Things you refuse to do in the game

[Rainyface]

I don't really do killboxes as such. I usually make a main entrance that's more "realistically" defended by turrets, sandbags and a mine/trap field, then have some sandbags and mini turrets dotted around the main buildings, behind the surrounding wall. I don't do trap corridors.

I don't play without infestations disabled. I don't build deep mountain bases anyway (I like house clusters) and I don't want to have to avoid those dark green tiles like plague just for building into a hill that has 10 tiles of mountain.

I don't accept chemical interests/fascinations.

[ReZpawner]

I won't kill wild people (or let them join, since their skills suck).
Wild people are also the only ones who gets a grave.
I will go out of my way to murder other people though. Including Tynan.

[cultist]

I tend to start out a new colony with reasonably high expectations for moral behavior and then slowly descend into a more grey area as circumstances force me to make hard choices. Once you learn how to read the impact various actions have on your pawns and their behavior, it quickly becomes clear what sort of behavior is tolerated and what isn't. It's not difficult to run a colony that's ruthlessly efficient but also happy, because you only need to avoid specific types of "bad" behavior and they're all pretty obvious. Don't eat or butcher humans, don't abuse/kill prisoners and don't harm your own pawns or tamed animals on purpose. That's pretty much it. Everything else is just a matter of base layout, resource management and a bit of luck.

[Limdood]

I never take a prisoner i don't intend to release (release WITHOUT amputation) or recruit.

dying pawns on the ground get looked at....non-recruitables from pirate factions get shot on the ground, non-recruitable AND permanently-immobile non-pirate pawns get the same (brain damage, spine destroyed, etc.)

I know many people harvest prisoners for parts and medical xp, but I just kill on the ground, or capture-release or capture-recruit.



I never have my colonists willingly use the "hard" drugs....yayo, flake, go-juice.  And i usually (but not always) avoid using beer (unless it's gifted) or smokeleaf.  We also don't eat ambrosia....BUT i make heavy use of luciferium in my games, and i often produce drugs, but only to sell.

[Travinsky]

There's not a lot of things I don't do because I like, morally object to, like my colonists rarely do drugs only because I can't be arsed to make them myself and I don't want to deal with addiction/withdrawal, not because I'm a prohibitionist.

I think the only thing is, I won't kill/execute/sell into slavery/position them near raiders any of my colonists because they're useless. I've executed them if they've committed severe enough crimes during a rage. And I euthanised one who was braindead (Which was one of those most memorable things I've done in the game), and I won't rescue sailors or sheriffs from bandit camps or raiders. But once they're in my colony, I try to protect them best I can and find the best use out of them I can.

[Aszh]

1) I don't do unnecessary surgeries to train medical, too micro-y and boring, and also unnecessary because of #2
2) I allow surgery fails, but I don't allow surgery fails that also consume the body part.
3) I don't use traps and use very few turrets, but still make heavy use of walls and killboxes.  I can't be asked to do combat the "challenging" way anymore; been there done that, and after 1000 hours it's just way too micro-y, boring and RNG.
4) I don't allow social fights to do permanent damage.  If somebody loses a toe in a social fight, it gets dev consoled back.  Wasn't a rule before B19, it's just way too common now, and completely unrealistic of actual social fights
5) I don't hunt with groups of drafted colonists, way too micro-y and boring.  Thusly, I also don't allow full herd animal revenge--if they do, they get console removed like they were never there in the first place.  The compromise is I don't get that meat and leather.  Single animal revenge is ok, even though that's also kinda bullshit because the AI governing hunting sucks.
6) I don't build the spaceship
7) Mid to late game, I don't allow pawns to choose their own partners (not that they would anyway, because romance is broken after about 10 colonists).  When I can afford to, I build a special "luxury" complex with a bedroom, private fridge, private kitchen, private bathroom, has TV, etc. and lock two single pawns in there until they fuck.  Once they do, they get booted back out to the common rooms and replaced with the next aspiring couple.  Arranged marriages for the win.
8.) If Pawn A hits on Pawn B and gets refused, and then Pawn B hits on Pawn A a short time later and gets refused, they get dev consoled into a relationship because that's nonsense.
9) I changed the value of -15 "Failed to romance me" to +5 to simulate flattery and the principle of successful persistence.  This obviously leads to more romances, but it also tends to lead to more affairs, which IMO is way more fun than the nearly insurmountable monogamous relationship values in vanilla.
10) I almost never use animals for combat.  They're just too precious to me emotionally, and also just way too stupid, bless their little hearts.
11) If I get attacked by manhunting cats, they get console removed because I refuse to kill cats.  I use console to fire a different manhunter event after.
12) I don't accept "Innocent Prisoner Died" mood debuffs, and they get modded to 0--because trying my absolute best to save someone's life but having them bleed out before I can triage them, and then getting a colony-wide debuff for it, is nonsense.  As tradeoff, I never leave anyone to bleed out on the battlefield, friend or foe, and always try to save everyone every time.
13) Until there's at least a *sort of* reliable way to down prisoners without killing or maiming them, I don't play with prison breaks.

[Shurp]

#7 and #9 are interesting, I may give those a try.  How hard is #9 to mod?  I like the idea of rewarding pawns for trying to start relationships and having entertaining chaos result.

Hmmm, I just realized something else.  #9 is the only way to get #7 to work, otherwise persistence will result in violence.

[Aszh]

It's an edit to one variable in a single xml file.  Find your Rimworld folder, navigate to Mods\Core\Defs\ThoughtDefs\Thoughts_Memory_Social.xml, open that up in a text editor, ctrl+f to find "failedromance", then change the baseOpinionOffset value to whatever you'd like.

#9 isn't required for #7, they won't fight unless they weren't compatible anyway.  It just speeds up the process a bit, and prevents situations where they each have 3-4x rebuff on each other, which actually happens irritatingly often.  I've done #7 forever, but I only just started #9 in my newest game. It always feels like romances stop almost completely once your base gets big enough, simply because they don't have enough opportunities to meet and chat with each other unless they're both cooks, etc.  And that's no fun.

[jamaicancastle]

I don't butcher people. I'll leave them to rot, but I won't butcher them. I also don't tend to take many prisoners; probably my most common outcome is just leaving them to their fates. If they recover after the battle, they leave peacefully, so it's not like I really lose out by just ignoring them, and it's loads easier. If they bleed out, I generally just leave the bodies there until something eats 'em, or drag them to a dump.

The real reason I avoid both of these is I think they make the game kind of silly. There's something deeply wrong about raids where the more you're attacked, the richer you get. But it's nice not to have to worry about separating food stockpiles or having tons of prison cells.

9) I changed the value of -15 "Failed to romance me" to +5 to simulate flattery and the principle of successful persistence.  This obviously leads to more romances, but it also tends to lead to more affairs, which IMO is way more fun than the nearly insurmountable monogamous relationship values in vanilla.

I'd never thought of tinkering with that... I might mod it to depend on the attraction/compatibility values between the pawns, so that pawns who hate each other don't magically hook up, but ones who are marginal aren't scared away.

[tojosan]

Things I won't do...
Bury pets.
Accept pyro's as colonists. if they wander in, guess who gets to visit ancient evils first.
Let my pawns use drugs; that's excluding beer!

There should be another thread...things I'd never have opted for before.
Like, heck, I'll lop off that prisoner's leg.... just in case Rhonda my sharpshooter needs it.

[makkenhoff]

I don't use combat strategies that feel unrealistic, or that abuse the AI tactics.

I won't allow visiting pyromaniacs to live, I arrest and execute them, for my own colonists I'm a bit nicer, they go for medical 'treatment' and then are executed humanely.

I don't usually allow my single starving colonist to die to malnutrition when they are laying next to a pile of food, especially if they had a tantrum of sorts that rendered them that way to start with. Hediff removal, one of the few times I'll actually console debug something.

[Alenerel]

Never recruit pyros, chemical guys, lazies or slowpokes. The lazy reasoning is like, Im here trying to save all your asses, and everyone is doing its part, and you have the balls to not give a shit? Well, you can die. Pyros and chemicals... Well, its a mental illness... But I already have enough shit to deal, and I cannot and will help someone who is not willing to help himself. Slowpoke I understand it as lazy.

TBH I never get old people either... Tho I should get them, or at least put the ones that are extremely fucked up to sleep (80 year old, bad memory, scars, etc), since it would be doing them a favor...

I never recruit fat people cause, even tho I know the mechanics are irrelevant for this, to me its like "wtf, are you stealing food? gtfo".

I also never recruit another kind of people... But people will be very triggered for this so I wont say. And yes, people will be triggered in this forum where, ironically, where they make jokes about war crimes, tortures, treating humans like livestock, etc.

[Jake]

I don't refuse any refugees, even if they're not very useful. I also don't harvest organs, butcher or otherwise mistreat prisoners: If they're not worth recruiting they get released unharmed.

I don't do killboxes, although natural chokepoints created by terrain features are fair game.

I don't allow my pawns to use any drugs harder than smokeleaf and psychoid tea unless they're already addicts, or become such by binging on the stuff they found in a dead raider's pockets if I can't put a stop to that in time.

I make a ridiculous amount of effort to make the colony pleasant to live in, with plenty of recreation options and the spaces between buildings filled with flowerbeds and lawns with the occasional sculpture.

[raydarken]

I generally don't banish or dispose of pawns which have become useless because it seems too much like min/maxing and is somewhat immersion breaking to me. My current game is set at the difficulty of Cassandra Rough with Marvin's Combat Readiness mod (highly recommended) and I recently had a pawn who gained mild blindness in both eyes on his 46th birthday (mod). By the time he was 48 he had gone profoundly blind in both eyes (same mod). He was my best shooter AND doctor at the time, but I just sucked it up and got through the setback. Last few years he's been a star animal handler. Thanks for your service Noob!

Also had a pawn who had a birthday and became frail. That one really sucks, but c'est la vie right? She's still doing all the same jobs just more slowly. We're all in this together!

That being said, I've been considering banishing a raider I converted who keeps having semi-regular breaks and tries to keep binging on the hardest drugs he can find. Shattered his nose the first time trying to  down him, but he still persists. Now that I think of it, maybe I will implement a 3 strikes you're out rule... that could be interesting an interesting way to trim the fat on unstable pawns clogging up the colony works. Then again, some seasons are bad for everyone and that sort of strict policy could leave the policy quite empty pretty quickly. But I digress, I think I'll head over to the scenario forum with a new idea.

[B@R5uk]

Well,

— no mods. At some point I used a mod that introduced hysteresis in hauling, but later I figured out how to make efficient food production chain using game features only. This chain does not even need additional hauler (cook can do it all), though dogs do increase production rate.

— no gay colonists. Never.

— no ugly traits, no sex-hater traits, no addict traits, no pyro traits. This all is driven by efficiency motives for couple-based colony.

— no part havesting (except bionics) or unnecessary mutilation of prisoners despite my colonies always sells a lot of human skin and train animals with insect-human kibble (good stuff for training cooking). I like how game allows me to butcher gays, then turn them into fuel, then into energy. But my colonies never execute prisoners even if some turns out to be gays. I train surgery on prisoners by installing/removing peg legs but only if a man already has a peg leg or got his leg shoot off during fight. If a man got into my cell it's a guaranty to be alive, he'll end up as a colonist or will be sold.

— never allow my men to die. Consequently very strict selection criteria.