What if these 0.19xx build numbers weren't random?

[Grapplehoeker]

The idea that's been buzzing around the back of my head was what if these haven't been just random number allocations that resemble years.
In fact, what if they haven't been just random years either... what if these are milestone years in the exploration of space?
For example,
Sputnik 1 first satellite in 1957
Yuri Gagarin first man in orbit in 1961
Mariner 2 flyby of Venus in 1962
Valentina Tereshkova first woman in space in 1963
Apollo 11 mission first moon landing in 1969
The Mariner mission to Mars in 1971
Mars 3 First signals from Mars surface in 1971
Mariner 10 flyby of Mercury in 1974
Voyager 1 and 2 launched into deep space in 1977
Voyager 1 flyby of Jupiter in 1979
Pioneer 11 flyby of Saturn in 1979
STS1 first reusable manned spacecraft in 1981
Venera13 first Venus soil samples in 1983
Voyager 2 flyby of Uranus in 1986
... we are currently on build 1987 (nothing of note happened in this year) and the next historical landmark is 1989 with the Voyager 2 flyby of Neptune.
Of course my imagination may well be jumping to conclusions, but man, it would be very cool indeed if Tynan was indeed using historical landmark years for his build numbering convention

[Canute]

Like a good conspiracy people you allways can find anything behind any number you just need to look deeper ! :-)

[Grapplehoeker]

Oh I wouldn't call it conspiracy theory, but it certainly falls into pattern recognition.
Development of human psychology owes a great deal to it and so for that, we as a people, can all be grateful for it

[5thHorseman]

Or maybe there have been almost 2000 builds of the version (About 1950 of them we didn't see) so that's where they happen to be now.

[erdrik]

Oh I wouldn't call it conspiracy theory, but it certainly falls into pattern recognition.
Development of human psychology owes a great deal to it and so for that, we as a people, can all be grateful for it

Its also the primary reason people think they see things that aren't really there.
Which is also something to be grateful for(artwork and creativity), but also extremely careful and skeptical about(misinformation and fanaticism).

[Jdalt40]

Actually no, the 4 digit version number is in reference to the number of days since Tynan's first release of Rimworld. You can work this out by dividing the current version number by 365.25. Tynan has been working on this for over 5 years now.

[Jdalt40]

In early Alphas the build number was around 300-500 depending on what Alpha you are on. The build number is only of course updated everytime he posts an update to the game

[5thHorseman]

Oh. Well that's... interesting. Not normal but many build numberings aren't normal so at least it's easy to follow.

[Peto2]

It is possible. It is not probable. I mean, if you search deep enough, you could find almost anything somehow related behind these years

[Scavenger]

I'm pretty sure Tynan has discovered a way to calculate the date of the apocalypse, and is trying to subtly share it with us without letting the government catch on.

[Matthiasagreen]

Actually no, the 4 digit version number is in reference to the number of days since Tynan's first release of Rimworld. You can work this out by dividing the current version number by 365.25. Tynan has been working on this for over 5 years now.

This is the correct answer. Tynan has stated (somewhere) that it is for each day he has worked on it. I would find the exact quote, but I have been following most of his comments for several years and would have no idea where to start.

Good thought though.

[Mufflamingo]

IIRC he said in his videos/posts that the number signifies tge number of days he's been working on rimworld. Its on the 17xx patch. (I think)