Idea how rimkids would work.

Started by Tatte, April 17, 2016, 02:42:22 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

Vaporisor

It isn't that there is no prescedence for death on video game children.  The main part is how it occurs.  In Banished, they die of sickness.  In rimworld, a more viable thing is that in combat, animals will attack whatever.  Raiders would probably have a priority tree.  Shoot threats first, then probably just abduct children which potentially could even show up years later in a raid.

I mean heck, dwarf fortress had far worse in it's engine with things like dragons roasting babies alive.  I remember one playthrough where a dwarf got trapped by accident and I didn't catch.  Gave birth while trapped and died of thirst before could get out.  Poor baby wandered the fortress til died.

In the end, it is to what extent.  No drafting pre-teens and teens can do hunting and combat etc, but not marriage.  If a player doesn't want children, there is another RP option to it.  Make luxury single beds.  Don't let people sleep together.  In reality, that probably wouldn't stop em but from a game mechanics point of view, would do the job. 
Stories by Vaporisor

Escaped convicts!
concluded
Altair XIII
Frozen Wastes

keylocke

#16
i agree with assigning single beds if you don't want your colonists to get preggers. it's a very simple solution that would provide the option of a no-children playthru, while double beds would allow players who wants to have children in their playthru. or better yet, only allow pregnancies for couples assigned to royal beds or something equivalent. this allows couples to still get some lovin without conceiving a child.

this way we all get what we want. and the naysayers have nothing to complain about anymore.

also, if you've seen the poll how people see rimworld if it's for survivors or colonists, majority of players seemed to have chosen colonists. there are also plenty of rimworld players who thinks that spaceships and trying to escape the planet is a waste of time. they just want to build a colony which implies they want to stay on the planet.

that kind of mindset does not impede on the gameplay of people who thinks of rimworld as only for survivors who needs to escape the planet.. by all means, build the spaceship and leave. no one's stopping you.

but don't say to others, NOPE you're not allowed to have kids in your games coz we don't want it and therefore you can't have it.

that's just creepy.

Vaperius

Growth Accelerator Chambers to make them mature within a few years. Basically children can be the second part of the End-game for Rimworld. A parent can refuse to get into the ship without their child unless they are a psychopath or some other relevant trait. So the longer you are on the Rimworld, the harder it will be to build a ship to escape. I imagine this is why there are Outlander towns actually; their populations just grew too large to build an escape vessel.
I remain Vigilant.

Nictis

Quote from: keylocke on April 20, 2016, 07:20:27 AM
better yet, only allow pregnancies for couples assigned to royal beds or something equivalent. this allows couples to still get some lovin without conceiving a child.
Fifty gold for children? I don't even think I can call that pay to win...

Also, spoilers on the poll, it doesn want bias.

JimmyAgnt007

Unlike fallout and skyrim where the children look real I dont think they will get any special armor to keep them from harm.

also no matter how shitty life is for people they never stop having kids.  if they did then those 3rd world countries would have died out generations ago.

birth control could be set in the medical tab, "use protection" checkbox so that they dont get kids, only one of the people involved need it to prevent pregnancy.  keep it simple.

Tynan has laid the groundwork for kids, he even said its really simple now that the animals do it.  The trick is that he wants to do it right.  So maybe not for a while.

Lastly, this is in the Frequent suggestions topic.  It gets talked about a lot.  I think I will replace the older thread with this one though. 

Tatte

Quote from: Shabazza on April 19, 2016, 01:48:30 PM
Those colonists try to get away from that planet. Not to build themselves a new permanent home.
So I'd say, having children would be strange in that situation.
Also, every children or adult in the colony who can't use a gun is a burden to the colony, because
they make raids harder without directly contributing to defence measures.
So another reason not to have childrens.
Also, those helpless childs that are dependent on adults weaken the colony further between raids,
because they keep colonists busy to some degree with having them satisfying their needs.
So in my eyes, childrens on the Rimworld are nothing to aim for.
And I doubt that a child would survive for years before it can hold a gun. Even most adult colonists don't grow old...

If they are colonists why are they trying to leave the planet? Because as far as I know colonizing means building a base and surviving in a foreign area. Your people are survivors, a majority of players have colonists.
~Tatte~

tbird18bro

They could age with the seasons, like once they are 1 season they are like 1 year old and so on and so fourth but once they reach 15 they have regular birthdays like everyone else.

MythicalEwok

I still have nightmares due to the things that happened to the child dwarfs during my time playing Dwarf Fortress. I get so much more attached to my RimWorld Pawns than I did with DF. Although watching little Billy grow up for 20 Rimyears only to take an unlucky tribal arrow to the(knee) brain and rendering him braindead would be horribly awesome. But I could look past him being grown in a vat or taking 2-3 Rimyears to mature into an "adult". Then I could just breed an army. Then I could take over the entire RimWorld..... After procedural maps are introduced. That's gonna happen... Right...?
"Guess I'll have to eat the cats"

keylocke

#23
Quote from: Nictis on April 20, 2016, 08:51:20 AM
Quote from: keylocke on April 20, 2016, 07:20:27 AM
better yet, only allow pregnancies for couples assigned to royal beds or something equivalent. this allows couples to still get some lovin without conceiving a child.
Fifty gold for children? I don't even think I can call that pay to win...

Also, spoilers on the poll, it doesn want bias.

you can probably build a single royal bed or whatever (baby making bed) and then rotate the couples assigned there so you can save on resource and be able to choose which couples are gonna have a baby.

Quote from: JimmyAgnt007 on April 20, 2016, 09:40:33 AM
Unlike fallout and skyrim where the children look real I dont think they will get any special armor to keep them from harm.

also no matter how shitty life is for people they never stop having kids.  if they did then those 3rd world countries would have died out generations ago.

birth control could be set in the medical tab, "use protection" checkbox so that they dont get kids, only one of the people involved need it to prevent pregnancy.  keep it simple.

Tynan has laid the groundwork for kids, he even said its really simple now that the animals do it.  The trick is that he wants to do it right.  So maybe not for a while.

Lastly, this is in the Frequent suggestions topic.  It gets talked about a lot.  I think I will replace the older thread with this one though. 

ooh.. contraceptives via healthtab. i actually like your idea better than mine.   ;D

stefanstr

We already have too fast growing animals. So why not humans?

Kegereneku

Kids is one of those ideas that come far more than they should, it's easy to formulate to the point of overlooking suggesting the game mechanic.

I stand to my previous opinion that it is a false good idea, not just "not worth the trouble" but detrimental to the game, I wish so much to not hear about it ever again that I'm making this wall of text (in vain).


Every features need reasons to be added. Why it would improve the game. "Children because children exist" isn't a good reason.
- Family-relationship is already covered enough, why clutter it with a redundant niche ?
- Child-Raising Simulation basically translate as a new complex entity to macro-manage but with lesser return, and less immediate than animals.
- Also despite some people dream, it can't be relied upon to go beyond +15 colonists without being creepy & inefficient.
As for beyond 50+ colonist, Rimworld isn't balanced for that. Don't hope proposing child as the step toward colonization.

As for the problems with simulating "raising child" the traditional way :
- Even with massive accelerated growth (1rim year = 3human year) child would reach adulthood at years +6 assuming the child was born at the very start.
- During at least 3 out of 6 years you'd have a half-colonist who can't feed, can't work and must be kept away from stoves, knives & gun.
- Yet, the child would need more subtle & complex mechanics than animal breeding (and compete in term of usefulness), all without the simplification that make those easier to deal with.
- Next come its integration with items, structure, background and events... do we need a job for teacher/handler ? Babby bed/bottles ? Kid-napping, ransom from raider ?
And finally the overall balance to allow a colony to sustain the child food/health/mood/training, can it survive all events, is there enough time to educate them ? Can they haul across the map ? Should I skin them to make a hat ?

All in all, the investment and debuff risk is such that it would encourage save-scum if any die, get sick or get captured. This would be a major downgrade in a game where ACCEPTING LOSS is a major game feature. You can survive/replace or profit from the loss of a colonist/animal/equipment during a year, but a child massive mood debuff ? And unless an event give a new one to you, it's 6+ more years to start again.

That's why the "Vatclone chamber" is often bargained as a solution. Even if it still need a reason to exist, it keep pointless and boring part at bay, can be easily balanced, do not require a couple, and the process can be started/avoided anytime.


That's why I would rather have Tynan work on new stuff with much greater return and potential (like inter-colony diplomacy, more events, themed storyteller, low tech).

ps : This is what the whole idea make me think about
"Sam Starfall joined your colony"
"Sam Starfall left your colony with all your valuable"
-------
Write an Event
[Story] Write an ending ! (endless included)
[Story] Imagine a Storyteller !

Tatte

Quote from: Kegereneku on April 21, 2016, 03:42:41 PM
Kids is one of those ideas that come far more than they should, it's easy to formulate to the point of overlooking suggesting the game mechanic.

I stand to my previous opinion that it is a false good idea, not just "not worth the trouble" but detrimental to the game, I wish so much to not hear about it ever again that I'm making this wall of text (in vain).


Every features need reasons to be added. Why it would improve the game. "Children because children exist" isn't a good reason.
- Family-relationship is already covered enough, why clutter it with a redundant niche ?
- Child-Raising Simulation basically translate as a new complex entity to macro-manage but with lesser return, and less immediate than animals.
- Also despite some people dream, it can't be relied upon to go beyond +15 colonists without being creepy & inefficient.
As for beyond 50+ colonist, Rimworld isn't balanced for that. Don't hope proposing child as the step toward colonization.

As for the problems with simulating "raising child" the traditional way :
- Even with massive accelerated growth (1rim year = 3human year) child would reach adulthood at years +6 assuming the child was born at the very start.
- During at least 3 out of 6 years you'd have a half-colonist who can't feed, can't work and must be kept away from stoves, knives & gun.
- Yet, the child would need more subtle & complex mechanics than animal breeding (and compete in term of usefulness), all without the simplification that make those easier to deal with.
- Next come its integration with items, structure, background and events... do we need a job for teacher/handler ? Babby bed/bottles ? Kid-napping, ransom from raider ?
And finally the overall balance to allow a colony to sustain the child food/health/mood/training, can it survive all events, is there enough time to educate them ? Can they haul across the map ? Should I skin them to make a hat ?

All in all, the investment and debuff risk is such that it would encourage save-scum if any die, get sick or get captured. This would be a major downgrade in a game where ACCEPTING LOSS is a major game feature. You can survive/replace or profit from the loss of a colonist/animal/equipment during a year, but a child massive mood debuff ? And unless an event give a new one to you, it's 6+ more years to start again.

That's why the "Vatclone chamber" is often bargained as a solution. Even if it still need a reason to exist, it keep pointless and boring part at bay, can be easily balanced, do not require a couple, and the process can be started/avoided anytime.


That's why I would rather have Tynan work on new stuff with much greater return and potential (like inter-colony diplomacy, more events, themed storyteller, low tech).

ps : This is what the whole idea make me think about

how is have 15 or more colonists creepy or inefficient?
and also children as they age could do small "chores" like cleaning or growing etc.
and 6 years or so to raise a child? good enough for me. My longest game was like 15 years or something because all I ever do is just make farming colonies.
and how is it detrimental to the game? It could be another way to lose an entire colony because a child died and the parents where so distraught they went berserk and killed everyone.

Tynan needs to do a poll,if less than ~50% want kids he should make it a toggle option for people who want kids.
~Tatte~

Shabazza

Quote from: Boston on April 19, 2016, 02:18:34 PM
1) Your colonists are trying to get away from the planet. Mine are perfectly happy where they are. In fact, "building the ship" is commonly viewed as a weird cop-out by many people on this forum.

I was referencing the RimWorld lore here. I for myself never ever tried to build that spacecraft to escape.
I like to build my colony to see how long I can survive in harsh environments - like most people here, I guess.  ;)

Kegereneku

Quote from: Tatte on April 21, 2016, 04:06:50 PM
how is have 15 or more colonists creepy or inefficient?
and also children as they age could do small "chores" like cleaning or growing etc.
and 6 years or so to raise a child? good enough for me. My longest game was like 15 years or something because all I ever do is just make farming colonies.
and how is it detrimental to the game? It could be another way to lose an entire colony because a child died and the parents where so distraught they went berserk and killed everyone.

Tynan needs to do a poll,if less than ~50% want kids he should make it a toggle option for people who want kids.

In order :
"how is have 15 or more colonists creepy or inefficient? "
I mean that at best you could only get 1 or 2 child before it start looking like a unrealistic creepy breeding camp.

Your LONGEST game (ever) was 15 years ? That's the problem.
My calculation were done with very optimistic assumption. If I take my last game as example :
2 Years to get a colony that can support them.
0-2 years to get compatible lover.
let's give 0-1 years for them to decide to get busy (they aren't automated child-factory after all).
3 month of pregnancy (divided by 3)
3 years where the child (0 to 8years) can't be expected to work on anything.
3 years where he can only do basic things from level 0.

So 7 to 9rim year to get an "16y adult" that have a lot of 0 skill and especially shouldn't have any in research & construction skills due to lack of real education (unless you have a Neuro-trainer handy to start at 0). During that time you could recruit dozens of raiders with better stats. (btw : myself I don't want to be forced to play more than 10rim years before changing biomes or playstyles)

#"and how is it detrimental to the game?"
- It would have all the problems of a colonist with half its interest. Notice how animal can be left alone entirely and don't even suffer some Events ? Kid would require more macro-management (meaning more pause, slower game)
- It would be redundant. Just to get social-interaction that can't be much different than what we have now. Unless you make kids a "MOOD NUKE" capable of destroying or immunizing colony entirely.
- Speaking of Balance, it would force the game into being easier overall (easier food, easier health, easier predator, easier weather, less raids) to not frustrate adult in loosing the 6y-old kid.
- Kid would be even more Luck-based than any other mechanic. If it can take a year just to get both a trader & silvers, it will take 6-10 years to fully raise a kid.
- WASTED DEVELOPMENT TIME. For all the time used to integrate kids (a feature not expected to be used by everyone), balance it, make sure no (current) interactions are unbalanced (berserk vs child)...etc. You could (say) RIDE ANIMAL, RIDE VEHICLE, have DIPLOMACY with faction. New events, new Storytellers, low-tech survival without electricity ...etc

QuoteTynan needs to do a poll,if less than ~50% want kids he should make it a toggle option for people who want kids.

If only it was that simple...
I remember that someone explained somewhere why Polls are unreliable without(and even with) professional to make it.
No easy choices can account for those who just don't want it before many other features, those who want to teach the kid, those who want random skills, those who want Rimworld balanced to raise 6+ at once into 50+ city, those who only want kid if they can fight, those who want to raise them FAST (say 4 years) and those who would feel cheated if less than 6years, those who want kids to replace Raider-recruit...etc

And there's that bias where everybody chose as if the question had only been "Do you want MORE FUN ? [Y/N]" leaving Tynan to choose.
"Sam Starfall joined your colony"
"Sam Starfall left your colony with all your valuable"
-------
Write an Event
[Story] Write an ending ! (endless included)
[Story] Imagine a Storyteller !

Tatte

#29
Quote from: Kegereneku on April 22, 2016, 05:23:45 PM
Quote from: Tatte on April 21, 2016, 04:06:50 PM
how is have 15 or more colonists creepy or inefficient?
and also children as they age could do small "chores" like cleaning or growing etc.
and 6 years or so to raise a child? good enough for me. My longest game was like 15 years or something because all I ever do is just make farming colonies.
and how is it detrimental to the game? It could be another way to lose an entire colony because a child died and the parents where so distraught they went berserk and killed everyone.

Tynan needs to do a poll,if less than ~50% want kids he should make it a toggle option for people who want kids.

In order :
"how is have 15 or more colonists creepy or inefficient? "
I mean that at best you could only get 1 or 2 child before it start looking like a unrealistic creepy breeding camp.

Your LONGEST game (ever) was 15 years ? That's the problem.
My calculation were done with very optimistic assumption. If I take my last game as example :
2 Years to get a colony that can support them.
0-2 years to get compatible lover.
let's give 0-1 years for them to decide to get busy (they aren't automated child-factory after all).
3 month of pregnancy (divided by 3)
3 years where the child (0 to 8years) can't be expected to work on anything.
3 years where he can only do basic things from level 0.

So 7 to 9rim year to get an "16y adult" that have a lot of 0 skill and especially shouldn't have any in research & construction skills due to lack of real education (unless you have a Neuro-trainer handy to start at 0). During that time you could recruit dozens of raiders with better stats. (btw : myself I don't want to be forced to play more than 10rim years before changing biomes or playstyles)

#"and how is it detrimental to the game?"
- It would have all the problems of a colonist with half its interest. Notice how animal can be left alone entirely and don't even suffer some Events ? Kid would require more macro-management (meaning more pause, slower game)
- It would be redundant. Just to get social-interaction that can't be much different than what we have now. Unless you make kids a "MOOD NUKE" capable of destroying or immunizing colony entirely.
- Speaking of Balance, it would force the game into being easier overall (easier food, easier health, easier predator, easier weather, less raids) to not frustrate adult in loosing the 6y-old kid.
- Kid would be even more Luck-based than any other mechanic. If it can take a year just to get both a trader & silvers, it will take 6-10 years to fully raise a kid.
- WASTED DEVELOPMENT TIME. For all the time used to integrate kids (a feature not expected to be used by everyone), balance it, make sure no (current) interactions are unbalanced (berserk vs child)...etc. You could (say) RIDE ANIMAL, RIDE VEHICLE, have DIPLOMACY with faction. New events, new Storytellers, low-tech survival without electricity ...etc

QuoteTynan needs to do a poll,if less than ~50% want kids he should make it a toggle option for people who want kids.

If only it was that simple...
I remember that someone explained somewhere why Polls are unreliable without(and even with) professional to make it.
No easy choices can account for those who just don't want it before many other features, those who want to teach the kid, those who want random skills, those who want Rimworld balanced to raise 6+ at once into 50+ city, those who only want kid if they can fight, those who want to raise them FAST (say 4 years) and those who would feel cheated if less than 6years, those who want kids to replace Raider-recruit...etc

And there's that bias where everybody chose as if the question had only been "Do you want MORE FUN ? [Y/N]" leaving Tynan to choose.

You gotta remember though people can have more than one child, say twins, or the most was, what, octuplets?
And he could also make it have options: How fast it takes to raise, what skills they can do at a certian age, etc
Or have kids as a free add-on/dlc
~Tatte~