Dealing with Mechanoids (without exploits)

[Wanderer_joins]

"taking advantage of": 1 trap

"abusing": 10 traps

Since drawing the line is subjective players usually say: no trap

[TheMeInTeam]

"taking advantage of": 1 trap

"abusing": 10 traps

Since drawing the line is subjective players usually say: no trap

If you ban traps, turrets, cover/targeting algorithms, kiting, etc you ban playing the game.

What I'm looking for is self-consistent rationale as to why one tactic is okay and not another.

For example, you can 100% all centipedes forever using kiting.  That's 10x.  That fits your definition of "abuse".  Or is this abuse okay for some reason other abuse is exploitative?

If you're just looking for some kind of variant play just say so, but I suspect that isn't the motivation when saying "no exploits".

[SpaceDorf]

I would draw the line between Tactics that are used and work IRL between Tactics that work ingame because of mechanics.

Using choke points, cover and advanced range is in IRL often refered to as "not being stupid"
Even Kiting a Larger enemy falls into that category. But this is the point where we should start to divide between "would this work in IRL" .. against stupid enemies .. sure.
Against Killer Machines from the futere .. maybe not .. so the machines need tactics available to counter this .. which would call for different types of ai behavior for different types of enemies .. which there should be in the future of this game.

[Wanderer_joins]

I suspect that isn't the motivation when saying "no exploits".

I'm just saying "no turrets" or "no traps" doesn't mean "no exploits". Game mechanics is what it is, and i love playing this game. But the more advanced you're in this game, the more rules you've to impose yourself to keep it challenging.

[TheMeInTeam]

I would draw the line between Tactics that are used and work IRL between Tactics that work ingame because of mechanics.

Using choke points, cover and advanced range is in IRL often refered to as "not being stupid"
Even Kiting a Larger enemy falls into that category. But this is the point where we should start to divide between "would this work in IRL" .. against stupid enemies .. sure.
Against Killer Machines from the futere .. maybe not .. so the machines need tactics available to counter this .. which would call for different types of ai behavior for different types of enemies .. which there should be in the future of this game.

If you draw the IRL line without further explanation, your conclusion is not to play Rimworld.  The game intentionally deviates from reality, a lot, even factoring the sci fi aspects...and it does so in the name of gameplay.  I consider that a good choice, but would be okay as long as the game is self-consistent.

@ wanderer joins:

Fair enough.  Taking stuff away from yourself to add challenge or look at the game a new way is a reasonable move. 

What isn't fair is to weight tactics using criteria unevenly such that the same outcome with the same risk and same resource usage would get graded out as substantially more/less cheap.  OP's request is fishy, because it tends to result in this kind of outcome.

[SpaceDorf]

And here I was thinking that my post did just that ..

[TheMeInTeam]

And here I was thinking that my post did just that ..

"Would this work IRL" in the context of a game that ignores physics and has enemies that don't exist is not a particularly useful measure.

IRL, an assault rifle could shoot across the entire map, and a good shooter wouldn't have much trouble hitting people at a higher % than you see at ~31 tiles right now.  What in-game tactic would work against rifles that shoot lethal rounds across the map with high accuracy?  Not many.  It's not a useful consideration.

[Derp]

An exploit is a tactic that relies on in-game simulation mechanics which would not be applicable in the situations which the game is trying to simulate with those mechanics.

To illustrate with an exaggerated example, consider embrasures in Combat Realism.  They're only supposed to work like better sandbags - stopping something like 90% of bullets - but wall up something completely in embrasures and it breaks targeting code entirely, such that enemies will never fire back because they only search for things they can path to. 

Using embrasures for cover is not an exploit.  Using embrasures to break targeting is. 

As applied to mechanoids, consider situations where you can do something "because you know that's how it works."  You can safely wall up a psychic ship except for a line of IEDs because you know ships only trigger when damaged.  You can dance a shielded pawn around a centipede while your peanut gallery safely stands in the open firing on it because you know it'll only target the closest pawn.  You can build elaborate deadfall corridors because you know they'll always prefer to path through open terrain.

Used appropriately to gain the upper hand, all of these are fair strategies.  Used to the fullest that the game mechanics will allow, all of these are exploits.  The line between the two is largely up to personal preference.  Some players will happily IED psychic ships to nothing.  Some can't play with embrasures at all because they're literally unable to not wall themselves in with them.  But the line IS there.

[SpaceDorf]

The same tactics that are described against scythers and centipedes.

Either outrange the shooter with a better rifle.
Cover and visibility .. which will seriously affect the shooter.
Fake targets.
Make him go a prepared path you want him to go ..
Flank him out of hiding with your weapon of choice.

Tactics are implementations of proven techniques, the use of terrain and knowledge of your surroundings to gain the upper hand against an opposing force.
No matter what the enemy actually is ..

So your example with the shooter and the IRL Rifle is moot. Because in IRL you have ways to deal with this guy. And I just remembered .. that ingame event you describe is called a siege using mortars .. except .. the mortars would hit ..

What I admit that I did wrong is, that I did not specify Tactics that work only in Rimworld because of the games engine.

Hmmm .. the only thing I can think of is hiding in a wooden house, and the centis try to knock down the door instead just shooting the house down ..
-- EDIT --

Thanks Derp for being faster and more knowledgable in Rimworld Exploity stuff than me

[b0rsuk]

This image shows where I defeated 3 inferno centipedes in melee without getting a single wound. They were crawling from the east to west along the upper half of the picture. I ambushed them well outside of the base, as you can see parts of it are still made out of wood.

I irritated centipedes with a personal shield wearing guy just on the edge of their vision. First, one centipede stopped to fire at him, splitting from the pack. Norman, triggerhappy, quickly rushed from the other side with EMP grenades. As soon as the first grenade was about to hit, several of my colonists and war beasts attacked in melee (most without shields). Then I just kept chucking EMP grenades and after a minute of bashing it was down.

Then I had to attack two centipedes at the same time. I used the same shielded colonist to keep their attention, while Norman crept out from behind the rock in the center of the picture. Then they tried to target her, but the triggerhappy EMP thrower was faster. Both centipedes were bashed to bits by a group of angry tribals, wolves and bears.

For anyone wondering, 'Adapted' doesn't help mechanoids much if you keep throwing those EMP grenades. Norman spammed so much I don't think any centpipede managed to attack in melee even once. Overall, it was surprisingly effective and the impact of EMP grenades was dramatic. And other than devilstrand I managed to harvest in first year, my equipment was substandard. Looted deadman kevlar vests, helmets, steel spears, gladius, maybe 1 mace.

You definitely don't need kiting or better range to destroy mechanoids.

[SpaceDorf]

If you have EMP, you don't

My tribe still has not a single emp weapon .. so kiting it is.

[b0rsuk]

Scythers are killable in melee, especially if you make animals go first. If you have an old kevlar vest, and some leather dusters maybe you will only lose a jaw. Or nothing, just some wounds to treat. Really, no kiting required to melee 2 scythers. But centipedes are terrifying in melee, incredible toughness and high BLUNT damage. Nothing really protects against blunt.

[Hans Lemurson]

You would think Parkas should provide a lot of blunt resistance.

I'm personally of mixed opinion as to how much of an exploit "Shielded Decoys" are for fighting Mechanoids.  On the one hand, you can wind up defeating them with nearly zero injuries, but on the other you are also constantly skirting on the edge of disaster.  Close-range lucky hit overloads the shield?  You're in for a world of hurt.

I can provide a story-based justification that this is nice and thematic with crafty humans out-witting dumb robot by exploiting their targeting routines, but the fact that this works on human raiders too is a bit of a problem.

[Shurp]

More importantly, it's way too much micro-management for my tastes.  Especially when it is unnecessary.  Just build some walls and sandbags to take cover behind and you can usually win a straight-up shootout with minimal injuries.  But make sure to target the scythers first... if you let them keep shooting at you you're going to lose a lot of arms and legs.

[b0rsuk]

Cover does work, except when the number of centipedes is 3 and they all have inferno cannons. They're literally designed to handle enemies in cover.