No way to win

Started by RazorHed, June 04, 2014, 03:29:51 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

RazorHed

I love this game , but it is only possible to eventually lose. My suggestion is to have a few scenarios .
One would be the game as it is now ,  a gauntlet type , see how far you can make it thing. Another would be a goal oriented scenario . reach a certain population , # of days , perhaps a certain type of building that takes lots of resources , research but essentially makes you invincible IE win

christhekiller

Nah. There are more than a few games with no-win scenarios. You just keep playing until you die. If your colony lasts until you get bored of it and start again then that's a win :D

max97

Yes play till you die, usually famine after an attack for me though there was one module proposed where you could construct a spaceship to end the game without killing your colonists or dying, or quiting.

bluntfeather

Win-states, I think, are on the list of Likely Things. Last I heard Ty was considering the spaceship idea with a possibility not all your colonists board it. I think that could be interesting depending on what other mechanics get added -- maybe the spaceship will be somehow able to aid the colonists that remain on RimWorld.

RazorHed

wait  , whats the spaceship idea? I must have missed that?   You win if you build a spaceship and leave to found a new colony elsewhere?  That would be great I think. research all kinds of spaceship oriented things , make buildings to produce parts, fuel, etc

Ruin

The spaceship idea is very neat but, I hope it would be *very* hard to do.  Say, 100s of days under normal progression.

JonoRig

The original game pitch was that your colonists are trying to build a ship in order to escape the planet back home, because ur not colonists at all, your original 3 people and any pods that rain down are ship wrecked. It a just where this is down the line for development, people have forgotten, or didn't realise

RazorHed

ahhh I see . excellent

max97


RazorHed

Ahh thank you much for pointing that out :)