Good arguments for water system ?

[Dorian]

Just my 2 cents...

Blah, blah, blah ! That's a bunch of useless details. Keep it out of this thread! Can you make a good argument for water system ? Your post doesn't have it. What does it add to the game ? How does it make it more interesting ? The game could have a detailed system of pimple popping. What makes water system more interesting ?

Read between the lines!  It adds more challenge and realism, which makes the game more interesting.  You also have to adapt more to your environment in the same way as you would if there are many trees available for wood or not.  Why do we have to grow food, hunt animals and chop wood?  Same reasons.

[SpaceDorf]

I am pro water as a ressource and think it would add a lot of challenge and diversity to the biomes.

But I also think the logistics should be kept simple.

[Limdood]

What about adding water without adding water?

Hear me out:

First, it feels like nearly every argument FOR water centers around
1) making growing harder
2) making deserts harder
Most of the rest have been argued against plenty already or only have minimal support.

Those two points do NOT require a water system....instead, they could use a much less invasive, much lower CPU load system:  Humidity or moisture.

Lets address point #2 first: 
What if each terrain square has a humidity/moisture rating on top of all the others...if you wanted to get more dynamic, you could add a dynamic humidity displayed alongside the current temperature (and likely affected by it).  Have the growing system reference humidity as well as temperature for plant growth...low temp or low humidity causes slower growth.  This means that rainforests are still amazing for growing, temp forests are pretty darned good.  Boreal forests and arid shrublands would have difficulties, but still totally doable without special systems.  Deserts and tundra would be really hard, and anything else impossible without specialized systems.  A "humidifier" and a potential tribal substitute (the passive cooler already references this) could humidify rooms to make indoor growing possible in dry biomes.

As for #1, the growing issue, Humidity would help, but I think people are looking for a bit more.  It seems it isn't a water issue at all...growing being "overpowered" is a work issue...the plant and forget mentality of growing means that to maximize your growers, you want fields so big that all your growers do day in and day out is plant and harvest.  Simple solution (that would require a good deal of balancing and testing) is to nerf the BASE grow time of plants and allow growers to "tend" crops, for some minor guaranteed boost, but an increasing boost as the growing skill rises...give it a "tend quality" and freely borrow from the medical system already in the game.  Now growers have to interact with a given plant, say, 5 times in the plant's lifespan instead of 2 (plant and harvest).  something like growing 6 should probably yield amounts equal to what you already get, since it does require some more pawn-hours of work, but with yield increasing after that, it will still encourage smaller fields (pawns that have to check plants will simply not be able to cover as large an area), but those fields will be more productive.

All in all:
humidity system instead of full-fledged "water system" since growing and deserts seem to be the only really truly convincing arguments for "water."  Also, growers tend plants to reduce growing time or increase yield - base growing time lengthened.

[O Negative]

A humidity/moisture system would be far more CPU invasive than a simple hydration value similar to nutritional value, and a few new "workbenches."

For whatever reason, I can't help but feel that people don't want their people to need water because it wouldn't be as easy as food is. Deserts are used as an example primarily due to how ridiculously easy it is to survive in them. No water need, no problem.

[Hans Lemurson]

I have zero problems with adding a "Thirst Bar" that goes along with the existing "Hunger Bar".  Water would in a way be another type of food, but one whose acquisition is rather different, and whose depletion is strongly affected by your environment.

It would also properly represent the challenge of hot climates, and if a crop-watering system were added, it would provide a way to offset the year-round growing season of Deserts.

As it is, Arid Scrubland is one of the easiest biomes to survive on.  It's a year-round bonanza of productivity, and you can feed half a dozen people on just wild-harvested Agave and Berries even without making use of the patches of fertile soil (which shouldn't even be there).  Add in the necessity for water, and now its scarcity becomes a rather limiting factor on the human habitability of the region.

[Beider]

....

All in all:
humidity system instead of full-fledged "water system" since growing and deserts seem to be the only really truly convincing arguments for "water."  Also, growers tend plants to reduce growing time or increase yield - base growing time lengthened.

I also agree that growing could be fixed by the system you propose or a similar system however I think the watering solution has a few advantages that I would like to point out.

First of all it's the tie in with rain and heat waves, it is true that you could tie the system you propose with humidity into that as well but what would that do? All that would happen then is that your crops would grow a bit faster and/or yield a bit more materials. That is great and all but it is not interactive at all.

On the other hand with a water based system rain would free up your growers, time is a very important resource in this game as you rarely have time to do all the tasks you want to do. As such freeing up growers to do other jobs (even if it is just hauling) would make rainy days a great thing. In the same way if balanced properly a heat wave could be devastating (unlike now as it has barely any effect on gameplay) because you either would have to sacrifice part of your harvest or designate more pawns to growing.

Water system also has the option of having more events as well (such as drought), which is also more interactive and adds a different type of challenge.

Another point is research, in another system where you just need your pawns to interact with the crops during the growth cycle what research could you have? Tools that you make once and then forget about? On the other hand with water depending on your implementation you could do a variety of things that makes the growing cycle more efficient (already mentioned in my last post). It would also mean that you have to handle some basic water logistics which adds another challenge.

All in all I think a water based system would be more interactive for the player and therefore more fun.

[Jstank]

Because the competition has water in it (Oxygen Not Included) and it is awesome. Its time we see water in this game!

[Limdood]

A humidity/moisture system would be far more CPU invasive than a simple hydration value similar to nutritional value, and a few new "workbenches."

For whatever reason, I can't help but feel that people don't want their people to need water because it wouldn't be as easy as food is. Deserts are used as an example primarily due to how ridiculously easy it is to survive in them. No water need, no problem.

the problem with a colonist water need is that the AI just doesn't handle needs very well.  If my miner is going to wake up, walk across the map, take 1 swing at the rock, come back for food, go back and swing, come back for water, walk, swing, walk, food, walk swing, walk, water, walk, swing, walk, bed - he's not going to get much done.  Am i exaggerating?  sure, but it is still quite a legitimate issue, and it ISN'T an issue with needs, its an issue with how game's scale and how needs are managed...which is mostly fine, or at least tolerable for now, but each new need added to pawns is going to exponentially increase pawn downtime.

Also, i don't see how a separate ambient value that is only referenced by plants and "humidifiers" would be more intensive than adding a water need to every single pawn on the map AND having it somehow impact growing plants too.

[Aerial]

I also agree that growing could be fixed by the system you propose or a similar system however I think the watering solution has a few advantages that I would like to point out.

First of all it's the tie in with rain and heat waves, it is true that you could tie the system you propose with humidity into that as well but what would that do? All that would happen then is that your crops would grow a bit faster and/or yield a bit more materials. That is great and all but it is not interactive at all.

On the other hand with a water based system rain would free up your growers, time is a very important resource in this game as you rarely have time to do all the tasks you want to do. As such freeing up growers to do other jobs (even if it is just hauling) would make rainy days a great thing. In the same way if balanced properly a heat wave could be devastating (unlike now as it has barely any effect on gameplay) because you either would have to sacrifice part of your harvest or designate more pawns to growing.

Water system also has the option of having more events as well (such as drought), which is also more interactive and adds a different type of challenge.

Another point is research, in another system where you just need your pawns to interact with the crops during the growth cycle what research could you have? Tools that you make once and then forget about? On the other hand with water depending on your implementation you could do a variety of things that makes the growing cycle more efficient (already mentioned in my last post). It would also mean that you have to handle some basic water logistics which adds another challenge.

All in all I think a water based system would be more interactive for the player and therefore more fun.

These are all good points.  I also think adding water considerations would deepen the game by providing another kind of survival pressure on the colony.

That said, everything above is about water availability in the environment and that's where I would stop at adding water.  I don't think adding a thirst bar or additional water need to the individual colonists would add to gameplay.  I think if there's food we can assume the colonists were able to get water, too.  At least, I'd be willing to make that assumption.

I don't particularly want to water crops, either, ala Stardew Valley/Harvest Moon.  However, I do think it would add a lot to game play if early crops were dependent on the rain to water crops and have them grow, with research available for wells and irrigation that would make those crops less susceptible to lack of rain and/or heat waves.  Crops planted in the two squares closest to water tiles could be self-irrigating, giving the presence of lakes a purpose and making oases vitally important on desert maps. 

I would not want to add piping, water storage, faucets, toilets or any of that kind of infrastructure to the game.  To me, these things don't seem like they would add much to the game because they feel too repetitive with existing systems.

[kenmtraveller]

Alright, I want to preface this by saying that Rimworld is by far my favorite game, and I've got over 1000 hours playing it in steam.  So, my suggestions come from the point of view of someone wanting to see an incredible game be even better.

To be honest, when I heard that the consensus was that Rimworld didn't need to model water I was shocked.  Rimworld is a survival game, based on meeting needs.  And the big three needs are food, water, and shelter. 

I don't think rimworld needs z-levels , although I wouldn't mind a simplification (say, 3 levels total, to represent flat ground, elevated areas and ditches) , but adding water would add the potential to add a great deal of interesting content and decision making to the game, especially now that we have the ability to move on the world map.  With the detailed biomes that Rimworld already has, it wouldn't be that hard either -- just calculate where the water table is (or if one even exists)  on any given map (for wells), how to collect rainfall, and whether any lakes and rivers existed.

Currently thirst is , I suppose, abstracted away in the hunger stat. This would make sense if thirst behaved like hunger, but it doesn't -- one can go hungry for much longer than one can go thirsty and still survive, for example, and how thirsty one gets depends more on external factors like temperature and work load than hunger does.  Currently people go nut pretty quick if they don't eat.  With water added, it would make sense for pawns to be able to go longer between meals, but not between drinking.  You would have biomes where water is easy to get and food is difficult, and vice versa. 

Water also has interesting interactions with food production, animal behaviour, defense, and electrical generation (IE, if we had rivers water wheels would be a first tech solution for tribals getting electricity).

In short, I think adding water would add a lot to the gameplay, while making RimWorld more in sync with the genre it represents.

Ken

[jpinard]

Because the competition has water in it (Oxygen Not Included) and it is awesome. Its time we see water in this game!

Saying OnI is competition/akin to Rimworld is like saying a Mario platformer is akin to Ultima IV.  Outside of the survival theme they're world apart.

[SpaceDorf]

Crap .. there is always someone fast than me writing down what I wanted to write.

I am with Aerial in this.
I would like a Water/Irrigation System but without adding the extra Need-Bar for pawns.
Water as an Item I am unsure.

But to keep it in B0rsuks Format

pro (1) I want rivers.
pro (1) irrigation and draining of land to make it better for agriculture
pro (1) plants are even more dependent on a biome ( or hydroculture )
than before. ( rice for wet biomes, corn for lush biomes, potatoes for dry biomes )

pro (1) expensive flow model is not needed. the floor level is enough to make ditches represent water and everything else. Personally I find it strange, that there are nearly no impassable bodies of water .. even slowed over 50% of most lakes are walkable .. why ?
floods could be represented by water over floor level.
pro (1) low tech water collection in desert could be by extracting it from plants ( cacti, agave ) against later higher tech solutions like digging and drilling a well.
pro (1) the same goes for getting rid of water in wet biomes.
pro (1) for temperate and cold biomes there is also the matter of snowmelt.
pro (1) moisture levels for ground and air ( ground only local with player interaction ) and air global .. even the most sophisticated ac's can't do much against humid weather. further distincion between biomes, because of the different combinations of humidity and temperature ..
pro (1) personally I don't care about pipes .. I allready wish for different phases for power cables


con (-2) having moisture levels of the ground and air calculated could be a cpu drain.
con (-1) i can't see a way around pipes to fully use water with higher tier tech.

[NagaPrince]

I agree with implementing water, matter of factly, I am shocked that Rimworld doesn't have it. I see all these simulators as Dwarf Fortress-clones, kind of how like games can be Diablo-clones. So when I began playing the game, was surprised my Pawn's don't need water to survive, and neither the rest of the animals.

I'm frankly shocked at the resistance to implementing it, because the way I see it, I just want more Rimworld, which is me really saying I want more Dwarf Fortress, in this nice, clean looking UI.

I want the Vanilla game to have shoewear already loll. Pawn's need shoes, Tynan. Everyone talking about 'hat's, on the Reddit. We need "Shoes", too.

EDIT: The one feature I would suggest to go along with everyone's ideas on Water as a resource, is that while I assume it would be a separate mechanic to satiate, when Cook's are preparing Meals, they should "include" Water (cup) in the production, by either buckets or pipes as some here have suggested. It would simplify the mechanic, but Water would also be consumed on its own as well.

[Beider]

I'm frankly shocked at the resistance to implementing it, because the way I see it, I just want more Rimworld, which is me really saying I want more Dwarf Fortress, in this nice, clean looking UI.

The reason I resist water as a resource for pawns is that I can't see any interesting production chain or interaction for water.

For food there is a production chain, you have multiple choices on how to acquire it (growing, hunting, livestock, trading, butchering raiders). This creates opportunities for the player to make choices and prioritise depending on the current situation. In particular since cooked meals and meat have a short life when it is not frozen, while harvested vegetables have a long life this adds more choices if you don't have a freezer (like tribal start). In addition you have different levels of food (simple, fine and lavish) which adds more choices.

Now those of you who support adding water, can you think of an interesting system for water that would not be build and forget? For instance in dwarf fortress you built a well and you were done. Great job, you built a well wasn't that fun! Now you can watch your dwarves drop everything they do to run to the well once in a while, yay, the fun!

Rimworld is a game and not real life. I think rather than asking, "how can we model this closer to real life?", we should be asking, "is it fun?". If it's not fun, then don't add it.

Edit: For anyone who thinks water sounds like a lot of fun here is a mod that adds toilet need and hygiene to the game, I suggest you try it out and see if this is really what you want. To me it is mostly a build and forget thing, not to mention pawns have no sense of ownership so making private bathrooms just means some idiot will run in to poop/shower in the room of someone else while they are sleeping.
https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=836308268

[O Negative]

Now those of you who support adding water, can you think of an interesting system for water that would not be build and forget? For instance in dwarf fortress you built a well and you were done. Great job, you built a well wasn't that fun! Now you can watch your dwarves drop everything they do to run to the well once in a while, yay, the fun!

Rimworld is a game and not real life. I think rather than asking, "how can we model this closer to real life?", we should be asking, "is it fun?". If it's not fun, then don't add it.

Edit: For anyone who thinks water sounds like a lot of fun here is a mod that adds toilet need and hygiene to the game, I suggest you try it out and see if this is really what you want. To me it is mostly a build and forget thing, not to mention pawns have no sense of ownership so making private bathrooms just means some idiot will run in to poop/shower in the room of someone else while they are sleeping.
https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=836308268

Tynan is interested in game mechanics that are fun and interact with each other. So, I'll try to answer your question by following those guidelines.
While I prefer things to remain simple, I see all of the following to be rather reasonable additions.

Health
Much in the same way famine (lack of food) can be detrimental to the health of your colonists, dehydration adds more to maintaining colonist health, which is currently a trivial task.
It doesn't have to be mundane, and there are plenty of ways of making this more interesting.
I think you already understand this to be one of the main arguments.

Production/Foraging
Water can be collected from water tiles already in the game manually, or collected automatically by the water pump already in the game.
Rain barrels collect rain in a similar way wind turbines generate power based on the weather.
Certain plants (ie. Cacti) can be harvested for their water contents.
Dehydration of food (unappetizing) to prolong the shelf-life of food drastically, and rehydration of food with water as a resource.
*This is where the main "fun" problem solving is, if you ask me.

Storyteller/Events
While I don't think floods are a necessary addition, droughts/lack of rain in otherwise "wet" biomes could cause interesting issues for people.

Growing
As others have already stated, growing could be and should be way harder than it currently is.
I'd be content with the removal/rarity of blight events in exchange for a water/maintenance requirement.
I'm not sure I'm entirely fond of the idea of wild plants having a constantly calculated water need, though...



Please, don't perpetuate the idea that a water need will/must be accompanied by a completely mundane hygiene need.
A mod that only adds a water need/mechanic would be a much better example; confounding variables are never good.
Most RimWorld players agree: This isn't The Sims...

The hygiene argument is bad, because a water need doesn't inherently advocate for a hygeine need.
Please, leave it out of this discussion.