well, that looks like a huge pile of shit I don't want to have to deal with. All Dwarves inside, the doors are locked, and the drawbridges are retracted. We'll wait them out."

There are downsides to waiting out a siege in DF, of course: no outside agriculture can be conducted, trade cannot be conducted (and traders who will show up will be attacked and likely killed by the enemy, for which they will blame you uninvolved though you may have been,) migrants who arrive will be at the mercy of the enemy, etc. But the biggest upshot is that the enemy can't get in and wreck all your shit.
Ideas / Re: Fire Extinguishers
October 13, 2014, 05:47:27 PM
Try using hand grenades. Explosive hand grenades. Just don't use molotovs!

Fighting fire with firepower is quite effective. Or it used to be, anyway. Haven't tried it recently.
Ideas / Re: Breeding colonists
October 13, 2014, 05:44:43 PM
Quote from: stefanstr on October 12, 2014, 04:56:01 AM
I don't think it is a good idea for several reasons, at least at the moment:
- would require a new system for romantic relationships- I think there are other areas where Tynan's time is better spent

I dunno, keeping colonists happy would be easier if two of them were getting positive "bumps" from one another regularly, also if they could share a bed happily.

Quote- the game is brutal, as is - I am not sure it would be good marketing to have a game where children are mutilated, killed, abducted

Dwarf Fortress Say What?

Quote- what would it really add, gameplay wise?

More complication that isn't Yet Another Hilarious Thing That's Going To Fuck Your Colony Over.
Quote from: Mathenaut on October 12, 2014, 03:30:35 PM
Quote from: ShadowDragon8685 on October 12, 2014, 02:05:42 PMNow that I've played devil's advocate, yeah. Solar flares are just redonkulous in this game.

Rimworld structures aren't built with paper-thin and hollow walls, though.  Roofs only leak when they are damaged or built improperly.

Not to mention, solar flares shouldn't really be hitting structures that are deep underground anyways.

Nor does shielding really require 'rare and expensive' materials.

No, it really doesn't. You want to shield something? Put the sumbitch in a faraday cage. Nothing electrical is getting to it.

Of course, it's not going to be able to meaningfully interact with stuff outside, either. But that can be okay, if you say "fuck it" and build your entire home as a faraday cage.
Quote from: Mathenaut on October 12, 2014, 01:24:21 PM
Add food preservation and you can do that, yeah.  Welcome to agriculture.

It's like saying there should be a % chance that people still get rained on indoors.  Or that shooting through walls should be a thing because blocking line of sight shouldn't give 100% protection from bullets.

I hate to say it, but roofs do leak, and most walls/doors/furniture are concealment, not cover.

Now that I've played devil's advocate, yeah. Solar flares are just redonkulous in this game.
Perhaps if melee combat had a "wrestling" component and wasn't just "punch until dead," you could have an orderly (or five) restrain an unwilling patient. Failing that, syringe gun!
Ideas / Re: Musings on ammo
October 09, 2014, 10:58:40 PM
Quote from: Mathenaut on October 09, 2014, 09:39:34 PM
Cooldown time between shots would have to be cut big time if you want to incorporate reloading.  Really, it would just shift the weight of the damage done into bursts, while keeping the same dps.

This would be preferable, because as it is now, colonists run up into firing range and stand there derping for what feels like forever, like it takes them that long to remember "Oh hey, I've got a gun!"

A momentary set-up time after moving should be enforced, or else an accuracy penalty for shooting from the hip, but that would favor the defenders, because entrenched defenders are already sighted in while the zerging raiders won't be; so they'll either be derping around for a bit, or firing with wildly reduced accuracy.
You want to know what would bring me out into the open?


Defenses that work. Moats that bandits can't cross without something ridiculous like actually building a bridge. Turrets and/or pre-prepared manned firing positions that are so deadly that only morons would charge into them. Remember WWI trench warfare? Remember why everybody trenched up? It's because going over the line was suicide, because machine gun fire mows down massed infantry like a combine harvester mows down wheat. Anti-aircraft guns that can shoot down drop pods entirely, heavy energy blasters that shoot explosions that can wreck heavy enemies and get heavy splash damage on massed infantry. Bring back my freaking minefields.

If I don't feel safe coming out, nothing's going to make me come out; that is, if I don't feel that outside attacks are a manageable thing without going into pause-based real-time strategy, I'm not coming out. No amount of undermountain stick will get me out, but if you apply  so much as to make an undermountain base impossible whilst leaving me feel that an undersky base is impossible, I just won't play - I will, however, slag the game off to all and sundry who will listen, because I will feel cheated.
Ideas / Re: Musings on ammo
October 08, 2014, 05:49:16 PM
There's already enough logistics to take care of re: making sure Sophie Wattaface is A: Healthy enough for combat, B: not about to have a fucking mental break in the middle of combat, C: equipped for combat with a weapon, etcetera, etcetera.

Too much realism does not add fun. You know what else is realistic? 3+ people generate a lot of shit. Literally. They'd have to be going to the john every day or so, at least once a day, and that would mean they'd have to dig up new latrine pits every few days.

It's realistic. You wanna add that to the game, too? Having to micromanage everybody's trip to the hopper, keeping new latrine pits dug up and filling in the old ones, etc?
If I wanted to play a sci-fi pause-based-real-time-strategy game casting my mooks against overwhelming odds, I'd dust off UFO: Afterlight. At least then my mooks' skills increase at a pace that actually has meaning, I can give them full suites of equipment and I can research and develop effective forms of armor and weaponry.
Ideas / Re: Musings on ammo
October 08, 2014, 05:25:13 AM
Whenever you're thinking of adding something to a game (whether tabletop or vidja,) think "Does this unfairly favor the players or the NPCs?" If the answer is that it unfairly favors the players, proceed with all engines ahead full! The players should be having fun, and if they're unfairly favored, you can ramp up the intensity relatively safely.

If it unfairly favors the NPCs, then hit the brakes hard. Remember that the GM (or the vidja game,) has an unlimited number of NPCs. You can throw NPCs at the players until they fail, and it's no fun. Adding mechanics which favor the NPCs more exacerbates that situation.

It doesn't matter if the bandits' armor breaks. There will always be more bandits. It doesn't matter if their gun runs out, he was just bandit #425 of ∞.

It does, however, matter if Sophie Whattaface runs out of bullets, because she's #2 of your, what, 5 colonists? 10? 15 if you're lucky? 30 if you're playing on Randy Random or some mod which allows for moar colonists? When she runs out of bullets, your colony's fighting capability takes a nosedive, which proceeds directly into the death spiral of unrecoverability. Not Fun.
Basically, people (Bandits are ostensibly people,) shouldn't be behaving like Zerg. Mindlessly finding the most open path to the nearest person to kill/building to knocking down, rushing to within attack range and fighting until they're most or all dead is the kind of thing the Zerg would do, but not the kind of thing people would do.

Frankly, by the time you're looking at a plan for capturing the wealth which includes the lines "Gather a Vile Force of Darkness," "Assemble Siege Engines," "Traverse the moat of broken stone and metal," "Break through two heavy walls," and "overwhelm them with bodies," you should be rethinking your plans to make war with these people, unless your boss's name is literally Sauron or Sarumon or Sarah Kerrigan or Diablo.
Dwarfing is not a problem. Fortressing is not a problem. Convincing the AI to do stupid shit is not a problem.

What is a problem is that the player is under such extreme pressure to prepare to defend against physical assault that the only way for someone who is not a god of micromanaging combat to survive the physical assault is to do those things.

If players want to dwarf, if they want to build doom-castles, let them. Those resource expenditures are their own opportunity cost; a colonist building fortifications or digging chambers isn't erecting beds or farming.

Speaking of abusing the AI, if the AI is calculating how many forces it sends at you based solely on the potential "rewards" (IE, how "rich" the player is,) then that's effed up, because you can abuse that by keeping your colony "poor".

Bandits would rather attack poor people than nobody, and they'd rather attack nobody than heavily-armed, entrenched paranoids. They certainly wouldn't gather up an army of dozens or hundreds and attack a band of armed-to-the-teeth lunatics who've had time to prepare their defenses.
Quote from: jaeden25 on October 06, 2014, 02:18:54 PMYou can't use that as an argument lol, This game is a sandbox, there is no 'intended' way to play. In fact do you really think the intended way to play would be to dig into a mountain and build a killbox? It's abuse of the AI, there is nothing intended about it.

By that argument, everything the player does is "abuse of the AI." The player sends snipers out to harass the AI into attacking before they're ready? Abusing the siege AI! The player digs in and builds killboxes? Abusing the zergrush AI! The player rushes hydroponics tech early because they know that a hydroponics room locked deep inside their base is faster, safer and more reliable than natural growing or hunting? Abusing the food system AI!