Remove ability to smash through stone walls with melee.

[Ildac]

I can see a stone club smashing through a wooden wall, and even that would probably take a considerable amount of time.

But a stone club vs a stone wall?  That club's going to fall apart before a wall is.  Building walls is a resource investment that shouldn't be punished by a bunch of primitives with poor quality slate clubs.  The entire point of a wall is to force your enemies to go through a path you want them to--and if they want to come through, they should have to use explosives.

As for tribals, well, they should bring their bows and arrows.

By the way, this is happening in a base that's not completely closed off.  There are three open entrances, only two of which are protected by turrets, and the enemies are still just beating down my heavy stone walls, forcing my gunners to go outside and fight.  Enemies with mortars and grenades were supposed to be the counter to killboxes.  Not cavemen swinging rocks.

[Limdood]

1) it's a game, and some "realism" get's sacrificed for gameplay.  If tribals or melee wielding pawns couldn't break through walls, then there couldn't be tribal or melee raids, and the variety makes the game better.

2) currently a wall takes 5 resources and a club takes 25 i believe.  If my club takes FIVE TIMES the amount of stone that it takes to make a METER THICK WALL, you better believe I expect it to be able to smash through a wall...that thing is a wrecking ball!  On a slightly less facetious note, if you made a club cost 5 stone bricks, then you'd still be looking at something like 200 stone per wall section as a "realistic" ratio of resources...I wouldn't enjoy playing where walls cost 200 resources to make.

[Kirby23590]

I think in sapper raids...

Raiders in sapper raids can easily mine your walls. Be it Wood, Steel, Sandstone, Slate, Limestone or Granite... This can happen not just in Melee Raids but also in Pure ranged ones... And they are able to surprisingly be able to mine the walls quick...

And some explosives like Grenades can easily tear down walls.

So no need... For that...

[Ildac]

The point is that sapper squads should NEED explosives to get through a wall. If they don't have them, then too bad. You have the advantage that time.

If the cost of a club vs the cost of a wall segment is such a problem, then the values can be adjusted to make more sense. It's completely nonsensical that a club costs more than a wall, anyway.

Again, there are massive, obvious counters to walls. Clubs should not be one.

[Limdood]

The point is that sapper squads should NEED explosives to get through a wall. If they don't have them, then too bad. You have the advantage that time.

If the cost of a club vs the cost of a wall segment is such a problem, then the values can be adjusted to make more sense. It's completely nonsensical that a club costs more than a wall, anyway.

Again, there are massive, obvious counters to walls. Clubs should not be one.

I'm not interested in playing a game where 100% of tribal raids and 25% of other raids are stopped by nothing more than a simple wall that takes 3 in-game hours to build from scratch.

I doubt most other people want that either....I also wonder what you want out of it?  do you really want half the raids that come to your base to just show up, say "nah, nevermind" and leave without doing anything?  what's the point of the raid then?  If you DO want that, why?  are raids too rough?  you can turn down the difficulty.


I'm not arguing the realism.  you're right, it's not realistic that a wood spear/club tribal raider can break a wall....but it sure makes for a more engaging game.  Other games have the same issue.  7 days to die, a zombie survival building game, has zombies that can (eventually) punch through a meter of solid steel with their fists.  Realistic?  not even remotely.  But if they couldn't do that, everyone would just build a little sheet-metal shack and a huge aspect of the game's challenge would be GONE.  Rimworld isn't any different.  If different tech levels are going to be present on the planet AND BE ABLE TO PROVIDE ANY THREAT, then punching walls down is going to be a thing.

[Ildac]

The point is that sapper squads should NEED explosives to get through a wall. If they don't have them, then too bad. You have the advantage that time.

If the cost of a club vs the cost of a wall segment is such a problem, then the values can be adjusted to make more sense. It's completely nonsensical that a club costs more than a wall, anyway.

Again, there are massive, obvious counters to walls. Clubs should not be one.

I'm not interested in playing a game where 100% of tribal raids and 25% of other raids are stopped by nothing more than a simple wall that takes 3 in-game hours to build from scratch.

I doubt most other people want that either....I also wonder what you want out of it?  do you really want half the raids that come to your base to just show up, say "nah, nevermind" and leave without doing anything?  what's the point of the raid then?  If you DO want that, why?  are raids too rough?  you can turn down the difficulty.


I'm not arguing the realism.  you're right, it's not realistic that a wood spear/club tribal raider can break a wall....but it sure makes for a more engaging game.  Other games have the same issue.  7 days to die, a zombie survival building game, has zombies that can (eventually) punch through a meter of solid steel with their fists.  Realistic?  not even remotely.  But if they couldn't do that, everyone would just build a little sheet-metal shack and a huge aspect of the game's challenge would be GONE.  Rimworld isn't any different.  If different tech levels are going to be present on the planet AND BE ABLE TO PROVIDE ANY THREAT, then punching walls down is going to be a thing.

Unless you build a ludicrous amount of turrets, you're not killing a giant tribal raid that passes through your base entrance.  And if you are, then you're obviously not here for the challenge.  And don't even try to say that even 10% of other raids would be stopped just because they can't get through a wall fifty feet away from your otherwise completely open base.

What I "want" out of it is for building a wall to actually be a sensible decision, strategically.  It has nothing to do with difficulty--it has everything to do with building an actual "base" being a poor decision with how the AI handles pathing and sapping.

Again, this would be FINE with an enemy that makes sense--sapper squads with bombs are perfectly reasonable.  I've also mentioned drop pods and mortars as other perfectly viable means of the game challenging you by removing the wall from the equation.

But walls are explicitly advantageous against melee assailants, seeing as they are forced not only to path through a corridor of your choosing, but they also have to close to melee range, often through turrets.  That's WHY you build walls.  If the game determines that your walls are too strong, then maybe it should stop sending ALL MELEE combatants.  Tribals have more than just stone clubs at their disposal.

Don't even start with the "building a box would make the game too easy" bit.  First of all, even if that didn't completely handicap you by removing caravan trading, preventing any hope of building relations with other factions, completely removing caravan/raid missions, and severely limiting your building options, the fact remains that people who WOULD do something like that aren't looking for a proper challenge anyway, and simply find other ways to close themselves off and piss on any notion of being attacked.

I'm not asking for uber realism.  I'm asking for an obvious defense solution to not be COMPLETELY nullified by a class of enemy that it's clearly meant to be advantageous against.

[Limdood]

First of all, your idea nullifies tribal raids....full stop.  Sure, they have more than melee weapons, but I really hope you're not arguing that a club shouldn't break a stone wall, but a shortbow should.

Tribals don't have grenades or explosives or drop pods.  They're 2/5s of the factions in a standard game and they present their own unique challenges (btw, traps, firing lines, fallback positions, and winding corridors with ambushes works against large tribal raids....no turrets needed).  you shouldn't be able to completely ignore a large portion of the game by simply completing a wall.

Don't even start with the "building a box would make the game too easy" bit.  First of all, even if that didn't completely handicap you by removing caravan trading, preventing any hope of building relations with other factions, completely removing caravan/raid missions, and severely limiting your building options, the fact remains that people who WOULD do something like that aren't looking for a proper challenge anyway, and simply find other ways to close themselves off and piss on any notion of being attacked.

There's a strange, nifty kind of wall in the game that opens.  you can find it under the name "door."  Yeah haha snark, but the game treats walls and doors the same for enemies that can't open them...they're just a slightly lower hp wall, so your argument of "build a wall and no one can ever enter or leave again" is completely wrong.

Complete Walls in this game (such as a completely enclosed outer perimeter wall) still serve a function...they slow enemies instead of stopping them.  Whether melee or ranged, they show you where the enemies are attacking and allow you to react before the enemies are on top of you.  Incomplete walls are actually more effective against ranged combatants, and arguably seem INTENDED for fighting against superior ranged forces as they can be used to block off firing lines for longer ranged enemies and force them into tighter quarters.

Yeah, that was another of your points, that walls are intended to fight against melee opponents.  And it's pretty ridiculous as well.  Realism was your very first argument for "no melee to kill walls" and do you really expect a hunting rifle or even an assault rifle to make any meaningful dent in a meter-thick stone wall?  There's no support for walls being intended or realistically meant to stop melee, but not ranged.  In fact, in the game, walls are a DETRIMENT to fighting melee, since wide open approaches favor the side with ranged weapons, while walls can be used to great effect forcing long ranged firearm-equipped enemies to funnel through holes in your walls and engage with their sniper rifles from 3 tiles away.

In summary,
- melee breaking walls makes no more sense than bows, rifles, or assault rifles breaking walls
- if walls can't be broken by melee, but can by ANY ranged weapon, then the game just made LESS sense
- If walls are immune to things that shouldn't break walls, several raid types and factions become completely irrelevant
- walls are currently better against ranged than melee, as is fitting for barriers that block movement and line of sight
- Lastly, the game has gone through pretty much every stage of it's development with walls able to be destroyed by melee.  It's quite doubtful that Tynan would suddenly reverse direction on this completely AFTER alpha ended and with no massive outcry, reported problems, or indication that this is a problem.

[Ildac]

First of all, your idea nullifies tribal raids....full stop.  Sure, they have more than melee weapons, but I really hope you're not arguing that a club shouldn't break a stone wall, but a shortbow should.

Tribals don't have grenades or explosives or drop pods.  They're 2/5s of the factions in a standard game and they present their own unique challenges (btw, traps, firing lines, fallback positions, and winding corridors with ambushes works against large tribal raids....no turrets needed).  you shouldn't be able to completely ignore a large portion of the game by simply completing a wall.

Don't even start with the "building a box would make the game too easy" bit.  First of all, even if that didn't completely handicap you by removing caravan trading, preventing any hope of building relations with other factions, completely removing caravan/raid missions, and severely limiting your building options, the fact remains that people who WOULD do something like that aren't looking for a proper challenge anyway, and simply find other ways to close themselves off and piss on any notion of being attacked.

There's a strange, nifty kind of wall in the game that opens.  you can find it under the name "door."  Yeah haha snark, but the game treats walls and doors the same for enemies that can't open them...they're just a slightly lower hp wall, so your argument of "build a wall and no one can ever enter or leave again" is completely wrong.

Complete Walls in this game (such as a completely enclosed outer perimeter wall) still serve a function...they slow enemies instead of stopping them.  Whether melee or ranged, they show you where the enemies are attacking and allow you to react before the enemies are on top of you.  Incomplete walls are actually more effective against ranged combatants, and arguably seem INTENDED for fighting against superior ranged forces as they can be used to block off firing lines for longer ranged enemies and force them into tighter quarters.

Yeah, that was another of your points, that walls are intended to fight against melee opponents.  And it's pretty ridiculous as well.  Realism was your very first argument for "no melee to kill walls" and do you really expect a hunting rifle or even an assault rifle to make any meaningful dent in a meter-thick stone wall?  There's no support for walls being intended or realistically meant to stop melee, but not ranged.  In fact, in the game, walls are a DETRIMENT to fighting melee, since wide open approaches favor the side with ranged weapons, while walls can be used to great effect forcing long ranged firearm-equipped enemies to funnel through holes in your walls and engage with their sniper rifles from 3 tiles away.

In summary,
- melee breaking walls makes no more sense than bows, rifles, or assault rifles breaking walls
- if walls can't be broken by melee, but can by ANY ranged weapon, then the game just made LESS sense
- If walls are immune to things that shouldn't break walls, several raid types and factions become completely irrelevant
- walls are currently better against ranged than melee, as is fitting for barriers that block movement and line of sight
- Lastly, the game has gone through pretty much every stage of it's development with walls able to be destroyed by melee.  It's quite doubtful that Tynan would suddenly reverse direction on this completely AFTER alpha ended and with no massive outcry, reported problems, or indication that this is a problem.

Your entire argument boils down to "that's how the game has been" and "lol realism".

You've made your point.  It's not a very good one, but you've made it.