The Grand Exploration thread

[SuperCaffeineDude]

I can understand why it's not the focus, though honestly I can't help but want it, even if its as a separate expansion.
In any survival story there's always the "now we take the fight to them" part where we give the raiders their comeuppance, or we become the monsters ourselves. But in terms of workload yeh I'd rather see at-home features fleshed out.

[Anduin1357]

Although the game is not about killboxes, every fort's front gate is a killbox. We all built our colonies as forts because it made it very easy for us to defend ourselves.  This is the practicality of fort building and this is how we all intend to play. The story is bland atm because all the AI can throw at us are weak mobs and siges with no tactics. I expect multiplayer will change things due to the use of strategy.
Nobody is at fault for building killboxes, it's just us adapting against the game.

Perhaps you should read my entire post, mentioning killboxes was a very little piece of fluff from everything i said, and i never said they or who built them are at fault 

It was a little fluff I commented upon, I read your entire post and only happened to disagree on a little point that said

but IMO the game is about the colonists and their stories, not building killboxes.

Which I took to mean that you oppose further development of killbox mechanics.

[Johnny Masters]

Ahh. Well, I'm not against agaaaainnsttt, but i do have some reservations. Building walls, defenses, gates, etc are well part of every day defense in dangerous places. My complaint, if it should be brought up, is against how the AI handles it (or how it doesn't), how player-exploiting sandbags and obvious halls of carnage (practically the size of your whole colony) as the AI beelines to certain death, which of course happens because how the game handles enemy amount, getting pinned (there's no pinned condition) or being scared.

[Reolos]

Endgame...

I am new to Rimworld, and so, have little in the way of experience to back up what I am about to say, but in my opinion, Endgame for a game like this should not mean "how I beat it", but "how the game plays before I start again". DF, Gnomoria, PA, even Dark Lands (I am old) don't have a way to win, just a series of events that destroy you or bore you or force you to try again better. I love this aspect of the genre, and I don't think there needs to be an opportunity to escape. That being said, I am happy as a player to NOT use a "win" mechanic, but rather play till I die. I think kill boxes have the same effect on the game as a win mechanic, they truly can make you indestructible if built a certain way, and so, I choose not to use them.

I think there have been valid points made here  on game value and replayability. We are trained (by Ludeon), to see our colony as a small part of a bigger picture, one of many settlements on this forbidding planet, which (since the world generator) is one of many similar planets on the Rim. Factions feel a certain way towards us, and react based on those feelings. Traders see the value of our goods or silver, and fly to this distant place to trade with us, but also, no doubt with other factions. This adds to the richness of the game, it doesn't detract from it. Allowing players a way to react in a similar way that the AI factions do, adds to the experience.
I think exploration and extra-colonial interaction can be handled in two very distinct ways. Each has it's value, each has it's flaw.
(1) Away missions. You could select a number or all of your colonists to leave your colony for the sake of a mission. Mission purpose could include raiding, resource mining, trade with friendly factions, defense of friendly faction from third party, hostage trades, ambassadorial visits, colonicide (other colonies, not yours!), and colonial relocation. Once these missions start, you will have no control over those who have left, until they return, or you receive a message that they have failed.
There are a number of things that need to be implemented first for this to work, but I think, in all, this is an easier path for the devs. That being said, this creates kind of a "fire and forget" mentality regarding missions, and the results won't be as rich and rewarding as:
(2) Actual ability to leave colony. Now, I think it would be really tough, from a dev standpoint and even to play the game, if we had to dual manage those leaving the colony, and those who stay behind. So, either everyone has to go, or, a kind of "colony manager" would have to be created to keep people alive and kicking while our focus was on the mission. Travel could be handled as fast (you pick a destination on the map and arrive there) or slow (you have to manually traverse the distance). While the latter would make for a real rogue-like experience, I think the former works better for this game, as the focus is and should be, the colony we left behind. When we arrive at said destination, our pawns (I didn't say toons!) would behave as directed just like at home, and we could go about whatever business we decided. This I think is a richer more immersive way to conduct missions, but I think needs a lot more programming to make it work, and does pull focus from your settlement more than the former.

I love this game. I will play it for a long time. But, once it is released as a finished product, I think there NEEDS to be extra-colonial interaction, or, as has been said, it won't hold the attention of as many as it should.

[Johnny Masters]

1) I've thought on fire and forget type of missions, but as you stated, they don't bring much to the table from a story standpoint. If it's about getting resources, we already can get from the starting map and traders, plus it'd be rather painful if some where to be lost in the venture, without our direct control.

2) I don't think there would be simultaneous controls. The way i think, it's like this: You select a group (and, who knows, vehicles and resources) to send somewhere in the world map. You lose control as you see they moving to the edge of the map and vanishing, like other faction do. Then you kept playing your colony for a bit longer until a certain timespan then you'd be sent to your explorers. Once in the new map, you do whatever is it you gonna do and head back. Then you get switched back to your colony exactly the same since you left. Then you play your colony as normal until your explorers get back, waiting the exact amount of time you stayed away (plus some random amount maybe).

That's how i imagine things, giving full control to players and not asking you to multi task on multiple fronts (i hate this in games). But i'm sure there are hundreds of ways to do this.

[Reolos]

2) I don't think there would be simultaneous controls. The way i think, it's like this: You select a group (and, who knows, vehicles and resources) to send somewhere in the world map. You lose control as you see they moving to the edge of the map and vanishing, like other faction do. Then you kept playing your colony for a bit longer until a certain timespan then you'd be sent to your explorers. Once in the new map, you do whatever is it you gonna do and head back. Then you get switched back to your colony exactly the same since you left. Then you play your colony as normal until your explorers get back, waiting the exact amount of time you stayed away (plus some random amount maybe).

Alright, I dig it. Reminds me of the original X-coms (didn't play the new ones) or Age of Wonders 1 and 2. Combat, or in this case, missions, take place free of the constraints of world time. Any perceived time "lost" could just be absorbed by the trip back, if that is needed to help anyone's suspension of disbelief. No need for a colony manager AI, no fear of: "if I had been running things they'd still be alive!" Would there be "encounters"? Party A is journeying to settlement B, on the way, they are attacked by...

[Johnny Masters]

Exactly! I wasn't thinking particularly in xcom or AoW, but they do have an influence on me!

Yeah, it's like whatever happens and how long it takes on a mission would have little impact on time. You'd still suffer everything that time brings (hunger mainly) both in mission and colony and "regular" time is reseted once everyone is back. The only possible downside to this, maybe, is that you are essentially "time traveling", playing twice the same time frame. But since it's a whole new map, with different purposes, i think it would affect little, after all, it's all about the stories it would produce.

As for random encounters, as like in fallout or any world map rpg encounters, i'm not sure. Of course it could be made, but it seems like a system inside a system (like exploring is alpha 23 and random RE alpha 25).

Then i wonder if you wouldn't have to play each and every world square when you are exploring:

The (probable) good side is that you get to really play the hardships your pawns may encounter while traveling. Random encounters would be 'built-in', because they could be random but they are also part of the map you are exploring. I also consider a good thing that exploring would be hard, so it gives the sense of wild&savage of a rimworld. It shouldn't be a piece of cake traveling around, as a consequence, your colony up its own valuable ("wow, i really miss home").

The (probable) downside is that you might really dilate things if you travel a lot under the system i suggested. There's the possibility of spending more time on missions than in colony. This could be good or bad, depending on your hopes for the game. Either way it shouldn't be needed to explore, nor should it be trivial.

[Reolos]

With the possible dilution you are speaking of, random encounters shouldn't actually be "random" or rerolled for each map-square you traverse. There should be a % chance, that increases over distance, yes. Once an encounter happens, that number could be reduced by half or more. This would make short trips unlikely to spawn an encounter, and long trips unlikely to spawn more than one.

There could also be "zones" for encounters. Tynan has already given the location of each settlement on the world map. Currently it has no effect. With travel, each settlement could have a zone of control around it, an area they scout or patrol which makes encounters more likely close to a settlement. If you incapacitate the scout before he runs off, you get a surprise bonus, if not, they will be dug in. Other zones would be certain kinds of animals for certain biomes, and even no-mans-land areas, which are really likely to spawn baddies and should be avoided. This could influence Pathing, another dynamic.

I do think there should be a soft cap on the amount of encounters. They add to immersion, but can distract if they are too common. There could also be good encounters, like finding a small group of friendlies, or crashed resources, or even other folks from the spaceliner.

[deslona]

My 2 cents...

If visiting other colonies was to be implemented (and I refer to at this point single player with the possibility of multiplayer expansion) a few things must be added.
1 - The player can retire colonies that would store the save file but make it otherwise unplayable.
2 - The initial reaction to the retired colony to new colonies doesn't necessarily have to be 'neutral/positive'. The relationship to new colonies could be hostile, because that is how the retired colony was played (arrested everyone who visited)
3 - You can only visit locations on the map that are are NPC factions OR colonies that the player made and 'retired'.
4 - A screen determining which emissaries/raiders and trade goods would be sent to the new map. Also the travel time, based on distance. Meaning the new colony is that much weaker for a time. The colony would still face the same level of threat as if all colonists/wealth were there. Making traveling a serious consideration. The amount of things that can be taken is determined by how man people travel. This may also affect travel time (overburdening).
5 - Actions taken on a non-home map cannot be saved. But can be paused. The player can retreat/leave by sending all pawns to the edge of the map (right-click "return to colony" or "run away!") The first would take the transported trade goods with them in an orderly manner the second would just leg it.

[Anduin1357]

Everyone, nice ideas. I too have ideas on exploration too, it was to start up a new instance of Rimworld whenever you send your pawns away. The colony has slightly less aggro and the travellers get some aggro...