Too formulaic, no true diversity --- Add diversity of colony style

[gipothegip]

I agree to some extent. You bring up player choice, and mention "the hand of god" (by which I assume you're talking about RNGesus) as though it were bad.

However I believe that adaptation should be a decent chunk of what drives diversity.  Given there's a degree of survival strategy, and the concept of an emergent narrative.

The problem is, if the player doesn't have to adapt and has too much choice, they will often make the most advantageous decisions, unless they impose on themselves. Which means rather similar bases and strategies.

One could argue there is already some diversity, although it's mostly just between extreme and temperate biomes right now, along with how much stone an area gets, with the storyteller effecting progression. However Borsuk does have a point, there are too many flavors of many things with little variation to eachother.

[Bozobub]

That's a good point.

One way to possibly mediate this, is to do as mentioned above:  Make resource distribution FAR more random, but also "chunked" more.  So your relative abundance/scarcity of resources starts to matter FAR more, at least for early/midgame, and possibly longer, and not just in extreme biomes.  For example, you also are almost certain to have an abundance of, say, 2-3 out of however many specific resources, and minor deposits of some others, but you're also almost certain to be missing 1-3 resources, as well.  In other words, every colony would have to "make do", in some way or another, but not the exact same way every time.

But this would also require a lot of balancing, to ensure that relative, or even total lack of any given resource(s) isn't always immediately fatal at game start.  Instadeath isn't much fun, for most folks ^^'.  So any set of changes like this adds not just the initial coding, but the large testing, debugging, and rebalancing overhead; you'll need to make your case pretty strongly, to make it worth Tynan's while!  And even then, it may not be where he wants to focus his time, that simple *shrug*.

[makkenhoff]

I agree with some of the other comments, it sounds like a great idea for a mod. I use vegetable garden for more plant variety, I use mods when I want 'diversity' but to be honest, it really doesn't make a lot of difference.

This isn't diversity it's repetition - I can for example, spit out 10 different varieties of my solar generator (mod I wrote to learn C# syntax and dll writing), or I can make it once, and start on something else. I mean, I could change variables within the mod sure - I could change the power output, build cost, I could re-balance the power supply capacity or I could even design different sizes and tweak the stats accordingly.

The biggest reason I didn't take suggestions for 'larger' versions of the solar generator: time, plain and simple. I have a certain amount of time I get to myself; if I'm wiped out I might answer/respond to a few forum posts here, or on Project Zomboid's forum. End result is I value my time enough to not want to create clones when I could be designing new systems or responding to suggestions or answering questions.

Most of what you suggest is already in the game - just in ways that don't seem like the same idea. You suggest plants growing only in certain types of soil - this is already in the game, as you will have a hard time growing corn in gravel, but your potatoes will grow fine - you won't find agava in a tropical biome; you suggest making pawn 'growth' into a crpg style leveling system complete with talent trees - this is already available to some extent with the trait system and skill influencing success; part of the reason for these 'simplifications' is just that, to keep it simple - the temptation is always to make a system 'expansive and specialized' but the fact is, that has its own set of drawbacks that usually results in balance issues not to mention workflow problems.

The key thing to remember is - with all these various 'simple' systems in place, Tynan has the ability to decide which are working, and which aren't, and those that are working, he can expand on, at a later date if he decides it could use more depth - but the only way he will know if a system has a problem is when he expands the game. Until we hit the end of Alpha, any of these systems could be altered massively. (Just look at some of the changes since the early alphas - sometimes very large scale changes.)

[b0rsuk]

Okay, I'll make it short:
Please add a slider for "combat threat <> enviromental threat"
This is what I'd wish for and what would make the game even greater!

Non-combat challenges are very hard to scale meaningfully with difficulty level. There are very few non-combat events which are actual threats and can kill someone! Maybe blight in the first year of a short summer biome (but you can hunt + nutrient paste dispenser even then). But even that can be avoided by playing every single biome as if you'd play ice sheet. What works on ice sheet, works everywhere else, you're just not taking advantage of extra resources.

[Bozobub]

I think I can reword what you are saying as:  There are definitely more and less optimum approaches to the game, which can encourage, or even demand min-maxing and some specific, optimal solution often comes out on top.

But you know, that's true of real life, as well.  Yes, some approaches to survival ARE inevitably more or less optimal.  Thing is, you cannot avoid this in any game type, much less "sims" of this sort; strategy guides exist, for example, exactly because a given approach is highly optimal, right?

[O Negative]

Non-combat challenges are very hard to scale meaningfully with difficulty level. There are very few non-combat events which are actual threats and can kill someone! Maybe blight in the first year of a short summer biome (but you can hunt + nutrient paste dispenser even then). But even that can be avoided by playing every single biome as if you'd play ice sheet. What works on ice sheet, works everywhere else, you're just not taking advantage of extra resources.

I disagree. You could think of it in terms of Magnitude of natural disasters/events. Higher difficulties would linearly scale the Magnitude of natural disasters. The length/time and frequency of lingering events and map conditions (Toxic Fallout, Volcanic Winter, Heat Wave, Cold Snap, Solar Flare, Eclipse) is a variable that is easy to manipulate based on difficulty settings. With respect to sudden events like Blight, you would simply need a new variable that determines the Magnitude or amount of plants destroyed based on the difficulty setting.

I think I can reword what you are saying as:  There are definitely more and less optimum approaches to the game, which can encourage, or even demand min-maxing and some specific, optimal solution often comes out on top.

But you know, that's true of real life, as well.  Yes, some approaches to survival ARE inevitably more or less optimal.  Thing is, you cannot avoid this in any game type, much less "sims" of this sort; strategy guides exist, for example, exactly because a given approach is highly optimal, right?

Strategy games will always have optimal methods, yes. However, a game that's designed for replayability should have multiple ways to play the game well, and those methods should be noticeably different if they're going to be meaningful. For instance: Currently, there is only one optimized method of deterring militaristic threats, and that's to build a kill-box/trap. That's why sapper AI was developed. Then, people were even more compelled to play in mountainous areas for the geological advantages. These mountain bases (which are boring to look at) are why Infestations were developed.

I like infestations because it forced some players out of the mountains, even if some of them relentlessly cried about it. By not digging into the mountains they'd prevented a potential threat from ever happening in the first place. That decision, however, cost the player their natural defenses. We lack that same dynamic when it comes to raids from both Humanoids and Mechanoids, along with the threat of man-hunting packs and animals that just go crazy. When it comes to those threats, the only solution anyone ever resorts to is to wall yourself in and force the threat into a situation where they can't possibly win.

We lack the option to choose to bribe or pay ransom to pirates instead of getting raided, as an example. We simply land on the planet, and pirates instantly want to extinct us. They're not just after wealth, they want to eradicate anybody that isn't them. A simple form of self-vassalization in an attempt to self-preserve would be an interesting choice. A colony that chooses to produce "wealth" for their safety rather than wall themselves in or dig themselves into a mountain is interesting and just as viable as building a kill-box.

There are more than just the solutions I've put forward, possibly even 10x better than anything I could think of, and I have a good feeling that Tynan and the other devs might be exploring how Faction Interactions can be fleshed out in the future to make each playthrough more unique.

[Panzer]

The increase in length of natural disasters is certainly something that I want to see in the scenario editor, a long solar flare or heat wave/cold snap can certainly be nasty.

[maculator]

I think I can reword what you are saying as:  There are definitely more and less optimum approaches to the game, which can encourage, or even demand min-maxing and some specific, optimal solution often comes out on top.

But you know, that's true of real life, as well.  Yes, some approaches to survival ARE inevitably more or less optimal.  Thing is, you cannot avoid this in any game type, much less "sims" of this sort; strategy guides exist, for example, exactly because a given approach is highly optimal, right?

It really is up to you. I didn't face a real enviromental threat in my first year so I began to produce drugs to make some good silver and then the second summer I got hit by toxic rain and had to rethink it all. I changed the shedules of my guys, moved everything in, began to dig a greenhouse etc... it was some fun, sadly the rain only lasted a few days and I didn't even finish my preps in this time.

I mean yes you can just start and prepare for everything, but whats the fun? 1 Year Volcanic winter out of nowhere, thats what I wish for.

Edit:
Combat wise I got a feeling you only got to choose between "mad squirrels and raiders with shoody knives all year" to "fully armed deathsquads 24/7"

[Lowkey1987]

On mobil, but i have to add something.

I clock my gametime via steam but played it before so...some hours are missing.
I played Rimworld over 800hours. In terms of time, i played it the most.

I cannot see the great problem of replayability. Ludeon had done a great job with this. Even with normal start, tribal start and rich guy start there are interisting other ways for new storys.

Main Point: replayability is not for everyone a problem.




[attachment deleted by admin: too old]

[Vlad0mi3r]

On mobil, but i have to add something.

I clock my gametime via steam but played it before so...some hours are missing.
I played Rimworld over 800hours. In terms of time, i played it the most.

I cannot see the great problem of replayability. Ludeon had done a great job with this. Even with normal start, tribal start and rich guy start there are interisting other ways for new storys.

Main Point: replayability is not for everyone a problem.

I'm with you on this view Lowkey1987. You can play this game over and over.

[O Negative]

I shouldn't have used the term replayability, I guess. A game doesn't have offer diverse experiences for it to be replayable; Take a look at some of the FPS's some people clock hundreds of hours into.

RimWorld is definitely replayable. Part of it, I think, comes from the updates. Each new update brings so many new and interesting systems for players to interact with. Unfortunately, you're not always given the choice to interact or not interact with any given system. Drugs and addiction, for example, is something you're going to have to deal with whether you like it or not at some point in time. The idea behind RimWorld is that it's supposed to tell a different story each time you play it. Or, at least, that's the way I've interpreted the storytelling aspect of this game. That idea/quality is tarnished by the formulaic nature of the game as it stands. And, I think that's what the OP was getting at. RimWorld offers plenty of different starting points, but the Journey and Victory Condition both lack diversity.

The problem is less apparent than it once was, now that we have more events and aren't cycling through the same events over and over as frequently. The fairly new "Open-World" has opened up so many opportunities for interesting interactions with the systems in the game, which was a huge leap forward for the game in terms of diversity in gameplay. For example, before, if you had no chance of surviving the toxic fallout on your current tile, the game was over and the story came to a quick end. Now, you have the choice to evacuate, whether it be temporary or permanent. Also, there are now multiple avenues to arrive to the only true Victory Condition currently in the game. The game is taking steps in the right direction, that's for sure. I just hope it continues to do so.

[Lowkey1987]

Someday it will stop to change. When its finished.

And all this ideas are great. But perhaps not for everyone. Mods are great to show Ludeon how a idea could benefit the game. And perhaps they include it into the vanilla.

I think we are on the same side, when it comes to new contend, game changing things. Caravans where a huge difference and need work. But they spice things up. Some players try to life on a caravan to get the ship at the end of the world. Atm nothing which i will do 😊

But ideas need balance and as it was pointed out: they drag ressources from other things.

Two examples: Dirt should be a source of sickness.

If you live dirty, more sickness will arise. A problem here are new players or tribals. When is your base dirty? At the beginning of the game. When didnt you have much meds? At the beginning.
A nice mechanic but it will make the entrance go the game much harder. Or did anyone love sickness? Atm cleaning is luxourius (hope its the right word).

Or take the containouse disease. I thing there would be chance to give it to other pawns. But the pawn himself needs treatment. So a doctor have to come by. Wilm he get sick? And who is next?
It would change the way we build hospitals (for some of us). Different rooms etc
Can you prevent other pawns from getting sick? Like with gloves? But you wont have this gloves. Asume a tribal start. It would be easier to let the pawn die.
It beggs quastions.

It was good that you mentioned replayability. Because we discuss it. And 'easy' ideas will have work behind them. Things to consider. Not a "i have a great colonie and this would be nice" thinking. Things to discuss. Put the ideas into the suggestion board. Perhaps build a mod and make a new thing.

Its better to talk about this things and see a different view 😊

[Serenity]

It's true that you do tend to the same stuff in slightly different configurations because there is an optimal way to do things. That goes for pretty much all games though.

But adding some true diversity and meaning to things would really help. There are only a few animals that really stand out. Alpacas and muffalos mostly. Boomrats/boomalopes. Wargs maybe. But also a vast amount that I wouldn't want to see gone, but that are basically the same.
Earlier I saw a monkey manhunter pack for the first time, which was fun, but it might as well have been almost anything else.

Some simple production chains for high end gear would indeed be nice. At the beginning things can stay simple and later get more complicated. This would also allow pawns to be bit more distinct as you can have them work in specific points of the chain.

[maculator]

I guess its more of a player problem. Every problem X has its solutions [A:B:C:D] an you can't really make them a 100% even. So there'll always be the better one wich a player, opting for perfection, will take...
Offering more solutions, moving stuff to higher tech levels/skill levels will only slow the process down. It's just natural.
Every strategy game goes that way. First you don't know how it works so this is the first thing to have fun with; geting to know the "best" way. And then it's up to you to decide to give yourself a bit of a challenge. If you're unable to do the second becuse you're a completionist you're gonna have a bad time I guess.

[BoogieMan]

The main issue I encounter while playing is lack of "end game" threats and challenges. Even with maxed out difficulty settings even the large raids don't pose much a threat after a certain point unless I get a string of bad lack. In fact at some point it feels like I get LESS raids because the game is too afraid of me getting any more people or something.. So I end up mostly dealing with non-raid events until I eventually start a new colony.

Going for very harsh weather sites helps, but also only for awhile, and it can make it easier to deal with raiders.