How to bring the colonies out into the open again?

[thewoodpecker]

There should be effect on someones mood if they don't get enough sun light, this would also mean that window would be a necessity.

[NoImageAvailable]

There should be effect on someones mood if they don't get enough sun light, this would also mean that window would be a necessity.

There already is, its called "Cabin Fever"

[MarSmith]

A few things. At least my observations on the situation. Don't flame me too much on this one.....

1. Large bunkers, in real life can be spartan, yet very comfortable. Cabin fever can be really averted. (I wish so in the game, as I design mine based on real life larger bunkers.). How many people here play a -practical- game, versus a simulation? For example, I try to design bunkers based on the ones I am in, with dedicated areas and designs. A living module, a plant module, a production module, blast doors, containment, etc.

1.a. Some larger bunkers in real life can be sealed off almost indefinitely. I've been in some which were designed 50 years ago for 500 people to be completely sealed for 30-90 days. Food, fuel, and air was the largest problems. Not to mention, they normally had procedures in place to deal with people going crazy. (Rim-world actually does emulate this...I've also roleplayed it out when people do crack.) 

I dislike the cabin fever de-buff, simply because there is no other option. A lot of what gets people is stress, routine and lack of things to do. Joy in A10 adds a great layer, as it deals with the psychological stresses of survival. If you give enough things for people to do, they will not think about where they are at. I'd like to see more joy activities within the game, and more items (I'm surprised people aren't adding more in for mods yet?)

There is also the issue of, a large bunker boxes you in. It really does. Which leads me into my next few points below.

2. Patrols. Patrols would be fun. It would force people into the open. Snatch patrols, fighting patrols, recce patrols. All fun to do. The mechanic is somewhat there to do snatch squads on visitors and on wanderers. However it isn't enough, especially on tribal due to recruitment difficulty. It would be fun to be able to ambush raiders, ones who aren't running at my front door. It would be fun to ambush supply convoys, or grab prisoners. Hell, even some intelligence gathering would be fun. I try to roleplay taking prisoners (not for recruitment, or for anything, but to pretend I've tactically questioned them.....)

2.a - One option would be to look at indirect raider raids. Where they set up a snipers nest, or try to ambush your hunters / gatherers. Or again, have them park outside and set up a camp fire. Perhaps a "threat escalator", where a small group comes in and sets up an OP / LP, then more come, then more come, eventually a siege and an assault?

3. Better use of ground and defensive positions.. Currently right now, the only good defense is to build a static position, and fighting the delay is very difficult. Setting up a proper section, or platoon attack is difficult. (Yes, I do simulate like that.) I'd love to be able to have my colonists do more than run out onto the ground and wait for the enemy. Shell scrapes, only take a few minutes to an hour to dig in real life, and that will give you some protection. A stage 2 trench (down to chest / head level) to a stage 3 (with a dug out for overhead protection) will take less than a day. [/center]

3.a. The biggest problem with a section or platoon attack is that when you place your colonists, and they are in range, they just open fire. So you can't set up a proper "firebase" for fire and maneuver.

3.b. There is also very few options other than walling up. Mutual supporting fire positions can work, and they play well into my early game, where I do actually try to set up a section defensive position. However, some tend to get overrun first. So it becomes difficult, especially with paths and targeting.

3.c. Fighting a withdrawal can be fun, however I find the game's combat interface rather limiting. Mutual support becomes difficult at best. Especially when "pepperpotting." (1 advances, 1 covers, or 1 withdraws, 1 covers.). The question becomes, why should I go out and fight them back to my main defensive line, in a delay action, or advance to contact, when I know they will walk into me, and not flank.

3.d. Lack of tactical options. Again, as I said before, some of the issues with the combat interface I find, make it difficult, if not impossible to simulate low level combat. Setting up a platoon minus, or a platoon sized fighting patrol can be very difficult at best. ROEs, don't fire until commands, groupings, etc will save a lot of this problem. Even orders of march to help keep colonist spacing? Why advance when I know they will walk straight in. I'd love to see raids become a bit more multifacted, where, again, a small band comes in, sets up an OP, then perhaps a small probe, then a mass assault, if that fails, they regroup, and call in re-enforcements and artillery / mortars / heavy weapons.

3.e Map size. Even on the largest size map, there is far too many choke points, and far too close ranges. I'd love to see the map size doubled. Simply because it adds a lot of space for everyone to maneuver.

4. Tactical Options. Right now, my only options are hold a main defensive line, or fight a very risky assault or delay. Now, I've raised the issues with the later above. Another issue is I can't keep colonists out for that long and expect to survive. I can't set up OPs / Shell scraps, or deal with all the issues of administration for long enough to actually setup for the 18-48 hours to actually do a proper, and simulated attack. Rather it's run up and do some sort of hasty attack, normally a up the center assault rather than a flanking attack. Also, if I do an attack, the issues are my colonist's don't group well together, and tend to screw it up too much, and it hurts. (Group moves of colonists are an issue. I'd love to be able to set formations up.) One problem for example, let's say I send out a textbook section. (2 LMG, 6 rifles (there's no really good Grenade launcher in the game yet.....), I do advance to contact, come under "effective" enemy fire. After that the system falls apart.

4.a - Morale : People don't get scared running into direct fire. Winning the firefight doesn't really happen in Rimworld. Putting down a pair of LMGs does not suppress the enemy allowing me maneuver. Enemies don't withdraw to cover. So why take them? Even if I was to attack with two balanced groups of four, it's difficult, if not impossible to have them advance, in a coherent fashion, in a fire and maneuver way. Rather they charge blindly in. This goes for both sides. People don't get nervous running into near certain death. I can't expect my colonists to use ground and cover to their advantage, or use things like zig-zag to avoid fire. Nor do they freeze up, or say, "nope, we're not charging in", or "I'm a piddling wreck who will be in the fetal position begging for mommy." The close combat series did this quite well really.

Again, my points are that open combat is very difficult to manage, and rather limiting. So from a pure cost benefit ratio, it's easier for me to hold up, in a place with one chokepoint, and wait for them to come to me. Logically that works, even in real warfare, the problem is, there's always ways around anything. (Maginot line anyone?). Not to mention, "control" of the map matters little.

How to make this better?

1. Make it valuable to patrol, make it valuable for me to send out snatch squads, or to send out people to fight openly.
2. Make control of the map important. I figure eventually, we will be allowed to trade around with factions, so what better way then to have trade convoys coming in and out, that you have to protect. Perhaps road building may be a thing to make them faster? Banditry and raiding in the truest sense would be fun, as you would have to either 1/ Pay for protection by the other party, or 2/ Send people out to protect a convoy.
3. Give us larger maps to play around with, let us experiment with something other than hold my main defensive position.
4. Expand the UI and behavior to allow me to tell people to move up, but not open fire until I give the order, or let me have formations.
5. Make raids more complex, longer, more drawn out. . An idea is the one of multi stage raids as listed above, the other, I know it sounds like a club, is offmap artillery, being directed by a forward observer team, or a lone sniper sitting out at a distance taking pot shots at people. I know fog of war isn't in the game, however a sniper that roamed around, or an OP team that would set up, would make things fun.....

(Edit : Fat fingered, and posted before I was done.)

[Maragnus]

The killbox strategy has annoyed me and it certainly wouldn't work in real life as it does with the game.  People don't (typically) attack people just to "kill 'em all".  They scout to find the best route to accomplish a small goal.  Like stealing food, resources, information or maybe capturing someone specific.

1. Raids should actually attempt to raid stockpiles, not just kill colonists.  The best, safest (around turrets, avoiding blood stains) path to any valuable stockpile should be found.  Second, the raiders should divide into two groups: the breach & steal group and the group providing cover.  They leave when each of the first group has their hands full or they've taken too many casualties.

Personally, I'd rather just let them steal some junk than get into a fight to the death with only a few colonists.  I may try to slow them down or capture one of them, but I'm not going to blockade them and take down every last one.

2. The risk of being in battle is too high.  My colonists end up dead more frequently than injured.  When injured, they lose limbs or damage their brain.  A lot of real fire fights end up in nobody getting seriously hurt, they're just a distraction, a diversion for something bigger going down elsewhere.

I only play on Challenging.  But after a rough fight with significant losses, the next encounter comes too quickly.  Before I've healed up and always before I've recruited anyone worthy of fighting.  You really need to not take any losses at each fight to grow fast enough to keep up.  Colony life is supposed to be hard, full troubles, sure.  But it feels like everyone is just out to kill me, which wouldn't benefit them if I pose no threat.

3. Calling everybody to arms each time there is an encounter doesn't feel believable. After a certain point, only my primary skilled soldiers should need to deal with an encounter.  The rest of my colony just needs to stay away from the fight.  Colonies of a certain size should have people on watch and guard duty throughout the day and night.  I've liked the idea about building, stocking and manning outposts.

4. Sieges should have a pattern and be a little more epic and progressive.  Scouting parties, sabotaging conduits on ground and walls, attacking power generators, explosive door and wall breaching.  Some events paced out and some events involve multiple things going on at once to deal with.

5. Drop pods are awful, typically the only cause of me ever resorting to reloading my game.  I'll typically lose most of my colonists before they can get into a defensive positions.  I feel these are unbalanced and should be resolved for the result of heinous actions, like using human leather and meat, kidnapping visitors and the like.  They should also have a goal and leave, to rescue someone, destroy something, steal some high quality art or equipment.

6. Automated defenses need to be a bigger variable.  They should be armed with guns available on hand and react according to the gun's quality and accuracy.  So they can become more reliable and useful as the colony advances.  Short range shotgun turret, corridor cleaning minigun.

[DustBust]

Good discussion to have. Thanks for bringing this up.

It is a tough balance problem to solve. I think the best, most obvious solution is to put players on the offensive more often. I tried to do that with sieges and the ship part, but I think it's not quite panning out that way with sieges. So maybe I could rework sieges and make them a bit more common, and perhaps add another kind of threat or opportunity that draws people out of their base. Anyone have any thoughts about what this could be?

Adding some further mood penalties for being underground for long periods may be a viable option as well. You can live underground, it's true - but it's really awful to be underground all the time.

Looking at topic summaries also, I think we need different classes of mortars and different roof types to be supplemented with the type of walls you are supporting with, better walls, better roof or as roofs become hammered with mortars, they begin to damage walls before they crumble making a more viable option of building in the open... seems like the mountain is the go to choice for everyone.

I enjoy the ramp up of enemy hordes, feels like I am city building and playing tower defense in an essence.

I don't mind sending my colonists out to attack the ship or sieges but I think they needs to be more depth in the medical field, as my colonists become blown to pieces, I have better ability to patch them up in rudimentary ways or more advance ways in the future. Utilizing cryosleep caskets is a good start, essentially someone good have a critical failing organ and they could be put in one until my colony advances enough to remove him and heal him. Once a good hit is taken on a base and you lose most of your colonists, the game is pretty much over because the next wave is going to be just as big. If I can slowly restore my colonists, they adds a whole new depth to the game.

[MarSmith]

5. Drop pods are awful, typically the only cause of me ever resorting to reloading my game.  I'll typically lose most of my colonists before they can get into a defensive positions.  I feel these are unbalanced and should be resolved for the result of heinous actions, like using human leather and meat, kidnapping visitors and the like.  They should also have a goal and leave, to rescue someone, destroy something.

+1 for that.

Drop pods don't work in real life either. Well, the idea of jumping right onto the objective. It's just too dangerous for the assaulting force, until they can get organized. It's been tried, and not had great success. Even the most successful raids had a forming up point.

The killbox strategy has annoyed me and it certainly wouldn't work in real life as it does with the game.  People don't (typically) attack people just to "kill 'em all".  They scout to find the best route to accomplish a small goal.  Like stealing food, resources, information or maybe capturing someone specific.

Actually, Killboxes do work. Just not in such a simplistic fashion. Normally, when fighting the defense, you try to lure the enemy into a killing ground, or a choke point. Or you spring ambushes......Normally this is done by destroying / disabling / rendering impassible other lanes of advances towards objectives. This can take a lot of ways, anti-tank ditches, minefields, improvised obstacles, strong points and fortifications, terrain, etc. You want to deny the enemy room to maneuver, and fight on your terms. However, since the map doesn't handle multiple levels of terrain, it is hard to replicate this. Not to mention, over watch is very, very, very difficult in game. Too easy to simply kite the enemy back, or get hit by your own friendly fire.

1. Raids should actually attempt to raid stockpiles, not just kill colonists.  The best, safest (around turrets, avoiding blood stains) path to any valuable stockpile should be found.  Second, the raiders should divide into two groups: the breach & steal group and the group providing cover.  They leave when each of the first group has their hands full or they've taken too many casualties.

Personally, I'd rather just let them steal some junk than get into a fight to the death with only a few colonists.  I may try to slow them down or capture one of them, but I'm not going to blockade them and take down every last one.

The big problem is, the AI doesn't have to follow the cost/benefit ratio that we have to. They theoretically have, unlimited resources. So they only logic I can see, is "Advance". If AI factions did have some sort of economics or population mechanism, which would be both simple, and difficult to insert, (a few variables, the coding would be hard to make more than simple.) it would make a lot more sense. Right now, AI factions have a population of infinite, rather than a population of n. So they can advance and lose all their forces without problems or a second thought.

I see the logic working like this.
AI faction population at start= n
Population growth per 24h = +x
At population 2n, then raid, using 1/4n
If losses = y%, then withdraw
Add in some modifiers and you have a winner.
This could be expanded to allow for some more sane kit and equipment choices. For example, you say that 1/10n = melee weapons, 1/10 = power armour, etc.


Mountains = Underground in my mind. If I was actually out there, I would go underground, and quickly. It's not difficult to build underground, not at all, it just take time, lumber, burlap, hessian, and a lot of rope, nails and hopefully a waterproof material. A MEXE shelter, or SKOP kit for trenches can protect very effectively against anything short of a direct or close in nuclear blast. A MEXE shelter can be connected, and assembled within 24 hours, I will have to pull out my notes on digging calculations, however I think 4-6 people could go underground for a space of 5x5 cells in game within 24h. (I am assuming based on scale, that 1square = 1m2)


Edit : I attached a quick decision matrix and calculator I put together in excel to illustrate my point. You can play around with the values. It's best I could come up with in five minutes on the topic. However, I'm sure we could expand it and expand some logic for it. It allows for -some- AI decision making abilities, to allow for a more reasoned AI rather than a -zerg swarm-. As you can see, it also gives some sort of economical basis for equipment distribution as well. It would probably be easy to modify for difficulty by adjusting some variables. It also abstracts somewhat an internal economy.

[attachment deleted due to age]

[Maragnus]

Killboxes: I do agree with you that a killbox can be advantageous if clever.  But the bloody field or hallway with the carefully aligned turrets would likely be avoided by an intelligent strike force.  If I see a turret, I'm going to evaluate my entry point.

AI Economics: For a long term goal, I love the idea of simulating the neighbors.  But short term, I think the director selecting a goal based on recent events (captures, arrests) and available resources (expensive art, high food supplies) and creating an encounter to set things back a little is more reasonable.

That table is fun to play with by the way.  It would be fun to play have that type of data motivating raids and negotiations.

With a raid having goals other than to just be a fight... 

Well, it would still feel the same to people apt to only have one entrance and everything safe behind their front entrance with a killbox out front.  But on failure like that (never seeing their goal), it could result in either an epic siege to break down the defenses, or it could call in a digging crew to break into the weakest side of the mountain, far from the main entrance.

And for people like me that utilize the outside... Raids using unique strategies, like rushing, splitting up or wall breaching, it would be a lot more reactive.  And if everyone was injured, sick or sleeping, they'd leave when finished without incident.  Unless they hate you, then they'd burn down your stock pile an smash your flower pots.

[Goldsmyths]

I just realized how ironic this topic is, and I only have 1 reason:
We are always playing defensive in home turf.

After hundreds and hundreds of hours perfecting my mountain bunkering technique, over dozens of colonies and many biomes, I see no reason to go outside besides to challenge myself.

Reasons I'd hunker down in a cave:
1. Unflankable: anyone who had some experience or knowledge in fights knows not to expose their back.
2. Unreliable constructed roof: mortars and drops pods, in my base?

Reasons I have to get outside the cave:
1. Energy: Not, mods for the win! But true enough for vanilla. All solar, wind, and geysers are outside. I see what you did there.
2. Wood: but not really, since you can still dismantle wooden weapon from raiders for some wood.
3. Trade beacon: Though not too far, still forces me to do so.
4. Mortars: because walking 200 blocks to a map edge just to kill sieges are a bitch. No, sieges can just waste all their ammo on my mountain rooftop.
5. Zombie Apocalypse: the mod almost succeeded by having airborne version that revives dead humans to zombies, forcing me to go out and burn them all. But I decided to put more pointy sticks on the front door instead.
6. Meat: Not anymore thanks to wargs It's like McDelivery if you have embrasures. And if warg meats are made inedible, well, there's still raider's meat. Especially Tribes

A foreseeable Tynan-Class trollboat to force me out of my mom... mountain's basement:
1. Earthquake incident: randomly crushes spaces below mountain rooftops.
2. Orbital drill pods: Drills and destroy mountain rooftops while deploying enemies through said holes
3. Resources: like steam geysers, but maybe Oil for example or other mining pits that can only spawn on open fields
4. Fog of war: a need to place sensor towers outside to remove FoW. Though I think the lag would kill my computer.
5. Ambush raiders: only detectable via sensor towers outside, works in tandem with #3 & 4, would either to turn the whole map into a military base or turtle further into the mountains.
6. Random bombardment/bunker busters locations: forces people to spread their base
7. Water resource: before someone mods pipes and pumps. Hauling itself is already hard, so please don't.

A counter-productive trolling possibilities:
1. Orbital Bombardment: If a mountain rooftop couldn't handle this, why even bother building outside?
2. Concentrated aerial bombardment & bunker busters: same reason as #1
3. Encirclement: Definitely worse when you are in the middle of the map

[Jstank]

Problem solved

[Tynan]

You see? I do listen!

[stefanstr]

You see? I do listen!

We got what we asked for, didn't we. 

[StorymasterQ]

Looks like Tynan corrupted this wish

[Jstank]

always be careful of what you wish for

[b0rsuk]

I recently noticed another unnecessary advantage of mountain bases: they're super clean.
Dirt is generated within a short time of pawn coming indoors from outside. Open bases have pawns constantly switching between indoors and outdoors. Indoor bases are very easy to clean, you just clean near the entrance.

Bugs do remedy that somewhat, as the amount of dirt and bugblood they spawn is obscene.

"Ice" surface on ice sheet is curious. Unlike other natural floors occuring outside, this one is inherently clean. Like with all natural floors, no dirt is ever spawned on it (I haven't noticed). The only downside is slow walking speed. But if it's a rarely used room, like hospital, it's a perfect alternative.

[Vaporisor]

I wouldnt complain about that in the least, random rock fall from mortar hit.