Survivors or Colonists? - Vote

[Mikhail Reign]

EDIT: POLL RESULTS DISCUSSION: https://ludeon.com/forums/index.php?topic=19296.0

If everyone that voted would like to head over to this post for a discussion of the results (quick recap at this point -21/04- roughly 70% colonist 30% survivor) that would be great.


Everyone that has voted I thank you very much. I would also like to thank the many people that voted without posting - over 100 people. This is another reason that I love this game - the community. Just think - I asked broadly, on the internet, for people to do something which was very easy to NOT do, and the VAST majority complied. This isn't calling out the few people that posted - honestly I should have made a discussion post as well.

Please continue to vote/bump for as long as you feel it is relevant.

First off - lets try and not have any post. Just vote. If you vote, maybe just post a '.' or something to keep the topic up top as long as its relevant. This is so that an unbiased opinion of how everyone views the game. I feel that this is a key part of the test - so please keep posting to a '.' or something similar if you vote (for bumps) - cheers people

This is a long time erk of mine.

Half of the game descriptions describe the pawns as colonist, implying a colony
Colony synonyms:   territory, possession, holding, dependency, province, dominion, protectorate, satellite (state), settlement, outpost. All words with somewhat permanent implications.

The other half of the game describes them as survivors - they are survivors of a crash. I dont really know what kind of settlement survivors would build so I cant quote a description or anything. Some of the parallel are, most obviously, the inital crash landing, as well as a lot of the in game flavor.

I have not real problem with it either way, but obviously being one or the other structures the game - survivors would be less interested in crafting lasting alliances, while colonists would. Survivors would be more likely to devote time and resources to build a ship to enable them to leave the planet, while colonists would use those resources to better their current location.

Anyway, how does everyone see the pawns in this game?

EDITED: I felt the description of survivors felt a little biased, which I'm not. As I said, I feel the game could do either way. Added a little more to it.

EDITED: This has gotten a good amount of votes, so I feel it is a relevant topic. Since I feel that mod post (cheers by the way) might prevent spontaneous bumps, I have bumped it for a second run. Will keep this to very minimum.

EDITED: The last bump got another 10+ votes, so I feel that it is worthy of bumping again. As soon as there is a noticeable lack of votes I will stop bumping the thread. I'm trying to keep it to a minimum and allowing it to fall to the 4th or so page before bumping it again. This seems to take about 2 days.

[milon]

Per Mikhail Reign's request, all other posts have been removed.  Please do not reply to this topic, other than to "bump" it to keep it visible.  (Yes, I am making an exception to our usual rules.)  The point of this thread is simply to vote, and to see the results.  Mikhail wants the voting to be a "pure" as possible, without any prior discussion swaying opinions.  You may discuss this issue in a separate thread if you wish, but please do not post your thoughts here.  I would lock the thread, but it may disable the voting and it would definitely cause the thread get lost.

[Mikhail Reign]

bump

[Mikhail Reign]

Bump

[Mossy piglet]

A

[Shurp]

burp

[Mossy piglet]

Get up there

[Nictis]

Beep Boop Son

[Shabazza]

Colonists that try to survive long enough to get away and become true survivors in a new colony on a safe planet. 

[keylocke]

"safety" is a relative term. it's subjective. if something is not safe, then make it safe. the "wild west" is a good example. it was not safe, yet people still colonized it. 

nothing is really "safe". the peace that most nations enjoy are due to the military forces that protects them from invaders. the safety from crime is mostly due to the efforts of the police force. military and police did not materialize from nothing. these institutions were built by society to create this illusion of "safety".

[Mathenaut]

I'm not sure if I see the conflict here.

[Boston]

"safety" is a relative term. it's subjective. if something is not safe, then make it safe. the "wild west" is a good example. it was not safe, yet people still colonized it. 

nothing is really "safe". the peace that most nations enjoy are due to the military forces that protects them from invaders. the safety from crime is mostly due to the efforts of the police force. military and police did not materialize from nothing. these institutions were built by society to create this illusion of "safety".

What is funny is that the "Wild Wild West" .... wasn't actually all that wild. Settlers actually tended to cooperate and trade with the natives (and vice versa), up until after the Civil War. After the Civil War community-and-state militias were replaced by the Federal Army, and the Gov. had to justify spending all that money. So, they "flexed the muscle", so to speak.

http://www.independent.org/publications/tir/article.asp?a=803
http://www.perc.org/articles/old-west-violence-mostly-myth
http://www.unpopulartruth.com/2009/04/myths-of-old-west.html

[rmurdocci]

^bump

[Headshotkill]

Opinons man, can't supress mah visions... (even though my post was deleted ;( )

*oh and this serves as a bumb*

[Malachi_Draven]

Haven't you ever seen The 100? Everybody crash lands back on Earth, thus being survivors. Then they go about trying to build a settlement called Arkadia, complete with farms, prison, and hospital. Then they (badly) attempt to build relations with the various other factions like the Grounders and the Mountain Men.

They're both survivors and colonists. And it's literally the exact same scenario in RimWorld. Basically, The 100 is like if somebody simply made a TV show about their playthrough of RimWorld. Hell, there's even diabolical AIs now.