Tie population cap to colony wealth

[Shurp]

The subject line says it best, but if you are interested in my reasoning please read on.

I was thinking back to playing Gnomoria where colony wealth determined not only attack strength but also how many new gnomes you get each year.  I assume something similar happens in Dwarf Fortress (I could never deal with the UI).  And it seemed like an obvious way to solve two common complaints: that raids get too hard as wealth increases, and that population growth tapers off too quickly.  Want more colonists?  Build more pretty stuff to entice them -- and then you'll have more defenders then the raiders show up (which helps to reduce the reliance on turrets).  And it actually increases the realism of the game.  The worse of a hellhole your colony is, the less likely anyone will want to join it.

Which reminds me also of a question I wanted to ask: is there a mod that does this already?

[doomdrvk]

You're asking Tynan to completely change an established mechanic ingame, it would require a lot of re-balancing and this would break scenario options as well as mods.

[Sliderpro]

I don't like it.
I don't like it because as a tribe you may want a lot of people in your settlement. Because they die faster. And you 100% cant be wealthy at that time if you compare yourself with endgame settlement. Basically, further into game, fewer people you need. Not having MAX cap is great. But the system low wealth = low chance to be attacked - is pretty good. 

[SpaceDorf]

1.) I assume something similar happens in Dwarf Fortress (I could never deal with the UI). 

2.) And it actually increases the realism of the game.  The worse of a hellhole your colony is, the less likely anyone will want to join it.

3.) Which reminds me also of a question I wanted to ask: is there a mod that does this already?

1.) It does, but only to an extent, and in comparison to Rimworld you get "immigrant waves" which are dependent on how wealthy, old and safe your Fortress is.
Wealthy Fortresses can get HUGE immigrant waves, sometimes larger than your current population .. to an extent that players dealt with them the same way they did with invasions. ( Magma, Drowning Chambers, eugenic sorting ..   )
Larger Fortresses tend to become worse hellholes than small ones.
In addition Dwarves have Children.
But you can also define hard population limits which stops both immigrants and pregnancies.

2.) see above. remembers me of the fear/fun mechanic from early Rimworld Alphas.

3.) Not to my knowledge.

[Granitecosmos]

Comparing RimWorld to Dwarf Fortress (or to any other DF clone, like Gnomoria) regarding their population handling system is simply stupid. In DF and the aforementioned DF clone, you're pretty much guaranteed to get additional population. In RimWorld there is exactly zero guarantee for that. Furthermore, while in DF players usually have hundreds of dwarves (which are expendable, exactly because you'll just get another migrant wave at the end of the month anyway), RimWorld is designed to grant the players no more than 15 colonists. Yes, you can have more but the game is balanced around this theoretical maximum number per colony.

Your change would make sense only if we also include the migrant wave mechanic. Which would make the story aspect a lot less important; why care about your people, you'll get more anyway.

This is one of those suggestions that would do more harm than good. The game's goal was never to be as realistic as it can be. The game's goal is to generate stories and to be fun to play while it does that.

[SpaceDorf]

I don't think immigrants would be a good thing.
It is one of the few things I don't like about DF

Rimworld has other recruiting methods which fit the game better and are more selective than those of DF.

But I concur with the main argument that the Player should have a bigger say about the maximal population in the games settings.

And that colony wealth, beauty  and relations could be used to control this

[Granitecosmos]

But I concur with the main argument that the Player should have a bigger say about the maximal population in the games settings.

RimWorld is designed to grant the players no more than 15 colonists. Yes, you can have more but the game is balanced around this theoretical maximum number per colony.

This is the devs' vision and this won't change, Tynan himself have states the game is about a small group of survivors and is balanced around this fact. You're free to use a mod or edit the storytellers' defs yourself to change the softcaps, though.

And that colony wealth, beauty  and relations could be used to control this

This sounds good until you realize something. Other factions have settlements huge enough to casually send 15-20 of their people to a deathmarch to get slaughtered at your front doors every season. Imagine how big and wealthy their bases must be. And tribals would have no incentive to give up their ways and join the arrivals' group just because they are wealthier; the same can be said about outlanders not willing to join tribes. Now tell me again why would anyone happily forfeit such a strength-in-numbers and risk living with your 10 colonists instead?

The only time this does happen is when the game takes pity on the player doing so poorly and sends them a wanderer because they are that low on colonists. Or when Randy is being random enough.