How about upkeep costs instead of raid scaling ?

[Wanderer_joins]

As long as you can spam deadfalltraps and IEDs without any incidence on the threat, it's up to you to set your own challenges and difficulty.

The first thing i do is set a deadfall traps : colonists max ratio and no turrets to deter sappers.

Things like a "high expectations" debuff could be a nightmare at extreme difficulty

An upkeep for defenses... i'd rather have a simple cap depending on wealth/time

[maculator]

I don't like time beeing a factor. This would really force you to progress wich just produces stress. I'm "new" to the game and I got my problems with combat, real problems...
I guess to make things easier for noobs "scaling with military power" would be an interesting idea.
-Wealth would only attract more raids, but wont increase the power of the raiding partys.
-Good weapons, Armor, Sandbags, Turret count etc. would encourage the raiders to ramp up their arsenal.

[Vlad0mi3r]

Just a few things:

Low expectations buff fades over time already.

Raid size already increases with wealth.

Anything that is added to the game that cannot be answered by the players actions is just spanking for the sake of spanking. I think there is enough of that already, Solar flare anyone?

Wealth generation mid to late game could be managed better perhaps but there will always be a runaway effect once you achieve stability. By stability I mean you have food and shelter and effective means of defence (kill box, Traps whatever). Drug production or Apparel manufacturing will net huge returns for little investment.

The end game at the moment is build the ship and "escape". After you have played through an built your first couple of ships and gotten off the planet you start wanting more. So we have had sappers getting buffed and bugs getting buffed for A17. Management of these two no big issue some micro and some forward planning and its all good.

So what would press an established colony moving forward? It has to be task orientated not punishment orientated. So maybe missions that have an impact on relationships or global events like a mechanoid hive has been detected on planet. All hostilities between factions cease but colonies get destroyed in an increasing radius as the mechanoids advance mechanoids do not distinguish between raiders, tribe's and outlanders. Until the player can defeat the "hive mind" at the central hive. So you need to master caravans or drop pod jumping and use the best gear to take the fight to the enemy.

This is just me throwing out the concept that there needs to be drama to move the story forward and provide challenges. Although "spanking" does this to some degree I don't believe it keeps people engaged in the game.

[b0rsuk]

The key thing to remember here with all of these suggestions is that the player has to have SOME way of countering or preventing the effects of whatever it is that happens. Basically everything in the game as it is can be planned for and mitigated/prevented outright. This is very important, because if you can't stop something, then you take away player agency which kills fun even faster.

Let me rephrase what you said in mathematical way:

0 * (event1 + event2 + event3 + event4 + event5...)

If you can prepare for everything, then nothing is happening. It's like resistance-based game design of some roguelike games, the most outrageous example I remember is Angband. You've got damaging beams of elements like fire, cold, electricity...void, inertia, time, darkness etc. For each damage type you have at least one enemy that breathes or shoots it at you. You have to collect rings of resistance and other equipment to make sure you wear all of it. Then you achieve nirvana. Nothing is happening anymore. Enemies print messages at you, but those messages don't do anything. You realize how repetitive they are without what made them special.

"Stopping" or "preventing" shouldn't be the only counter-measure. Reacting can be even more fun.
For example if there's a blight, you can increase hunting, start eating bug meat, slaughter your pets, build nutrient paste dispenser, rush to harvest berries, send caravans for food, open an ancient danger room and put some people in sleep until Spring, etc. The best events are those which can be handled in several different ways. Naturally, it completely goes out of the window once player stockpiles a bunch of grain in freezer, but we can delay that.

"Here's an event that forces you to go repair things for a while and there's nothing you can do to stop it". How is that fun?

Yes, you can do. You can just ignore it for a while. Imagine a sandstorm damages a stone wall for 20% of its max health. You can just ignore the damage until you have no more important things to do. But if you expect mechanoid raids, you may want to repair quickly to stand a better chance against heavy charge blasters (terrifying damage to wall cover).

And storms damaging stuff left outside would have interesting chain effects. What if a storm comes after a sapper raid ? Note I'm not saying sandstorms should cause BREAKDOWNS, just HP damage, which is much more granular and predictable.

I'm not arguing that a well played colony shouldn't get wealthy. But I think it happens too easily, too quickly and too consistently. Outside of very early game (first year), nothing catches me off guard. There is an answer-- pardon, pre-emptive attack for everything, or there is NO answer and then you can do nothing, so you stop thinking about it. Rimworld is a game of such extremes currently.

I think Tynan is wrong to outright ban some events like Poison Ship and toxic fallout in the first year (or whatever). It removes tension, and besides sometimes player CAN beat those unfairly difficult early challenges, and it feels AWESOME if it happens. Maybe another event like an unexpected caravan or some windfall cancels it out.

And I can't think of any way to make it plausible. It's weird if your colonists suddenly start demanding more and more.

I'm not a fan of making colonists demand more and more directly, for no reason. It's too jarring in a game that is partially about survival.

Maybe if they have some traumas or other mental issues. Drugs could be tweaked to achieve that. Medicine - if there were more chronic diseases that are not lethal or very harmful as long as they're treated. Muscle parasites, sleeping sickness, mechanites, gut worms don't count in my opinion because treatment barely affects them. Your colonists are crippled and there's practically nothing you can do about it! Either new diseases or tweak those.

Anyway,

There's lots of stuff wrong about raids.. Well, not wrong, just in the way they affect the way the game is played.

They wrap the game around them in my opinion. The ugliest, most inefficient bunker will stand as long as it can survive raids. Difficulty levels rely on raids like on a crutch.

Big mid/endgame raids end up either killing you or making you a lot of money because you got tons of good stuff to sell, and they completely invalidate crafting because you can get great high level equipment from raids consistently.
I don't think I EVER crafted weapons if not just for the fun of it. Never because it was useful or necessary  -  in fact it's highly wasteful before you level your crafter up to 15+ in crafting.

If life was harder, more demanding outside raids, AI storyteller could justify sending smaller raids. Raider AI improvements did help, but not enough. Loot would be less abundant. Then we would come up with something else.

I think the best way to add endgame challenge is simply to make the end harder.
Make a ship, fine. But you need lots of stuff to research (you need to find components to research by performing all kinds of missions and excavations in dangerous contested places, etc,

If you don't reduce the rate at which player accumulates loot - and higher upkeep costs accomplish that - Rimworld will forever have to make endings and endgame content very, very demanding. And it will keep growing out of control each time new kind of loot is introduced (drugs, harvestable bionics, single use items...) and each time a significant new source of income is introduced (animal husbandry, drugs). Colonies will get richer from alpha to alpha and Tynan will have to turn the screw again.

Also different, difficult endgames. Lets say the tribe start (village destroyed by the machines) has an endgame where they have to find the main hivemind and destroy it (having to destroy many different automata hives until they pinpoint the main baddie)

Note tribals have 400% research cost penalty, and did it make much of a difference for building the spaceship ? Not really. POWER CREEP is already happening.

[Lightzy]

True regarding power creep.
I just can't see a plausible way of raising upkeep exponentially in order to avoid exponential power creep. I think it's probably untenable because it'll affect the game in truly terrible unpredictable ways at different stages of colony growth.

I think first you have to isolate what causes power creep and handle that instead, and then see about escalating 'rubber band' mechanics if at all.

These factors  mainly:
1) too few skills (so one crafter crafts everything best, one builder builds everything best, one scientist is enough to be best at all fields of research), which speeds up the game and makes it quite boring and samey ultimately (pointed out in the diversity post I made).
2) too fast skill learning (especially with science)
3) too fast science
4) Raid loot (probably the worst culprit I think, in any normal game)

But part of this may be just my personal dislikes.
And then, all that said, it's also true that if you play ironman and truly random start on rough and above, you'll lose like 97% of the time to some random event at some point so.. It's not like the game has a very serious problem if you play it as a real survival sim.
It's just when it gets to the "E-Toy" stage that flaws stack up

[NiftyAxolotl]

Different players want different things out of "late game". Most of the people in this thread (myself included) are challenge-players - if the game stops seriously threatening our colony, we are bored. Having survived a difficult early game, we feel something is missing because we have nothing interesting left to do.

But a lot of players just like building cool bases! They survive the difficult early game, and get a nifty Sims-type design toy as a reward. They like the "E-Toy", as you call it.

If you are suggesting an increasing challenge curve, try not to annoy those players by kicking over their sand castles.

[Jibbles]

If you are suggesting an increasing challenge curve, try not to annoy those players by kicking over their sand castles.

It's constantly suggested because rimworld will benefit from it.  Players have options such as base building difficulty, able to change difficulty settings mid-game, scenario editor, etc.  I don't worry at all about increasing challenge since we have those options, but I do worry about overwhelming new players. It's why I usually don't approve of adding more resources/items that don't serve anything new to the game.

[Andy_Dandy]

What about repairs requiring ressources, like needing stone bricks to repair stonewalls etc?

[Jibbles]

What about repairs requiring ressources, like needing stone bricks to repair stonewalls etc?

Here's a flaw I see in that.  You won't conveniently see all the damage that's done, or see all the resources you need to repair. Workbenches,  generators, they also have multiple resources to build. So I imagine it would need components as well for repairs.  If you're low on materials and didn't want to use them for repairs, then it would be tedious to prevent pawns from using them. 

[mangalores]

If you are suggesting an increasing challenge curve, try not to annoy those players by kicking over their sand castles.

It's constantly suggested because rimworld will benefit from it.  Players have options such as base building difficulty, able to change difficulty settings mid-game, scenario editor, etc.  I don't worry at all about increasing challenge since we have those options, but I do worry about overwhelming new players. It's why I usually don't approve of adding more resources/items that don't serve anything new to the game.

There is differences in what constitutes challenge however. There is already tons of repetitive RNG which imo is mainly annoying, not challenging because it screws with you in mundane ways while your control over affecting those events is zero. Constantly breaking machines are e.g. busywork, not a challenge.

Imo the same would be true for upkeep. It's busywork, not mechanically interesting or challenging.

A challenge would be a scenario emerging asking for you to come up with a strategy to solve it. It's the strategy thing which gets your brain and thus excitement firing. Something like a toxic fallout is interesting because you may have to come up with a way to make your colony able to survive it.

What Rimworld may need are more late game scenarios of some kind. E.g. maybe faction wars or something pushing you to pack up and relocate your base. Or maybe some late game mechanics of sorts.

[b0rsuk]

True regarding power creep.
I just can't see a plausible way of raising upkeep exponentially in order to avoid exponential power creep. I think it's probably untenable because it'll affect the game in truly terrible unpredictable ways at different stages of colony growth.

Exponentially ? I don't think it has to be exponentially, and forever. I mean Rimworld colony wealth does get out of hand eventually, but I think delaying it would be a small victory.

Upkeep can scale with several things at least:

• Colonists
  
• Objects
  
• Pets
  
• Fields ? Plants ?
  

As I said, for colonists it could be medicine for chronic diseases, more food usage if someone becomes fat, or eats too much due to stress or gut worms. But currently it would be too little, because food production in biomes other than ice sheet is (in my opinion) very effective. Old people in our world seem to need more and more medicine. It's not fun, but colonists do get older in Rimworld, so it's a low hanging fruit. Colonists could also become addicts and demand more and more drugs (which some people argue are currently too devastating - I don't know, my colonists suffer withdraval periods. I could justify giving them drugs in dire emergencies, for example when there's only a doctor standing after a raid and everyone needs patching up).

For objects, my pet idea is wall maintenance, because killboxes, which I consider degenerate gameplay, rely on large amount of constructed walls. Then builders become semi-useless and twiddle their thumbs. One exception is when you migrate or establish new bases, then you need new base up FAST before mechanoids drop on top of you. Note upkeep doesn't have to take the form of spending resources. Merely spending colonist time has a cost, and it does make sense that your builders go around fixing damage after a storm. That would give them a regular job to do, and it would scale with the size of your base. I mean it wouldn't be just crafters and artists for late game.
Some kind of equivalent is needed for underground colonies, to avoid raining misery on open colonies only. Maybe cave-ins, maybe dust, I don't know, maybe a miner can create an account and enlighten us ? I'm OK with reducing infestation power if this gets implemented.
And it does lead to more stories. Imagine you're breeding dinosaurs, and a storm damages your fence. Or a storm is approaching when a manhunter pack is at the gates. But if the storm deals so much damage, maybe it will chase the pack away ? Will those rhinos care ? Will those boomrats start exploding ? Maybe not, but then maybe one of them is sick and more vulnerable ?

Pets - it's pretty obvious. Pets would receive special (medical) care compared to other animals, and not caring about bonded animals might upset colonists. It's sort of in the game already, but it could be increased by introducing (expensive) animal bionics. Colonists might hold a grudge if you don't spend money to fix their pets.

Plants - fields other than hydroponics could require some kind of tending, like regular removal of weeds, watering, etc. It doesn't have to cost actual resources, just colonist time, because outdoor farming is a bit out of control as a source of wealth now. Cotton, drugs, medicine, devilstrand, food, beer... Even if you don't like the idea, maintenance could be added solely for some late game, special plants. Or maybe instead of plant maintenance, Tynan could make wild animals eat your fields more aggressively. Then you might need to keep a few dedicated hunters just to keep wild herbivores in check. Lords and sheriffs don't have much to do, right ? This could change.

I think first you have to isolate what causes power creep and handle that instead, and then see about escalating 'rubber band' mechanics if at all.

My diagnosis is: staying alive costs too little on this frontier planet. The gap between wealth generation speed and maintenance costs is too wide.

I have yet another idea, which might be a little complicated. Supply and demand for trade. If you keep selling weapons / armour from raids, nearby colonies start paying less and less for them, because there are more guns on the market. And a person generally can't shoot two at the same time ? Colonies don't have use for more guns they can wield in battle, except as backup. But this would cause hard to predict effects with other wares. Maybe you would need to retrain your crafters to become brewers ? And balancing this would take much some iterating. But if closest markets were saturated first, it would encourage players to send trading caravans, or maybe even establish a remote transship point and send goods via transport pods. Suddenly competent caravan guards would be in demand.

Speaking of guns, I know ammo usage can lead to terrible micromanagement, but maybe we should discuss pros and cons ? What if charge rifles required some hard to manufacture ammo you haven't researched yet ? Then capturing one from a raid wouldn't do you much good, you would run out of ammo pretty quickly. An early sniper rifle wouldn't necessarily solve all your poison ship problems. Triggerhappy colonists would be a bit more costly, careful shooters would spend less. Melee would get an indirect buff.

These factors  mainly:
1) too few skills (so one crafter crafts everything best, one builder builds everything best, one scientist is enough to be best at all fields of research), which speeds up the game and makes it quite boring and samey ultimately (pointed out in the diversity post I made).

I wouldn't trust myself to build a house, but I imagine it takes more skill to build one than building perimeter wall. As long as there is no such thing as wall quality, more builders would actually be good to have to repair walls after a sandstorm.

4) Raid loot (probably the worst culprit I think, in any normal game)

The whole situation where a small settlement can repeatedly defeat outnumbering raiders is very unrealistic, and as such I think it can only be handled by equally unrealistic mechanic. Like dead man apparel. I would prefer something less contrived.

[Dashthechinchilla]

I don't like the idea of steadily increasing demand for nice things. I mean, on some level the pawns realize that they are in a podunk little town. They want nicer things already, like the new Colony thought that goes away. 

I do like the idea of wear and tear. For example, currently you can repair forever for free. Once the wall is built it never needs new blocks until it's destroyed. The issue becomes pointless repair that is more annoying than anything else. For example zzzt and component replacement.

[Nafensoriel]

It would be a far more effective late game control method to include a forced external access economy for end tier colonies.

To express this in simple terms lets break it down to tier needs from a pawns POV.

Tier0=Colony landed. That stick is awesome! I'm happy to have this stick.
Tier1=We've been here a bit.. I'd really like a roof.. and food. this handful of berries is good.
Tier2=Ok we can eat now and it's warm/cool. I'm bored.(introduce joy needs)
Tier3=I want fancy things!(Introduced requirements for manufactured goods like drugs/better food/art)
Tier4=I want technology!(Introduced goods made from goods. Fancy clothing, real lights, advanced joy items etc)
Tier5=We can't make this stuff!(Introduce needs that MUST be imported)

By doing this you can also make the economy more active by actively adjusting item value based on colony wealth and supply of said item. This effectively soft caps colony wealth and directly limits hoarding. it also creates a constant series of challenges as item prices crash or raiders impact your production or that of your trade partners. IE if you piss off space pirates to much and defeat to many raids without losses they might just blockade your colony for a while requiring you to go out to a map point explicitly away from your built defensive kill boxes to break the blockade.

Deterioration mechanics end up being unfun over time.. you still can box yourself in but now you have to minmax every single room and thing you have. Eventually, killboxes become 1 design because it's the one design that kills raids without costing you more resources than it consumes. It's gameplay that removes long term gameplay flex rather than enhances it.

[NiftyAxolotl]

Prices driven by supply and demand seems like a good mechanic:

• It blunts, rather than exacerbates, balance problems. Whatever money-scheme is OP for each patch/mod, is OP only for a limited amount of exploitation. The player gets a finite reward for spotting the imbalance, but can't just end all scarcity with it.
  
• 
  It gives players some opportunistic risk/reward tradeoffs. If components are suddenly in demand, do you sell your stash? If meat is cheap, do you set up a pemmican production line and clean out the vendors?
  
• 
  No sand castles are trampled if some price is multiplied or divided by 2. It might take longer to get to the E-toy stage, but shouldn't cause any additional frustration beyond that.

[Seeker89]

The problem with supply and demand would be the simulation. You would have to figure out the pawns in the area that would trade with you, then do stats on everything they would need, or want. Sure that's not too hard but people are already complaining about FPS late game. Planet-wide supply and demand, yes will have it's limits but how would you go system wide? You selling 500 guns to the town down the road is a lot but system wide is nothing.

I think the problem with over wealth is there is really not much to do with it, or no real incentive to do something with it.