Gear

[Vagabond]

Hello,

My suggestion:

Make gear less complicated. You'll have five basic clothing slots: Hat/Helmet, shirt, pants, gloves, and boots. Two accessory slots for items such as a coat, cloak, scarf, ring, or necklace. One body armor slot that may or may not remove other items to equip- so long as the armor is in this slot it's equipped. If it's a armor that unequips other items, you'll have to put the armor away to reequip them.

All gear has a "Work Time", or "Equip Time" to put on. Some are faster than others.

A primary weapon slot and secondary weapon slot. The primary weapon slot would be for a two handed weapon or tool, the secondary weapon slot could be for a one handed weapon or tool. A secondary could be equipped in the primary, but a primary can't be equipped in the secondary.

Switching between your primary and secondary has a "Work Time", or "Equip Time" based on the weapons/tools you're switching to/from.

Tools!

Making tools part of progression. We'll have two types of tools: Tools that are required to do a job, and tools that improve job performance.

Performance improving tools are tied to jobs in which there is a workbench, thus assuming that all basic items are already present there. Consider these specialty tools that simply give the user an edge in production. These aren't suitable for melee combat and are instead made as tool belts, or kept in the character's inventory.

Tools that are required to do a job are tied to tasks in which there is no workbench. These make good melee weapons.

Logging:
- Lumber Axe/GMA (Gyroscopic Mass Accelerator) Axe that uses magnetic fields, gyroscopes, and other stuff to keep balance and generate extra force.
- Chainsaw
- Vibrocutter, a serrated glaive like tool that vibrates at ultra sonic speeds to shear through material, the length of the shaft aids landscapers in pruning trees, while the blade can easily fell a tree outright.

Mining:
- Pickaxe/GMA Shovelpick (mix between this and this)
- Pneumatic Pick, think jackhammer held like a minigun and battery powered.
- Plasma Cutter, a self contained unit like the Pneumatic Pick, but projects a foot long "blade" of plasma modulated with a magnetic field.

Construction:
- Multi-tool/Vibro Multi-tool like this but bigger
- Fubar/GMA Fubar like this

Farming/Plant Cutting:
-Sickle/Vibrosickle
-Scythe/Vibroscythe

I think thats it...

Cheers!
Michael

[BetaSpectre]

The system as is, is fun. The issue IMO is that there isn't alot of supply, and its really expensive to get more clothes.

But you are on a rimworld after all you've gotta make it all yourself.

[Limdood]

How is this...in any way...LESS complicated?

I can't say i favor this extra complication and time in equipping gear.  All i want is mendable gear (which a mod can give) and gear that can be mended while worn.

I also don't favor any mod that requires axes/picks for logging/mining.  Due to the way the "pneumatic picks" research project works, it's already clear that your pawns are ASSUMED to be carrying an axe and pick, why prevent them from fighting by requiring them to carry extra stuff?

[TheStache]

I think they should allow mining picks/harvesting tools, that would be cool, however I think anything else would be a bit complex.

What I think would be really cool is if they allowed you to build gun parts that would eventually be put together to make the actual gun. Each gun part can also have their own individual grade, with when put together with the other needed parts would create a total gun quality that equals the sum off all the parts.

[Vagabond]

I think the rpg-esque equipment screen for each pawn, and clearly defined slots that items fit into specifically would make things easier, and less confusing than an item that may or may not stack, or may or may not equip to a slot that is there, but with no real visual clues.

I appreciate that others may prefer a more 'arcade' experience, but personally, I think there should be more to the game than endless waves of human slaughter.

By making equipment take time to pick up/put on, by making comfort take into consideration if they are wearing armor or lugging around big weapons or tools, I think it'd give us more to deal with so the game doesn't rely on endless waves of enemies to challenge us. Instead an ambush with three or four enemies could be devastating if folks aren't prepared. Less screen clutter, but just as thought provoking and demanding- how am I going to get my guys into the armory to get them geared up, do I have anyone equipped who can lay down cover fire to give my guys time to get geared up?

Requiring tools to be crafted and equipped adds an additional layer to achievement and progress. Tools are integral to human existence - it's what makes us, us. Deciding on whether you want to equip that LMG and a knife, or pick and pistol is something that seems so small and insignificant, but has as serious impact on productivity, defense, and logistics.

To further define this layer of management, to require a real choice in equipment, I suggested:

A primary weapon slot and secondary weapon slot. The primary weapon slot would be for a two handed weapon or tool, the secondary weapon slot could be for a one handed weapon or tool. A secondary could be equipped in the primary, but a primary can't be equipped in the secondary.

This is incredibly important as it will potentially allow colonists to switch between ranged and melee on the fly, as needed. This way they don't just flounder there stupidly until you manage to disengage them from melee.

This might not be less complicated, but as envisioned, it will be more intuitive and beneficial to progression and immersion.

Intuitive - that's certainly the word I should have used instead of saying "Make gear less complicated". At the same time though, I don't believe this makes it more complicated. The system's complexity will remain, it will simply be more intuitive with a proper GUI, though admittedly it will take a bit more time - but I feel it's worth it if it adds to progression and immersion.

I aim to stomp out arcadey stuff. . .

Cheers,
Michael

[Limdood]

I'm against implementing mining picks/woodcutting axes/garden hoes/etc.

First of all, the game pretty well shows that your colonists HAVE all that already...i mean they're able to cut down a tree and mine out a section of stone in under 48 hours...Their work speed already shows them able to competently handle the basic tasks.  Additionally, the primary benefit of introducing tools into the game would be to adjust work time up or down depending on quality/material, but this is ALREADY done with the colonist skill.

Next, swapping gear is already a bit tricky.  Using the outfits is somewhat hit or miss (and already doesn't include weapons) - assuming drafting/undrafting colonists to reset their job when you swap their outfits, some might still prioritize other activities over swapping gear (like sleeping/eating/treating sick/firefighting), and sending 5 colonists over to 5 armors is completely random who grabs what, when you very well might want certain colonists wearing certain qualities of armor.  As it stands, some "attack immediately" events can make it impossible to even get into firing position before they arrive, let alone swap gear first.

[Toggle]

Yeah sorry, but...

Make gear less complicated.

Haha... Yeah this would make gear, and gameplay, more complicated.

[Britnoth]

This is incredibly important as it will potentially allow colonists to switch between ranged and melee on the fly, as needed. This way they don't just flounder there stupidly until you manage to disengage them from melee.

Only thing I agree with. This is incredibly important... that this is not implemented.

Having both a sniper rifle and a longsword on the same pawn just removes the choice of the player to use guns or melee. Why do you think it is 'incredibly important' to remove interesting choices from the player?

Yes if someone with a melee weapon closes with your sniper they are supposed to flounder around or have to fight back with their fists, that is the penalty you pay for not using a melee weapon yourselves.

[Vagabond]

This is incredibly important as it will potentially allow colonists to switch between ranged and melee on the fly, as needed. This way they don't just flounder there stupidly until you manage to disengage them from melee.

Only thing I agree with. This is incredibly important... that this is not implemented.

Having both a sniper rifle and a longsword on the same pawn just removes the choice of the player to use guns or melee. Why do you think it is 'incredibly important' to remove interesting choices from the player?

Yes if someone with a melee weapon closes with your sniper they are supposed to flounder around or have to fight back with their fists, that is the penalty you pay for not using a melee weapon yourselves.

You are entitled to your opinion, of course. As I am mine. I respect some people's desire to keep as much of the arcade feeling of the game as possible. Sadly, the game has slowly moved away from that - suggestions that I have made, as well as others in regards to this since the beginning of development (that players such as yourself have rallied against vociferously) have been implemented - and based on the developer's blog, even more such elements are going to be as well.

Allow me to shed some light on my views so that you can at least respect them, even if you do not agree with them. I love simulation games. I love rpgs.  Arcade style games appeal to me as much as the next guy, but they do not have a long play time for me - though I often return to them every now and then for some random fun between serious games.

I'm going to drop a word that people seem to chaff against for real, imagined, or fanboy reasons: realism. I love my games to be as realistic and immersive as the fiction will allow - I don't believe that stretching one's acceptance of truth to extraordinary lengths is required "for the sake of gameplay". Though I do believe some concessions must be made in this regard.

You made an extraordinary claim that they are supposed to flounder around or fight back with their fists. That it is some penalty that is to be exacted upon the player for choosing a gun. I call this unrealistic.

You do realize that the rules in place for your pawns, would also be in effect for your enemies, do you not? The playing field naturally evens out even when you inject realism into the game, despite your reservations. Why must there be a choice, when the realistic course of action allows for better gameplay too?

It's my theory that indie development has fostered a new sort of gamer, followers whom religiously defend aspects of the game, displaying irrational tendencies to "bash" other individuals for constructive input/criticisms.

I enjoy my ideas being picked apart - it helps me to refine them, but this line:

Only thing I agree with. This is incredibly important... that this is not implemented.

Is incredibly telling in tone and intent. I'm unsure if you meant it as it sounds, but essentially it comes off as you patting my head before putting the dunce cap on to sit me in the corner while the "adults" talk.

Then it is followed by an incredibly unimaginative blanket statement that doesn't take into consideration the implications of such a system beyond what was written in the suggestion.

I hope you can find it in your heart to really consider the effects on gameplay for both colonists and npcs. Perhaps you will find it to allow a more dynamic and fluid combat event to occur. Perhaps you will simply think it stupid. Either way, maybe you could try to run with the idea yourself and give some alternate solutions to a fellow gamer's obvious disillusion with the current system.

Cheers,
Michael

[Toggle]

A primary and secondary weapon, a possibility discussed before and might be added in various different ways to gameplay. All the other stuff seems too far off in the future to deal with right now.

[Limdood]

if you defend multiple weapons for the sake of realism, then, for the sake of realism, you'd have to accept the drawbacks.

There should be significant work speed penalties for having multiple weapons equipped (or even single weapons of the 2-handed variety) or be limited to knives/shivs.


Secondly, you say that the playing field will naturally even out, but in this game, at least so far, that isn't true.  Multiple weapons evens the damage out in a fight...no longer will you be able to melee rush a rifle-wielding pirate or bow bearing tribesman with your swordsman and expect to get off relatively unscathed.  Instead, any melee action will always be "equal" in terms of give/take of damage between the participants...sounds great, right?  except that equal damage is fundamentally UNEQUAL in rimworld, where the player cannot sustain the losses that the innumerable pirates and tribesmen can.  A single dead colonist in a raid is significant.  Not necessarily devastating or unbearable, but certainly significant.  A dead pirate...even killing the entire raid is fairly inconsequential...a slight increase in loot/colony wealth...a slight reprieve before the next raid (excepting Randy), and thats it. 

The more equal the pawns are made, the more difficult it will be to strategize and make those meaningful choices.  There will be no more clever jumping out of doors to surprise a gunman who wandered close...cuz he also has a gladius now and RNG and the fact that your colonists go thru many MANY more raids than any given pirate pawn means that eventually you're going to lose an arm, leg, or the whole head to a lucky swing.

It cuts the TACTICS of the combat side of the game down to either a standoff shootout trading shots and hoping you come off better, or a bum rush in melee with 6 guys to 1, hoping the one hit the enemy pawn gets before he goes down doesn't lop off an arm.

[Vagabond]

If you defend multiple weapons for the sake of realism, then, for the sake of realism, you'd have to accept the drawbacks.

There should be significant work speed penalties for having multiple weapons equipped (or even single weapons of the 2-handed variety) or be limited to knives/shivs.

That seems like a pretty arbitrary choice of penalty, especially when considering Seabees, Engineering corps, and folks like woodsmen. Are you aware how little most armaments weight? Once you get used to the feeling of metal or composite against your back, it's easy to forget you have a rifle there. I admit, that walking around with a "two hander" sword would make things difficult, but even those are relatively light - 3-7 pounds. They can't really be stowed away on your person  though - not if you want to be able to draw them. Which is why I suggested the primary slot to be allowed for a one or two handed item, and the secondary a one handed item.

I can personally attest to one thing: Having a rifle shouldered, with a knife on one hip and sidearm on the other, is not encumbering. Hell, most activities go completely unhindered in full LBE- After a couple days you even figure out the balance and stop feeling like you are going to fall over. The biggest thing is fatigue and the long term effects of carrying a buck-twenty, no matter how well it's rigged. As an MPO your time is split half on and half off garrison depending on deployment - so infantry has it even worse. Day in and day out, what is worse is standing around in it - it's much easier when you are moving and alert (as odd as that sounds).

Secondly, you say that the playing field will naturally even out, but in this game, at least so far, that isn't true.  Multiple weapons evens the damage out in a fight...no longer will you be able to melee rush a rifle-wielding pirate or bow bearing tribesman with your swordsman and expect to get off relatively unscathed.  Instead, any melee action will always be "equal" in terms of give/take of damage between the participants...sounds great, right?  except that equal damage is fundamentally UNEQUAL in rimworld, where the player cannot sustain the losses that the innumerable pirates and tribesmen can.  A single dead colonist in a raid is significant.  Not necessarily devastating or unbearable, but certainly significant.  A dead pirate...even killing the entire raid is fairly inconsequential...a slight increase in loot/colony wealth...a slight reprieve before the next raid (excepting Randy), and thats it.

Let me tell you a story. South east Georgia in the muck after TDRL with my dad, my son, and my little brother. Went hunting with an old family friend (One of dad's Navy buddies). Had just dropped a buck and my dad and I were cleaning it up. My little brother was taking a piss off about ten yards in front of us. My son was behind us cleaning the barrel of my rifle because he had decided to stick it barrel first into the mud. Boar came out of nowhere and was headed directly for my boy. Didn't hear it at first, my dad was making fun of my shot and saying that he (an old navy guy) could out shoot a young buck marine any day. Didn't even notice it until I heard the first shot - we spun around, my son was facing down a charging boar - first shot cought it somewhere in the shoulder plate. It kept coming, he stood his ground. Second shot blew off the front right hoof, i got to my boy in time to snatch my sidearm from him and put a bullet in the boar's head.

I share this story because the ever old "Don't bring a knife to a gunfight" thing is true. Unless the guy running up to melee is in shield or in cover - he's going to get shot. It's why I've also lobbied for easier hit chance when out of cover, and harder when in cover. My eight year old son disabled one of the scariest critters in those woods. My son had lots of target practice, but it was his first time out. This should be represented.

"innumerable" pirates is a separate issue, but as you've brought up, ties into this. This is starting to go into the territory of the combat & logistical issues that the game has. Using something fundamentally broken as an argument isn't worth countering, imo. Mind you, this is my position that it is broken, as I look at this game as a sim - I believe this game could be much better without the casual/arcade elements.

The more equal the pawns are made, the more difficult it will be to strategize and make those meaningful choices.  There will be no more clever jumping out of doors to surprise a gunman who wandered close...cuz he also has a gladius now and RNG and the fact that your colonists go thru many MANY more raids than any given pirate pawn means that eventually you're going to lose an arm, leg, or the whole head to a lucky swing.

Seriously? This game's combat is about as tactical as a tower defence game. Why not go play Kingdom Rush or VectorTD if you want this sorta mindless waves and waves of bad guys? I'm sorry, but you lack vision and imagination, which is what suggestions are about. Creative solutions to things people find bothersome. I get it, you are for the status quo. I, however, hope for a deeper simulation, a better AI, factions as dependent on logistics as the player faction is. Better combat using vision cones, fog of war, more powerful cover, with penalties for being out in the open in a gun fight. Essentially accounting for suppression and what other games consider reactionary fire - It is deceptively simple to hit someone moving laterally, or forwards/backwards. Which is why you are taught to 'zig zag' with diagonal movements in an effective range around your target - circular in a sense.

This game doesn't get more challenging as they dump more and more enemies on map. Two things happen: A) get bored and start over, B) Are simply completely overrun by the insane amount of enemies on screen.

It cuts the TACTICS of the combat side of the game down to either a standoff shootout trading shots and hoping you come off better, or a bum rush in melee with 6 guys to 1, hoping the one hit the enemy pawn gets before he goes down doesn't lop off an arm.

Can't even tell what point you are trying to get across here, I'm sorry. As far as I can tell this is what goes on right now. Either by the player, or by the enemy. Especially in early game. I agree with you that the combat system and AI need improvement. But that isn't something this proposition covers, and while it certainly would be a factor in such an overhaul, it isn't the end all-be-all to it, or the current mechanics.

Cheers,
Michael

[Austupaio]

That seems like a pretty arbitrary choice of penalty, especially when considering Seabees, Engineering corps, and folks like woodsmen. Are you aware how little most armaments weight? Once you get used to the feeling of metal or composite against your back, it's easy to forget you have a rifle there. I admit, that walking around with a "two hander" sword would make things difficult, but even those are relatively light - 3-7 pounds. They can't really be stowed away on your person  though - not if you want to be able to draw them. Which is why I suggested the primary slot to be allowed for a one or two handed item, and the secondary a one handed item.

I can personally attest to one thing: Having a rifle shouldered, with a knife on one hip and sidearm on the other, is not encumbering. Hell, most activities go completely unhindered in full LBE- After a couple days you even figure out the balance and stop feeling like you are going to fall over. The biggest thing is fatigue and the long term effects of carrying a buck-twenty, no matter how well it's rigged. As an MPO your time is split half on and half off garrison depending on deployment - so infantry has it even worse. Day in and day out, what is worse is standing around in it - it's much easier when you are moving and alert (as odd as that sounds).

As someone who hikes and camps with a rifle, handgun and knife... I've got to completely agree. Yeah, they're mildly in the way and they are mildly heavy after some time, but that's represented in the penalties that already exist. Enough to be worth considering having your skilled workers unarmed if they would truly be safe, but not so much that it's a big deal if you'd rather they were armed.

Going beyond what already exists would be overkill, if people were allowed to carry multiple weapons, I would just want the penalties to stack and that's it. It may have already been said (this is a lot of big posts) but I would ideally envision this as pawns having basic slots just like they have for clothing. One big weapon (greatsword or rifle), one small weapon (handgun or hatchet) and one tiny weapon (derringer, knife, shiv).

Or skip the the tiny weapon entirely and just go with one big, one small/tiny. That would be fine imo.

[Vagabond]

Hello,

I'd like to add on top of Austupaio by saying that the inclusion of tool requirements for tasks would require colonists to fill one or both slots with something other than a weapon - mind you, most tools make excellent melee weapons, but at least you'd still be forced into situations where you sharpshooter who's also a miner happens to be across the map with a pick rather than his sniper rifle in that primary slot when bad guys attack.

Now, I understand some people are very much against tools as equipment, but there we have it. I can't for the life of me understand why there are such folks - tools are so important to us as humans. It's our equalizer. I don't think I've seen one (non-industrial) thing that I couldn't figure out, as long as I had that right tool. Hell, even without the tool some times; change that rad hose on the fly without a flathead - AH I got a penny in my pocket from McDonalds earlier.

Tools also add another layer of progression to the game.

Cheers,
Michael

[Britnoth]

You made an extraordinary claim that they are supposed to flounder around or fight back with their fists. That it is some penalty that is to be exacted upon the player for choosing a gun. I call this unrealistic.

I think this sums up this thread entirely.

Yes, it is somewhat unrealistic. It is also, I thought, entirely self evident that it is a necessary design choice in the interest of good gameplay.

What is gameplay? What is a game?

A game is a series of interesting choices.

- Sid Meier

Allowing pawns to carry both ranged and melee weapons reduces variation in combat, and therefore an interesting choice available to the player.

You could also say it is not fair a rook can only move horizontally and a bishop diagonally.

Would allowing rooks to move like bishops, and bishops rooks add to chess? No, because you just removed choice from the player,
and genuine complexity from the game.

Tools also add another layer of progression to the game.

No. they are an unnecessary level of complication to the game.

-----

Perhaps this thread received so many.... replies... lacking in support... was because the suggestion started with

Make gear less complicated.

and then proceeded to suggest multiple ways to make gear more complicated, without any addition to gameplay.

Let us go back to the concept of a game.

A game is a series of interesting choices.

- Sid Meier

Personally I am far from a fan of Mr Meiers more recent contributions to gaming. But I digress. 

Adding tool requirements to the game is more realistic, but how does it add choice to the player?

It does not.

It is assumed that pawns carry the tools they need with them. This is a simplification because the player wants to be spending
his or her time designing the buildings to be built, not micro managing the location of every hammer and nail in the colony.

I believe this game could be much better without the casual/arcade elements.

Oh, is this a filthy casual gamer hate thread now?