Auto avoid enemies

[Stealth]

Case 2 : To be sincere, I don't see why you would forbid all the time everybody to go outside. And even then, erasing one authorized place don't seem to hard.
Still again, being able to define as a whole if the selected zone is authorized or not could be our solution.

This works the other way around as well. If you never forbid anything, but only when you get attacked, you have to add a 'forbidden zone' every time there is a threat AND remove it afterwards.

I would guess that half of the players wouldn't mind the extra micromanagement. But the other half, players like Stealth, Adamiks and me, do mind. I lost too many colonists because I forgot to forbid resources or deselect mining areas outside of my colony because I was too focused on fighting a raid or another threat.

That's why I'm still opting for an automated danger zone which can be toggled. Then, everyone will be happy.

Exaclty. When I'm attacked, I already have to re-adjust what they can and cannot pickup as well a change up my "home" region so they don't run in the line of fire to put out a fire when undrafted. Simply having one danger zone will negate all this since it will take priority. It will actually reduce micro.

[Play2Jens]

Poor Tynan, if he has to read through all of these arguments and little fights 

[Adamiks]

I still see no need for a DANGER zone. So I disagree. all in how YOU choose to manage your colonists, and actually understand what they are doing.


I do see for people who play at speed 3, and don't pay attention to what their colonists are doing, would want to be able to restrict whole sections of the map.

"I still see no need for a DANGER zone. So I disagree. all in how YOU choose to manage your colonists, and actually understand what they are doing."

Jesus... Are you a bot or something? WE ALL understand what they are doing and how they are doing anything, we also can tell them what they should do, BUT we can't tell them HOW THEY SHOULD DO ANYTHING. We can't choose they paths, ANYTHING, only LOCKING DOORS is a good idea.

Because i know what you will say - no, this isn't my fault that i select hundred of jobs, i don't know how you're playing, but i know how i (and most of the players) are playing, we playing with action not like fu***** grandmas. When i'm building a big wall around my base i don't build it by sections, no i plan every section of the wall NOW, not 1 hour later or something.

"I do see for people who play at speed 3, and don't pay attention to what their colonists are doing, would want to be able to restrict whole sections of the map."

Ok, it's seems like you're really playing like grandma. My 4-5 years old colony = 120-168 hours of playing on 3 speed! I don't know how you life looks like, but i don't have time to play like month on 1 colony (like 70-90% of players).

In general:
If you like playing without 3 speed this is yours problem, because most of the players are playing at 3 speed and these players need DANGER ZONE.

Ahh.... It is meaningless, i will say this you will say this and so on. We all knows that you disagree and even great ideas will be useless for you, because YOU don't need it.

[Stealth]

Poor Tynan, if he has to read through all of these arguments and little fights 

People seem to have a notion that if they don't like an idea, it shouldn't be in the game regardless of it being optional.

[TLHeart]

As I said, adamiks, I can see how people who play at speed 3 could need a danger zone.

I also see the problem from other posts, about I set that job 2 or three days ago.... yep cueing up more jobs than they can do leads to not knowing what is going on.

The thread has went from the title of Auto avoid, to a user defined area, big difference from auto avoid. 

And I stated I can see why you want a user defined danger zone. I still won't use it, as I don't need it.

Yes I play at speed 1, as I enjoy the small things that happen. The game is not all about how quick I can construct a colony, and how many raids I can survive in an hour.... And Yes I have the time to play that way.

Different play styles for different people. 

Stealth,

there is ONE and ONLY one programmer, and that is a limited resource, and an OPTIONAL idea takes time to implement, debug, adjust due to community feed back, debug, finalize....

I would rather see the time spent on expanded events, and interactions with the other factions.

[Stealth]

As I said, adamiks, I can see how people who play at speed 3 could need a danger zone.

I also see the problem from other posts, about I set that job 2 or three days ago.... yep cueing up more jobs than they can do leads to not knowing what is going on.

The thread has went from the title of Auto avoid, to a user defined area, big difference from auto avoid. 

And I stated I can see why you want a user defined danger zone. I still won't use it, as I don't need it.

Yes I play at speed 1, as I enjoy the small things that happen. The game is not all about how quick I can construct a colony, and how many raids I can survive in an hour.... And Yes I have the time to play that way.

Different play styles for different people. 

Stealth,

there is ONE and ONLY one programmer, and that is a limited resource, and an OPTIONAL idea takes time to implement, debug, adjust due to community feed back, debug, finalize....

I would rather see the time spent on expanded events, and interactions with the other factions.

Again it's always what YOU want. All features are optional. Just because you don't want it, there are others that do. Like i said, the dev himself said he wanted to add it... You think expanded events and faction interactions won't have a testing period as well?  I can bet it would  be even longer so what's your point?

Also i said auto avoid in the title but w/e accomplishes this is fine. A danger zone would. Allow users to set their own restricted zone which can be good for many reasons.

[Kegereneku]

This works the other way around as well. If you never forbid anything, but only when you get attacked, you have to add a 'forbidden zone' every time there is a threat AND remove it afterwards.

I would guess that half of the players wouldn't mind the extra micromanagement. But the other half, players like Stealth, Adamiks and me, do mind. I lost too many colonists because I forgot to forbid resources or deselect mining areas outside of my colony because I was too focused on fighting a raid or another threat.

That's why I'm still opting for an automated danger zone which can be toggled. Then, everyone will be happy.

I think you misunderstood the idea.
What take long is to draw the zone. But if region-zone could be individually toggled into neutral/safe/forbidden with 2 click, the micromanagement is (in my mind) less than what we risk from having to negotiate with a too automated danger zone.

Though, the earlier idea was also aiming at maximizing the amount of possibility, beyond "keep non-drafter pawn safe".

Ok so requesting a feature is "entitlement" now? Nice use of strawman there to try and win an argument. Saying that you should "give up your features so I can have mine". GJ twisting my words there. Don't come in here acting all self righteous, I never said my idea was flawless but so far there has been lots of suggestions and most of which would work. Where did I say they wouldn't?

That's not what a strawman is...
You are acting like an entitled person in that you act as if what you want is more importance than other's, or compromise.
To get back on more friendly base. Since everyone is stating what he want to see accomplished on the "keep non-drafted pawn safe" topic, you now know that some of us still want non-drafted pawn who don't care about being at shooting range of an enemy.

Se we can work at making it optional, and ideally an effective use of Tynan's time.

The thread has went from the title of Auto avoid, to a user defined area, big difference from auto avoid. 

And I stated I can see why you want a user defined danger zone. I still won't use it, as I don't need it.

[...]

there is ONE and ONLY one programmer, and that is a limited resource, and an OPTIONAL idea takes time to implement, debug, adjust due to community feed back, debug, finalize....

I would rather see the time spent on expanded events, and interactions with the other factions.

TLHeart, I know there's hostility building up for no good reasons but still.
- You do agree that it can interest people.
- But you fear it will take valuable time over Tynan's time.
Considering that Tynan will decide himself it it's worth his time, what about proposing a way you consider efficient/multi-use in case Tynan decide to address the subject ?

Who now if creating user-defined <safe/neutral/forbidden> zone couldn't benefit events or factions interaction ? Take the incoming fallout, wouldn't it be cool to easily keep non-drafted colonist indoor ?

[TLHeart]

As I said, adamiks, I can see how people who play at speed 3 could need a danger zone.

I also see the problem from other posts, about I set that job 2 or three days ago.... yep cueing up more jobs than they can do leads to not knowing what is going on.

The thread has went from the title of Auto avoid, to a user defined area, big difference from auto avoid. 

And I stated I can see why you want a user defined danger zone. I still won't use it, as I don't need it.

Yes I play at speed 1, as I enjoy the small things that happen. The game is not all about how quick I can construct a colony, and how many raids I can survive in an hour.... And Yes I have the time to play that way.

Different play styles for different people. 

Stealth,

there is ONE and ONLY one programmer, and that is a limited resource, and an OPTIONAL idea takes time to implement, debug, adjust due to community feed back, debug, finalize....

I would rather see the time spent on expanded events, and interactions with the other factions.

Again it's always what YOU want.Look in the mirror Stealth All features are optional. Just because you don't want it, there are others that do. Like i said, the dev himself said he wanted to add it... You think expanded events and faction interactions won't have a testing period as well?  I can bet it would  be even longer so what's your point?

Also i said auto avoid in the title but w/e accomplishes this is fine. A danger zone would. Allow users to set their own restricted zone which can be good for many reasons.

If tynan said he wants to add this feature, show the quote from tynan. I have never seen such a quote.

I bolded where I again said, I can see where some people want it. 

Here I will say it again,

A user defined zone, that you the player must define the size of, define the area of, turn on or off, for some people is a good option, based upon their play style.  This is NOT auto avoid. This makes the player have to think about the area.

And yes we both make our ideas about ourselves.

[TLHeart]

Who now if creating user-defined <safe/neutral/forbidden> zone couldn't benefit events or factions interaction ? Take the incoming fallout, wouldn't it be cool to easily keep non-drafted colonist indoor ?

The fallout event is there to make you the player think and react to the event, and keeping non drafted colonists safe from the fallout automatically, defeats the purpose of the fall out event. Why even have an event if it is EASY to counter?

[Play2Jens]

Who now if creating user-defined <safe/neutral/forbidden> zone couldn't benefit events or factions interaction ? Take the incoming fallout, wouldn't it be cool to easily keep non-drafted colonist indoor ?

I really like this idea. I did indeed not think through the concept of keeping the zone drawn, but just toggling it to make it "active" and "inactive". But what will be the difference gameplay-wise between a zone which is toggle "safe" and "neutral"? 

The fallout event is there to make you the player think and react to the event, and keeping non drafted colonists safe from the fallout automatically, defeats the purpose of the fall out event. Why even have an event if it is EASY to counter?

- Completely untrue. Mate, I don't know if you noticed, but since alpha 10 there are new activities where colonists AUTOMATICALLY go for a walk or pick a spot to sky gaze. How would you counter this without a safe zone?
- Also, it's not really fun for the average player to forbid everything from hauling, deselect mining zones, suspend jobs, etc. every time there will be an incident like fallout or a raid. This way these events will become less fun because you have to do a lot of micromanagement which could have been solved much easier with a forbidden zone.
Implementing a forbidden zone doesn't make the game easier, it just gives to player an option to handle the situation more efficient. The player still has to think things through and place the zones on strategically selected spots. And manage them.
- Last argument that proofs that Tynan doesn't think that the player should handle every action the pawns do theirselfs with every event. Remember when temperature got implemented? At the release of that alpha, pawns were more prone to get a temperature-related medical condition when an 'extreme temperature' event arrived, because they stayed outside to do their job. So he implemented an AI change that pawns seek save temperatures automatically whenever this happens. Imho, this isn't any different from events like raids or toxic fallout.

[Scotty]

I would just like that if an enemy is near a colonist, they will avoid the incoming fire.
Having 15~ people is hard to manage when defending

[Kegereneku]

The fallout event is there to make you the player think and react to the event, and keeping non drafted colonists safe from the fallout automatically, defeats the purpose of the fall out event. Why even have an event if it is EASY to counter?

To me, drafting all colonist and keeping them in safe place knowing they will never move again look easier that the potential in this idea.

Also, there's more to it than keeping colonist drafted and safe.
Ex : What if your settlement is made of separate building and you have to decide between letting safe-zone between building or having to occasionally draft them to make them cross swiftly to another building ?
Think of it as being able to have the colonist sleep/eat and go on other occupation during fallout without having to micromanage any lemming you catch outside and reprogram it.

That aside, my point still stand : Who now if creating user-defined <safe/neutral/forbidden> zone couldn't benefit events or factions interaction ?
I bet I can make a few events and faction-relation that require to have togglable-zone where pawn regroup.

I really like this idea. I did indeed not think through the concept of keeping the zone drawn, but just toggling it to make it "active" and "inactive". But what will be the difference gameplay-wise between a zone which is toggle "safe" and "neutral"? 

I admit the name I gave them are a little misleading, they don't actually need distinct name.
- 'safe' zone would be a zone that attract pawn (or selected one).
- 'neutral' zone would be a zone with no 'toggle' waiting to be used, like a stockpile with nothing authorized.
- 'Forbidden' is self-explaining from here.
That is, its because I tried to also mix in a 'workplace' idea from others suggestion to make it more interesting. But you could probably have a more basic 'safe zone' that is kept drawn (like any clean/clear snow region) but toggled on by an outside button.

[TLHeart]

Who now if creating user-defined <safe/neutral/forbidden> zone couldn't benefit events or factions interaction ? Take the incoming fallout, wouldn't it be cool to easily keep non-drafted colonist indoor ?

I really like this idea. I did indeed not think through the concept of keeping the zone drawn, but just toggling it to make it "active" and "inactive". But what will be the difference gameplay-wise between a zone which is toggle "safe" and "neutral"? 

The fallout event is there to make you the player think and react to the event, and keeping non drafted colonists safe from the fallout automatically, defeats the purpose of the fall out event. Why even have an event if it is EASY to counter?

- Completely untrue. Mate, I don't know if you noticed, but since alpha 10 there are new activities where colonists AUTOMATICALLY go for a walk or pick a spot to sky gaze. How would you counter this without a safe zone?

I have noticed, and YOU have to allow the time for them to do that activity in the time table. And with alpha 11, if it is work time, that is all they are allowed to do, work.

Again it is about MACRO management of the colony.

I have stated, I see where some players need and would benefit from a "safe" zone, one that they have to create, and think about, I said I support, but will not use.

Some people want an easy to play game. I do not want it to be easy. Events need to upset your plans, and activities, and force you to respond, to make HARD decisions, that affect the survivability of the colonists and the colony as a whole. Otherwise it just becomes another boring simulation game, where what the player does has little impact upon the outcome.

[Play2Jens]

I have noticed, and YOU have to allow the time for them to do that activity in the time table. And with alpha 11, if it is work time, that is all they are allowed to do, work.

So let's say a toxic event takes longer then a few days. I shouldn't allow my colonists to have joy in the time table for all those days? that just seems illogical. And would probably cause a few of them to have a mood crash.

Because if I would let them participate in joy activities, they would just wander outside and get struck by some fallout... Or do you suggest that I let them have joy, but play a babysitter during those events and draft them every time someone is about to walk outside?

[Play2Jens]

TLHeart, just try thinking outside the box here. I bet a huge amount of silver that you will ever need a 'forbidden zone'