Is this always to be a game about a small number of survivors ... or more?

[DNK]

In its current state, Rimworld is mostly a tale about a very small band of survivors who land on a planet and can generally rebuild advanced technologies rapidly from scratch and whose primary goal is to leave the planet within a year or two, not increasing their population much beyond a dozen members, and surviving a few minor assaults from locals.

While I enjoy the game as-is a lot, I do wish/hope/yearn for more, and feel that this is not living up to the game's potential. It works for this stage of development, but I want to see a lot more down the road.

For instance, I want to manage an actual colony (not just a group of crash survivors) that can grow to 50 or 100 or more, much like in DF. I see no engine limitations to this, though I suppose many lesser computers might not handle it as well.

Also, if we're going with crash survivors, I'd like to see rebuilding from actual scratch, moving from primitive techs and rebuilding civilization sort of, rather than just jumping to advanced stuff like hydroponics, etc, OR at least the ability at colony start to choose your starting tech position, allowing for a more challenging/long game for those who wish. A game where research was a very central part of your colony's progress, and measured in months rather than hours, requiring multiple benches and people eventually, a constant colonial investment of so many percentages of workhours to advance tech levels, with exponentially increasing research times for advanced techs to go along with vastly expanding colony sizes and economic output... and dangers as you make yourself more visible in the intergalactic trading markets (and pirate hives).

I'd like to see a game where "winning" wasn't just building a spaceship and leaving (I know this is a placeholder by Tynan), but building a fully flourished, advanced-world city capable of fending off massive mecha-pirate assaults and dominating your otherwise backward rimworld planet through sheer political and economic dominance.

Of course, my tastes might differ from others, and from the developer's wishes, but I'm just curious what others feel about the underlying nature of the game in terms of:

technological progression
size/scope
end goals.

[nottma]

I've enjoyed the game as a means to create an amazing story.  The story only gets richer as more events and options are added to the game.  Survival is only one part of the story. In the future I hope there are events that dynamically change the game for the player.  (i.e. a large group of refugees move into your area seeking shelter or a massive climate effect changes your biome).

Survival of a few alone gets boring after a while.

[Mathenaut]

As someone that primarily plays the short stories, I see the game with a potential for more. I'd like to see support for massive colonies.

I'd like to hit a point where, if plans to leave take too long, I'd be tempted to consider just staying to build a proper community.

[TheSilencedScream]

I don't mind the option of having a huge colony, but - Dwarf Fortress included - there's already quite a lot of games out there like that. This game stands out for BEING focused on a smaller group of survivors who are attempting to get by for as long as they can or escape.

It may not be Tynan's intentions (because the late-game isn't balanced), but in my mind, the reason that you inevitably hit a force that killboxes can't deal with, it's because that's as long as your colony could get by.

As it stands, even at the largest map setting, it's really easy to clear the map of useful resources within a year, with less than ten colonists... and you're looking for 50-100? Inevitably, you're going to have 45+ colonists that are idle because you simply don't have anything to do with them. What's the point? You'll VERY quickly build your colony, you'll mine the resources, you'll have all of the clothing/weapons crafted that you need... and then, you're no longer playing a game.

You have a fully self-sufficient colony that only needs to be addressed when you need to draft colonists to defend.


If it's implemented (I'm not against it - I always love options), until the max map size is greatly increased (which will take a lot of work; try zooming fully out when you get attacked for a 30+ mob and see how much slow down you get), there's not really a point, as you'll hit that "nothing to do" point even more quickly with more colonists.

[longbyte1]

Well to understand how humans are organized, you've got to go back. Way back.

Thousands of years ago, humans lived in a decentralized, nomadic nature, until the Neolithic Revolution. That means most villages were composed of a dozen or so individuals diffused across the continents, and you were lucky to find a town with more than a hundred people. Usually these towns claimed a central government and some surrounding lands.

RimWorld assumes that all technologies have been discovered, but no government is established that can lure more people/subjects into your colony.

The game should be about survival, and it's supposed to be hard in order to keep the game engaging. Anything more than that, and you've turned RimWorld into Sid Meier's Civilization. Or Spore.

[Mathenaut]

You know, there's a person (and a thread they made) that actually has 60 colonists. You don't need wild speculation on what you think should happen, can just ask him.

It's good reading.

[longbyte1]

You know, there's a person (and a thread they made) that actually has 60 colonists. You don't need wild speculation on what you think should happen, can just ask him.

It's good reading.

Link?

[wolfman1911]

My thought is that the intimacy of a small number of survivors is what makes it special. It could be expanded to be about building a large compound with hundreds of people and seeing how long it lasts, but if you are going in for that, then Dwarf Fortress is always going to be that but with more complexity.

Then again, I really enjoy the emergent storytelling of the game. If the colony grows to the point where it's just a mass of people rather than a collection of individuals, I think it loses something really important.

[rtiger]

I would be much more interested to see the current game rebalanced so raids are not overwhelming. As it is now, you either turtle up hard, or try to build the spaceship before your overrun. Even in Dwarf Fortress, you generally die more often from poor planning then the actual raiders. In other words, as long as your prepared, and experienced as a player, your generally in good shape.

This game, it seems Tynan is more interested in making turtle soup and giving raiders new things, rather then giving the players more options to deal with raiders.

[Mystic]

I don't really want to see colonies growing so big that the individual colonists cease to have meaningful identities and stories.  I view that as one of the strengths of the game ... I always find myself mentally "filling in the blanks" for the back stories and attitudes of individual colonists, and giving them a real identity where I care about keeping them alive (in most cases ... once in a while, not so much).

However, I do think the tech tree is too shallow.  If I start off with a really good researcher who isn't given much to do other than research, I can have every tech in the current tree researched by the time the first winter comes, and research capabilities become useless thereafter.  To me, that's far too fast - I think there should always be a reason to at least consider continuing research, even if only to make additional, incremental improvements.  E.g., slightly more accurate targeting for mortars, some smelting technology that adds a bit more metal yielded each time slag or something is recycled, some sort of fertilizer to slightly improve crop yields, an improvement to solar panels to capture a bit more energy in dim conditions, etc.  You know, things that make it possible for a small colony to do a bit more, without necessarily having to add more people.

So I didn't vote in the poll, because all of the choices seem to be predicated on the idea that wanting a deeper tech tree (which I do) implies also wanting higher colony populations (which I don't).

[CheeseGromit]

I favour playing for survival and tend to keep colonies small, iirc I've not had more than 12 colonists ever.  I like the idea of rebuilding from scratch and would like the option to start with nothing. Theoretically I'd be nice to start with bows and spears and slowly progress from there. I'm looking forward to seeing what A10 bring in terms of wildlife attacking and raider improvements and whether I can mod around this to get something closer to my tastes.

I don't mind the 'building a spaceship and leaving' part but I don't like that it abruptly ends the game. I still favour the idea of planet hopping as a way of prolonging gameplay but I'm more interested in my colonists than the colony.

[rtiger]

Well, you can build bows and spears yourself already. Guns you have to either loot, or purchase.

[b0rsuk]

If you like hardcore survival games, try the board game Robinson Crusoe: Adventures on the Cursed Island. The game wants to kill you and it's a battle against forces of nature. It's also one of the best story generators I've seen, and the only cooperative game that doesn't bore me.

[Shinzy]

The storyteller changes your colonist amount alot
alpha 6 Edit: alpha 7 I had this massive colony of nearly 200
it was an antmoundhivethingplace with just a few dear hearties and dozens of not as dear but still lovely blokes

If keeps going as it's going now then Randy will be more focused on huge colony plays while the other two ladies more on the small band of survivors

Each player can play with their own preference (which is just the grapest! yay!)

[lusername]

Well, how many colonists you can keep as individuals before they become faceless tends to vary, but the Monkeysphere theories may have something to do with it. I find that I have no difficulties keeping my pawns straight as individuals well into the 30+ range, personally, but eventually the limited and clumsy UI starts to get in the way of keeping order.