This is 3000+ years from now and we're still using projectile weapons?

[b0rsuk]

US navy is testing gauss guns, and they have some very interesting properties. Naturally they don't advertise how unstable their batteries are. But the ammo they carry are fairly simple bolts. These don't explode. This is a big deal because one of most feared things for a warship is getting hit in the ammo compartment. Also, gauss guns are next to silent. They would make terrifying sniper rifles and terrorist weapons.

If Rimworld is supposed to have some more futuristic weapons, save it for something that CAN'T be done without high tech magic. Tesla coils, or railguns that pierce through multiple targets, that kind of stuff.

As for crossbows, in my country you need a "gun" license to own one, but you don't need for a bow. Crossbows are mostly inferior to guns, but they're still pretty damn deadly and EASY TO USE compared to bows. The best part is the rifle stock and trigger mechanism. It comes directly from crossbow. It simply works so well that it's been in use for thousands of years (Star Trek phasers are so awkward!!). Crossbow stock/trigger also works very well for cameras. You don't see them used that way because it makes police very nervous. It looks just like you're trying to shoot someone.

[Boston]

More generally, medieval / dark ages started because of the fall of Roman civilization. Bronze age ended when major civilizations of the time were crippled by the Sea Peoples. Only Egypt survived, and it wasn't what it once was. It's common in history that a source of stability disappears, and - gradually, not suddenly - people lose ability to build, craft, lose their knowledge, know-how how to maintain or create advanced items. Sometimes it's deliberate - for example ISIS is destroying various ancient ruins because they were made by "infidels".

Uh, Borsuk ....... technology actually advanced during the so-called "Dark Ages"/medieval Europe, contrary to "popular knowledge". The windmill, the stirrup, the crossbow, 3-fields agriculture, Gothic Architecture as a whole, plenty of other technologies.

The Medieval ages were called "Dark" not because they sucked, but because Renaissance-era were, to be honest, talking themselves up and shit-talking their ancestors, and because not much was known about the time period. Now, in the modern day, we DO know more about the time period, and the term "Dark Ages" is now known as the "Migration Period" or "Early Middle Ages".

Also, medieval Europe didn't exactly forget how to build Roman/Classical technologies, they just didn't have the means. When (Western) Rome fell (which, in and of itself, wasn't exactly the nigh-post apocalyptic event many people think of it as. It took a couple decades for the Empire to shit the bed, and the result was more "say goodbye to the old boss, say hi to the new boss"), most urban populations moved to the countryside, in order to grow their own food. Now, since premodern preindustrial agriculture is HARD AS FUCK, people flat-out didn't have the time to maintain roads, etc, and since forests were being cut down to make more cropland, there was less fuel for bathhouses and the like.

Again, contrary to "popular knowledge", the average Medieval peasant wasn't all that dirty. People, generally, don't really like being dirty, and medieval Europe was no exception. They still bathed, and washed their clothing, and cleaned their houses, they just did it less often (because it was more expensive and more time-consuming) than you or I. Roman-era sensibilities concerning cleanliness still prevailed for a couple centuries after its fall, and, when you really look at it, the Renaissance was actually more disgusting than the preceding period. The first real epidemics of STD's, the resurgence of urban population booms, etc.

[b0rsuk]

It recovered and advanced, but it took a nosedive first. We have few accounts of medieval times because literacy was so very rare in the period, and that's terrible enough in itself. When you don't have the means to build, and you can't write, you forget. As for hygiene, I don't remember many antique plagues, but they were common in medieval (no public baths!).

[Boston]

It recovered and advanced, but it took a nosedive first. We have few accounts of medieval times because literacy was so very rare in the period, and that's terrible enough in itself. When you don't have the means to build, and you can't write, you forget. As for hygiene, I don't remember many antique plagues, but they were common in medieval (no public baths!).

It didn't take a nosedive, Borsuk.

Yes, technologies gradually fell off, but not because we essentially "forgot", but because it wasn't economically feasible to maintain. An essential component of Roman concrete was volcanic ash from southern Italy. No matter how much you remember about concrete, if you don't have that ash, you are shit out of luck.

Same thing with bathouses. People didn't forget how to make bathouses, or take baths, it just wasn't economically feasible. Bathhouses require heating. The Romans used wood, because Lo and behold, Europe was positively LOUSY with trees and forests! After the collapse of the WRE, urban populations fled to the countryside, because urban logistics (sewer, mainly, although food trade got interrupted as well) started to decline as Imperial bureaucracy failed. These now-rural populations, in order to have enough land to grow food, cut down the trees. Hence, there was less firewood available for bathhouses. They tried using coal, but it made people sick, and was thrown out.

So, bathhouses died off, not because people forgot about them, but because they were too hard to maintain. People still took baths, however. And, in places were there was still abundant wood, like Scandinavia, Finland, and Russia, bathing-culture still stayed strong into the modern period. Sauna, anyone?

Same thing with roads. People didn't "forget" how to build Roman-style roads, it just wasn't economically feasible (you will note that that last topic comes up a lot). Generally, road-building requires a strong State (aka government), with organized labor. The Romans used their military to build roads and infrastructure. Once the WRE fell, there was no real State left to organize things. People still built roads, however, they just weren't the pinnacle of science that Roman roads were, namely because road-worthy stones are either 1) not located everywhere, or 2) hard to shape and fit. Instead, they used timber-and-track, or cannibalized Roman works for already-shaped stone.

Also, note that as soon as the "barbarians" (who in reality tended to be pretty Romanized) took over sections of the collapsed WRE, they started building infrastructure as soon as they were organized enough. For example, one of the main obligations of the Anglo-Saxon peasant was to work on roads and bridges.

As for plagues ....... the rate of plagues actually dropped in the Middle Ages, at least in the early (and Early) parts. Mainly, because urban populations declined and spread out into the rural areas, and migration and immigration rates dropped (due to both people becoming occupied in agriculture, and because safe-travelling was not guarenteed). Lower urban populations + lower rates of migration = less chance for communicable diseases to spread.

There were plenty of plagues in both the Classical eras and in the High + Late Middle Ages, mainly due to comparatively high urban distributions of populations. The months of July through October were known in the city of Rome as the "sickly months", and it is estimated that about 30,000 people died each year.

The Plague of Athens. The Antonine Plague. The Plague of Cyprian. The Plague, the "Black Death".

If you don't know "the truth" about history, please don't spread misinformation.

[b0rsuk]

I'm not taking your post as gospel. If you make claims like that, you need to provide sources.

[Boston]

I'm not taking your post as gospel. If you make claims like that, you need to provide sources.

Right back at you, pal.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_Ages_(historiography)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medieval_technology

While the articles themselves are interesting, the real meat of the info can be gleaned from the sources referenced by the texts, found at the bottom of the articles

https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/3pjuc4/when_did_the_public_bath_house_die_out_in_europe/
http://www.medievalists.net/2013/04/did-people-in-the-middle-ages-take-baths/

Those two sources are less academic, although they do reference "proper" research

[Mikhail Reign]

Yeah, you could make a small, manpack-able railgun or laser cannon, say, with approximately the same tech level as charge rifles, but there's simply no damn reason to do so at personal combat ranges, and the costs and maintenance are inevitably going to be a lot higher for things that aren't any more useful, that also are going to break far more often in ways you cannot repair in the field =p .  Meh.

I don't really see this to be intrinsically true. It would cost more to maintain a chariot today then it would a car, because current tech is easier to maintain then old. Current tech has cross overs, while old tech requires special knowledge in a specific old art form. This is why we have trouble rebuilding ancient boats that we find - no one builds boats like that anymore, so no one knows exactly how its done. We could build a new boat a lot simpler out of welded steel easier then a wooden one (or even riveted steel for that matter) simply because its uses techniques used everywhere else.

If I can build a reactor for a spaceship, solar panels, electric motors (for doors etc), batteries, stoves, air conditions etc etc out of stuff that I find on the ground, its a safe bet that they have access to some form of futuristic tech.

Saying that futuristic weaponry would be prohibitively expensive, large, dangerous etc etc 1500 years from now, is like saying 'You couldn't have a computer at home, they would be too big' in 1965. As we advance, stuff gets easier. The colonists have access to cyro freezing tech, space travel, charge rifles - why would there day to day gun be a M1911?

[LordMunchkin]

Yeah, you could make a small, manpack-able railgun or laser cannon, say, with approximately the same tech level as charge rifles, but there's simply no damn reason to do so at personal combat ranges, and the costs and maintenance are inevitably going to be a lot higher for things that aren't any more useful, that also are going to break far more often in ways you cannot repair in the field =p .  Meh.

I don't really see this to be intrinsically true. It would cost more to maintain a chariot today then it would a car, because current tech is easier to maintain then old. Current tech has cross overs, while old tech requires special knowledge in a specific old art form. This is why we have trouble rebuilding ancient boats that we find - no one builds boats like that anymore, so no one knows exactly how its done. We could build a new boat a lot simpler out of welded steel easier then a wooden one (or even riveted steel for that matter) simply because its uses technicians everywhere else.

If I can build a reactor for a spaceship, solar panels, electric motors (for doors etc), batteries, stoves, air conditions etc etc out of stuff that I find on the ground, its a safe bet that they have access to some form of futuristic tech.

Saying that futuristic weaponry would be prohibitively expensive, large, dangerous etc etc 1500 years from now, is like saying 'You couldn't have a computer at home, they would be too big' in 1965. As we advance, stuff gets easier. The colonists have access to cyro freezing tech, space travel, charge rifles - why would there day to day gun be a M1911?

I seriously doubt energy weapons will ever supersede kinetics weapons as personal weapons due to the energy densities involved. However, the rest of your point stands. If we use guns in the future, they will of course be more advanced than the ones we have today; light polymer cased or caseless telescoped ammunition, an electrical ignition system, and integrated "smartgun" electronics. Probably smart ammunition as well!  Also railguns, coilguns, etc (more likely as vehicle/heavy weapons than personal weapons I think though).

However, Rimworld presumes a series of technological collapses have happened. You might not agree that is realistic but it is the presumption nonetheless. So worlds which are at a low tech level (industrial worlds) would use weapon patterns similar to the ones we have today simply because they don't have the means or ability to produce anything better. In addition, those worlds which can produce better weaponry may produce simpler weaponry in great abundance because that's all their more primitive customers can maintain.

[Mikhail Reign]

Ok - A: can you stop calling ballistic weapons kinetic? A rail gun is a kinetic weapons. Pretty much ANYTHING is a kinetic weapon. Anything that moves a projectile. A catapult is a kinetic weapon.

I seriously doubt energy weapons will ever supersede kinetics weapons as personal weapons due to the energy densities involved.

This is EXACTLY my computer in 1968 VS 2018 A computer wouldn't have fit in a building. Now one fits in to my hand. Thats only 50 years. Ok - so there was a collapse, but we remembered how to make solar panels, uranium reactors and fire alarms, but only 2 guns that we are going to make in the next 1500 years?

Again with the maintenance angle - these people are building reactors, bionics and power suits. I feel that an electrical based rail gun, for example, would be a lot easier to maintain in those conditions then a ballistic weapons, simply for the cross over in needs.

Also wouldn't Glitter worlds produce SOME kind of weaponry? Even if just defensive weapons.

[Seeker89]

I'm not the smartest person in the world or have a lot to add to this... But I'll add my two cents..

In the real world we know how things work, but remaking them well that is something different. I like to imagine being on an island. What could I make myself? A chess set? A computer? A small one shot pistol? Maybe.

[Mikhail Reign]

I'm not the smartest person in the world or have a lot to add to this... But I'll add my two cents..

In the real world we know how things work, but remaking them well that is something different. I like to imagine being on an island. What could I make myself? A chess set? A computer? A small one shot pistol? Maybe.

Working from this - this game would be a lot more interesting if research was linked to the pawns. Like if you wanted to make guns, you would have to take in a metalsmith, and maybe a chemist. As the pawns them selves would KNOW stuff. Then expand the type of things you can build.

This way every colony would be different depending on what your people brought 'knowledge wise' to the table.

[LordMunchkin]

Ok - A: can you stop calling ballistic weapons kinetic? A rail gun is a kinetic weapons. Pretty much ANYTHING is a kinetic weapon. Anything that moves a projectile. A catapult is a kinetic weapon.

I seriously doubt energy weapons will ever supersede kinetics weapons as personal weapons due to the energy densities involved.

This is EXACTLY my computer in 1968 VS 2018 A computer wouldn't have fit in a building. Now one fits in to my hand. Thats only 50 years. Ok - so there was a collapse, but we remembered how to make solar panels, uranium reactors and fire alarms, but only 2 guns that we are going to make in the next 1500 years?

Again with the maintenance angle - these people are building reactors, bionics and power suits. I feel that an electrical based rail gun, for example, would be a lot easier to maintain in those conditions then a ballistic weapons, simply for the cross over in needs.

Also wouldn't Glitter worlds produce SOME kind of weaponry? Even if just defensive weapons.

First off, I will continue to call them kinetic weapons because that suits my purpose just fine. If you can come up for a better general term for missiles, rockets, compressed gas weapons, conventional firearms, primitive firearms, low-tech missile weapons, coilguns, railguns, etc go ahead. Until then, arguing about semantics is awfully sophomoric.

Secondly, it's a mistake to believe technology and miniaturization will continue to advance in a linear fashion indefinitely into the future. There are physical limits to how much energy you can store chemically. That is a fact. Sure there are other means of storing energy but most conventional ones are equally nonviable for personal energy weapons. So you're going to have to do something exotic if you want a laser rifle that can outperform a M16. Which brings in the matter of cost which IS valid even in the future and in this case it won't be a M16 vs your laser rifle. It will be the M9000 with near zero recoil, less weight, smartgun accessories, 2x the ammo, and smart ammunition that can lock onto targets a mile away.

Thirdly, yes people do mix technologies of different levels. Ever wonder why people in Afghanistan are using donkeys, AK47's, and satellite phones? Because an isolated society often does not have the number of people or materials to become wholly self-sufficient. Thus, they rely on more primitive technology to fill the gaps (and carefully pick and choose the few techs they will maintain/import). If Rimworld were more realistic, there would be a new category of components that you couldn't produce and had to be traded for. Small colonies like our in game ones would be very dependent on steady trade to survive and maintain their style of life.

Lastly, where did I say glitter worlds wouldn't produce their own type of weaponry? I merely gave a reason why advanced spacefaring cultures would trade and produce lower-tech weapons.

Honestly, if you want to learn the challenges most spacefaring societies would face when trying to create a self-sufficient colony, I suggest you read some of the old (and newish) NASA/USAF plans to colonize the Moon and later Mars. It's basically almost impossible to build lots of advanced goods in an isolated environment like space. The most you can is produce food, water, raw material, a few specialized things like solar panels (with a lot of planning), and import everything else.

On a sidenote, if you're really disappointed with the lack of futuristic weaponry, I suggest you use the Rimsenal mod.

[b0rsuk]

Saying that futuristic weaponry would be prohibitively expensive, large, dangerous etc etc 1500 years from now, is like saying 'You couldn't have a computer at home, they would be too big' in 1965. As we advance, stuff gets easier. The colonists have access to cyro freezing tech, space travel, charge rifles - why would there day to day gun be a M1911?

And yet you can build neither. Both require access to a highly advanced factory, and very specialized knowledge. How would you manufacture ammunition ?  By contrast, you could probably make an Awful charriot if you had a hammer, a saw, some nails, and a supply of wood. If you don't have wood, add an axe and a forest and you could still make one given enough time. Two slices of a thick tree to serve as wheels, a young but durable trunk as an axis.

"Rimworld" is a type of backwater planet. It's right there in the game's title. It's on the edge of the known universe, which has no faster-than-light travel. It's fundamental to the game's design. You may as well complain the game has Growing and Animals skill. Surely 3000 years from now they must have something better than agriculture ? Just spread some nanobot dust and food makes itself ?

Also, there was a good point that gunpowder weapons are deadly enough. If a single hit can be fatal, what else do you need ? What could be the possible improvement ?

[Shurp]

I think the point here is that the Rimworld universe is a "post apocalyptic survival" scenario, repeated thousands of times over and over.  All that compacted steel and machinery?  You're living on the corpse of an ancient Glitterworld that nuked itself.  There's advanced technology lying around (charged pulse rifle!).  It's just that any civilization advanced enough to make them is also advanced enough to blow itself up and turn itself into a tribal civilization scavenging the remains.

The reason we're still using projectile weapons is that anyone with a basement workshop who knows what they're doing can make one.  It's a bit harder to build a disintegrator ray gun in that mountain cave you call "home".

[Seeker89]

I think the point here is that the Rimworld universe is a "post apocalyptic survival" scenario, repeated thousands of times over and over.  All that compacted steel and machinery?  You're living on the corpse of an ancient Glitterworld that nuked itself.  There's advanced technology lying around (charged pulse rifle!).  It's just that any civilization advanced enough to make them is also advanced enough to blow itself up and turn itself into a tribal civilization scavenging the remains.

The reason we're still using projectile weapons is that anyone with a basement workshop who knows what they're doing can make one.  It's a bit harder to build a disintegrator ray gun in that mountain cave you call "home".

I think Tynan said something like that some where on the forums.

Almost everything we have now a day is made with some form of technology. From power tools to full computerized robotics. Have you watched the show, How it's made? It takes technology to make technology, it has to start from somewhere.
We also can't expect all people to understand how to the technology or how to remake said technology. And sure you can make motor, but can you make all the tools that make the motor?