New wealth system in B19

[5thHorseman]

So to massively min-max it, damage all your art to 10% HP, then when a trader shows up repair it all, uninstall it, and sell it

[vampiresoap]

So to massively min-max it, damage all your art to 10% HP, then when a trader shows up repair it all, uninstall it, and sell it

Too gamey and micro-intensive for me.

[bbqftw]

It does have a cost, when you get consecutive drop pod raids in your favorite rooms, sometimes Molotov involved. Then you have very little time to save things.

[5thHorseman]

So to massively min-max it, damage all your art to 10% HP, then when a trader shows up repair it all, uninstall it, and sell it

Too gamey and micro-intensive for me.

Everything in this thread is too gamey and micro-intensive for me. I see no reason to play on Merciless and do all this micromanagement when you get the exact same experience from Rough or Savage without all the BS work.

[BLACK_FR]

Adaptation factor is not overwhelmingly influential. As far as I can tell, true adaptation multiplier on merciless is 1+(.4*(adaptation factor-1)), where adaptation factor is displayed in the storyteller (value from 0.4 and 1.5). This is a 37%~ difference between max and min, but it's quite challenging to remain at min adaptation even if you're doing things like letting every refugee die.

If you play on naked merciless brutality you basically can't afford to lose colonists. So you basically have 1.24 multiplier for all raids.

So to massively min-max it, damage all your art to 10% HP, then when a trader shows up repair it all, uninstall it, and sell it

You are overthinking it. Why sell them? If they are good then let them be in your colony with 10% hp.

Everything in this thread is too gamey and micro-intensive for me. I see no reason to play on Merciless and do all this micromanagement when you get the exact same experience from Rough or Savage without all the BS work.

Then I have to seem even more weird to you by disabling all "good" events while playing merciless naked brutality)) But hey, everyone finds fun where he can. You are more casual player, many people here are more hardcore. It's not hard to make your items to be less than 10% hp, but if it's too hardcore for you, then ok. But you can't win hardest scenarios that way.

[5thHorseman]

Then I have to seem even more weird to you by disabling all "good" events while playing merciless naked brutality

Not at all. But if you play that way AND min-max it to win AND complain that you have to in order to survive then yes, that's weird to me. I'm not saying YOU're doing that, but I've seen it, a lot.

I can't stress that my problem isn't with it being done. I even enjoy the mental puzzling-it-out aspect my own self even if I won't put the work into putting it into practice. My problem is the complaint that you can't win at the high levels without doing it. Well, of COURSE you can't. That's what those levels are FOR. If you can win at the highest level without gaming every single system and maybe still losing then the highest level needs to be made harder.

[bbqftw]

To be fair, its not the only way to win this scenario. I've seen high wealth victories from NB opener, with high death counts, as opposed to the conservative style advocated here.

That said almost invariably there are a lot of tactics used in those runs that people would find distasteful too (things that make the AI look moronic, abusing specific movement patterns). But its not like there are 'fair' solutions to a lot of the quadratically wealth scaled threats the game throws at you in merciless.

So you find things like "how to kill 25 elephants with one pawn without risk of structure or pawn damage".

[Electroid]

I find it so weird where people will try to min-max playing on the hardest difficulty just to have the game play like it was on a lower difficulty.

I mean Sacrificing a pawn once a year to reduce raid sizes.
remove all your flooring.
damage all your equipment to below 30%.

it feels so weird. Just play the game, accept that it will get more difficult over time, accept that you will eventually lose pawns.

[vampiresoap]

I find it so weird where people will try to min-max playing on the hardest difficulty just to have the game play like it was on a lower difficulty.

I mean Sacrificing a pawn once a year to reduce raid sizes.
remove all your flooring.
damage all your equipment to below 30%.

it feels so weird. Just play the game, accept that it will get more difficult over time, accept that you will eventually lose pawns.

Yeah, man. I find it weird too, but maybe it's actually fun to them. Everybody's different.

[zizard]

Actually you need to sacrifice twice a year

[Bobisme]

You could say, looking from the pawns perspective..
'hey man we got raiders everywhere, anything worth.. anything , they're going to steal and, we're going to die for.. 
You're right...
We're fkd..
I know! lets just smash our shit up! like, really fk the place up, make it so we look like we aint worth, ..nothin!
then we build our ship right under their god damn noses n get the fk outa here!
Love it bro, fkn ,love it, sweet idea
*Proceeds to smash the fk out of everything*

lol

It makes sense that you stay inconspicuous, live under the radar, your job is to gtfo of there, if it means living in a shit hole so be it, What. Ever. It. Takes.
But the tougher way is surely the man who lives like a king and stands atop a pile o' bodies
..Though again, what good is finishing the game if everyone died to get there, heh.

I'm just on my second play through atm , first was randy random, rough, now cassandra classic rough, having fun, next play through, ice sheet.
Great game, any way you play it

Interesting read

[BLACK_FR]

Not at all. But if you play that way AND min-max it to win AND complain that you have to in order to survive then yes, that's weird to me. I'm not saying YOU're doing that, but I've seen it, a lot.

I can't stress that my problem isn't with it being done. I even enjoy the mental puzzling-it-out aspect my own self even if I won't put the work into putting it into practice. My problem is the complaint that you can't win at the high levels without doing it. Well, of COURSE you can't. That's what those levels are FOR. If you can win at the highest level without gaming every single system and maybe still losing then the highest level needs to be made harder.

It's not complaint, it's what makes game interesting to me. It means that without playing on maximum possible difficulty the game will not engage me enough to play it.
Wealth mechanic is main mechanic of the game so even if you don't plan to play merciless NB without good events, understanding how it works will be helpful. That's the purpose of this thread.

To be fair, its not the only way to win this scenario. I've seen high wealth victories from NB opener, with high death counts, as opposed to the conservative style advocated here.

That said almost invariably there are a lot of tactics used in those runs that people would find distasteful too (things that make the AI look moronic, abusing specific movement patterns). But its not like there are 'fair' solutions to a lot of the quadratically wealth scaled threats the game throws at you in merciless.

So you find things like "how to kill 25 elephants with one pawn without risk of structure or pawn damage".

I actually would very much like to see how to kill 25 elephants in b19 (if you actually know some method and was not using figure of speech).
Regarding high-wealth strategies, it's definetly possible. You have to increase your wealth substantially towards end-game anyway. And if you plan your colony properly you can withstand huge raids. But you increase chance that you would be overrun.
Also the most interesting part of the game is early-mid game, when you are don't have anything and should try to beat all threats alone without drops or random wanderer join. No room for mistake - it's so cool.

I find it so weird where people will try to min-max playing on the hardest difficulty just to have the game play like it was on a lower difficulty.

I mean Sacrificing a pawn once a year to reduce raid sizes.
remove all your flooring.
damage all your equipment to below 30%.

it feels so weird. Just play the game, accept that it will get more difficult over time, accept that you will eventually lose pawns.

It's not the same at all, actually. For me it's art of doing only what really needed to be done and in right order. That process is more beautiful than building big and shiny colony on lesser difficulties. If you can easily build colony you want - it loses more than half of interest (at least for me).

And why should I accept that I will lose pawns? If I mastered game mechanics why shouldn't put this knowledge to use and don't lose anyone? My last run on mercilles NB without good events (B18) I didn't lost any pawn whole game. And even took all bonded animals with me on the ship.

It makes sense that you stay inconspicuous, live under the radar, your job is to gtfo of there, if it means living in a shit hole so be it, What. Ever. It. Takes.
But the tougher way is surely the man who lives like a king and stands atop a pile o' bodies
..Though again, what good is finishing the game if everyone died to get there, heh.

My interest is so that nobody dies. And I play on merciless NB with no good events, so there is plenty of challenge. But that what makes game fun in my view. Other mods of playing just seem too easy to be interesting. But again I completely understand casual approach, it's just that my hardcore heart don't seems to be interested in it.

[BLACK_FR]

What a hell? I just discovered that health now don't affect weapons accuracy and armor protection. So you can have 10% hp weapon and armor and be just as good as having 100% hp weapon and armor.

I think that's a very bad change. Interesting why Tynan did that.

[Nafensoriel]

What a hell? I just discovered that health now don't affect weapons accuracy and armor protection. So you can have 10% hp weapon and armor and be just as good as having 100% hp weapon and armor.

I think that's a very bad change. Interesting why Tynan did that.

To be fair though it makes more sense. An old battered AR-15 is still going to shoot the same bullet as a brand new one. It just might jam or flat out critically fail on firing.

[BLACK_FR]

What a hell? I just discovered that health now don't affect weapons accuracy and armor protection. So you can have 10% hp weapon and armor and be just as good as having 100% hp weapon and armor.

I think that's a very bad change. Interesting why Tynan did that.

To be fair though it makes more sense. An old battered AR-15 is still going to shoot the same bullet as a brand new one. It just might jam or flat out critically fail on firing.

No it doesn't. First of all it greatly upsets balance. Now you don't need to keep your weapons health. Secondly, health in Rimworld represents damage to item. So 10% hp AR-15 is like bended beaten thing. In B18 that thing would fire with less accuracy. I don't see a reason why it's make less sense than firing as good as new.