Colony Building Simulator versus Survival and Escape Simulator

[Shaithis]

1) How do you play the game? As a colony sim or survival/escape sim.
I mostly only play on Randy Random because I enjoy the Colony Sim style of play. What drew me to this game was it's similarity to Dwarf Fortress. I just like the setting (space/future) much better.

2) Have you built an escape ship and did you feel it was an accomplishment?
I've only ever launched the ship once out of many games I've played. Sometimes I build it as an option of last resort so my colonists can escape when everything is falling apart but I like to see how long I can last and how big I can grow my colony.

3) Do you refer colonists or survivors? (I know some people call them other things but of the two which would you use as a generic term for the people who come out of your escape pods)
Colonists; they are building a new home. It even says 'Colony' faction on their name plates, the debuff says 'Colonist left unburied', etc. It just seems really obvious.

4) Throw out any other thoughts and observations here.
I feel like you have two specific modes of play. Honestly you could just rename Cassandra to 'Ellie Escape' and Randy to 'Sammy Survival' (or something like that)

[CheekiestBreekiest]

1) I only play on Randy because I want more than 10 people. I like having a sprawling, efficient, sustainable colony. I too am DF in background and I enjoy that it is like DF but a friendly prioritization and military system. Also guns.

2) Nope. Rather use those resources for a solid wall to defend the town.

3) I called them colonists because the game calls them that.

4) I would personally enjoy if the game swapped scope to be more like DF with no end goal. With more crafting options and doodads to put in my colonists rooms. I build huge 7x7 spaces for bedrooms, plonk a bed an a light and am done. It's disappointingly bare. I'd enjoy some sort of empire system where you build up your village to the point of launching trade-ships etc but I feel like that is an unreasonable pipe-dream.

[UrbanBourbon]

4. The ship was anti-climactic. Tried it once. It could work as a bridge to a new game, a new game+ mode. The escape ship eventually crashes, and you start with 3-6 colonists that the ship carried, but this time on a harsher (and previously locked) world or terrain and with a few unique items maybe? There's your cycle of life.

[togt]

The escape ship eventually crashes, and you start with 3-6 colonists that the ship carried, but this time on a harsher (and previously locked) world or terrain and with a few unique items maybe? There's your cycle of life.

I am all for this! Or crash with your ship then become the raider instead of the survivor, trying to take over an existing base.

[Headshotkill]

I start with building a colony just to make sure the colonists can survive for long enough so they can even start building the ship.
In my last playthrough we left the planet after more than 3 ingame years which seems like long enough to me. I set up some basic industries like making cloth cowboy-hats to create a stable income, giving me the ability to purchase prostethic limbs or bionic eyes incase someone gets hurt.

After some time when I start building the ship I really get a sort of claustrophobic feeling that I need to get of the planet ASAP. At this point I really don't see the colonists staying on the planet for the rest of their lives.

[stefanstr]

I only built the ship once, to see what happens.

The whole idea of ship building doesn't make much sense to me, TBH.

One option is you were on a colony ship trying to start a new colony on one of the rim worlds before you crashed. In that case you are already doing what you were supposed to be doing.

Another option is you were on a slaver that crashed. In that case, you have nowhere to go back to anyway. It has been centuries since you left your urbworld/whatever and your whole civilization would likely be gone or altered beyond recognition by the time you came back. Etc.

However I look at it, I don't see a good reason for my colonists to build that spaceship given the Rimworld universe.

[Levin]

4. The ship was anti-climactic. Tried it once. It could work as a bridge to a new game, a new game+ mode. The escape ship eventually crashes, and you start with 3-6 colonists that the ship carried, but this time on a harsher (and previously locked) world or terrain and with a few unique items maybe? There's your cycle of life.

I think this is a cool idea. Not sure how you would make it harsher, more challenging, but it sounds good.
Maybe simply a different biome from the last you were on.

[Mystic]

4. The ship was anti-climactic. Tried it once. It could work as a bridge to a new game, a new game+ mode. The escape ship eventually crashes, and you start with 3-6 colonists that the ship carried, but this time on a harsher (and previously locked) world or terrain and with a few unique items maybe? There's your cycle of life.

I think this is a cool idea.

I like this idea too ... and also the one that proposed creating different storytellers for the "escape" and "permanent colony" play styles.  The "escape" storyteller would continually ramp up the level of attacks and other problems, eventually reaching the point where no colony could possibly survive, motivating the player to get off the planet before that inevitable destruction.  Possibly some other irresistible problem could be added as well (e.g., occasional earthquake tremors that destroy random structures, building in intensity over time until the "big one" hits and destroys pretty much everything).  Whereas the "permanent colony" storyteller would cap the level of attacks before they reach the point of being completely impossible to fight off.

[NoImageAvailable]

4. The ship was anti-climactic. Tried it once. It could work as a bridge to a new game, a new game+ mode. The escape ship eventually crashes, and you start with 3-6 colonists that the ship carried, but this time on a harsher (and previously locked) world or terrain and with a few unique items maybe? There's your cycle of life.

I think this is a cool idea.

I like this idea too ... and also the one that proposed creating different storytellers for the "escape" and "permanent colony" play styles.  The "escape" storyteller would continually ramp up the level of attacks and other problems, eventually reaching the point where no colony could possibly survive, motivating the player to get off the planet before that inevitable destruction.  Possibly some other irresistible problem could be added as well (e.g., occasional earthquake tremors that destroy random structures, building in intensity over time until the "big one" hits and destroys pretty much everything).  Whereas the "permanent colony" storyteller would cap the level of attacks before they reach the point of being completely impossible to fight off.

That is already in the game. Cassandra and Randy do pretty much exactly that, the game just does a poor job of conveying it in the descriptions.

[stefanstr]

4. The ship was anti-climactic. Tried it once. It could work as a bridge to a new game, a new game+ mode. The escape ship eventually crashes, and you start with 3-6 colonists that the ship carried, but this time on a harsher (and previously locked) world or terrain and with a few unique items maybe? There's your cycle of life.

I like this, too. But maybe don't make the ship crash. Make it land. It would add some kind of reward for your efforts (as you could take off again at any time or decide to dismantle the ship for resources). And maybe we could an additional storage module for the ship so that we can go on another planet better prepared. Or maybe we could move the colony within the same planet. That way, you could start in the temperate biome and move to tundra when you feel ready for it...

I think this is a cool idea. Not sure how you would make it harsher, more challenging, but it sounds good.
Maybe simply a different biome from the last you were on.

[Mystic]

I like this idea too ... and also the one that proposed creating different storytellers for the "escape" and "permanent colony" play styles.  The "escape" storyteller would continually ramp up the level of attacks and other problems, eventually reaching the point where no colony could possibly survive, motivating the player to get off the planet before that inevitable destruction.  Possibly some other irresistible problem could be added as well (e.g., occasional earthquake tremors that destroy random structures, building in intensity over time until the "big one" hits and destroys pretty much everything).  Whereas the "permanent colony" storyteller would cap the level of attacks before they reach the point of being completely impossible to fight off.

That is already in the game. Cassandra and Randy do pretty much exactly that, the game just does a poor job of conveying it in the descriptions.

I wasn't aware that Cassandra keeps ramping up indefinitely.  I thought it scales based upon the size/wealth of the colony, so that if the colony stopped growing at a certain point, the attacks wouldn't get any worse either.  Of course I've never had a colony survive long enough to test that theory. 

[UrbanBourbon]

4. The ship was anti-climactic. Tried it once. It could work as a bridge to a new game, a new game+ mode. The escape ship eventually crashes, and you start with 3-6 colonists that the ship carried, but this time on a harsher (and previously locked) world or terrain and with a few unique items maybe? There's your cycle of life.

I think this is a cool idea. Not sure how you would make it harsher, more challenging, but it sounds good.
Maybe simply a different biome from the last you were on.

Why, the unknown and strange new planet would be the Mechanoid homeworld, of course! No traders, no human civilization, toxic atmosphere (=hydroponics farming only in a sealed room). Annihilate the Mech city with your cybernetically enhanced colonists before the Mechs wipe you. Do or die. After that's done, change the main menu background and enable the game to drop (rarely) some of the Mech world items from that point on. Possibly enable a few new exotic sci-fi metals in future new games (via trading only). Unlock cleaning robot research.

[christhekiller]

1. Colony survival sim
2. No
3. Why not both?
4. Never built the ship because it was never something I wanted to do. Usually by the time I wind up getting to the point of, "well there's nothing else to do" I end up getting bored and starting a new colony anyway.

[windruf]

1. colony sim
2. yes 2. times. useless
3. colonists
4. Raiders must die 

[Kagemusha]

I was going to create a new topic about all of this. But, this seemed an appropriate enough place for it.

I am now older and wiser since I posted this topic and after engaging with it more I have realised that I am not certain when or why the idea of escape came along.

When I first bought and played Rimworld it was back in The Bad Old Days...well...not that far back. But, it was before the space ship was added. I think. Back then (and now really) I played as survivors who ejected from a crippled ship in orbit. Landing on the planet and proceeding to build a sustainable colony that steadily grew in size and permanence.

Playing until the colony died or I got bored. Then starting another one.

The space ship was implemented at some point as an endgame testing mechanic. At least that is my understanding. To see what it would be like to have an 'end' to aim for and reach...a different kind of closure that was not just being slaughtered by Raiders.

And suddenly 'escape' became a thing. It became a research option. It became 'the endgame'. Without being fully aware of it I somehow began to think that the goal of my survivors was to get off the planet since that was the only 'end' option available. I of course continued to play with a deliberate avoidance of building the ship and getting off the planet, but I felt like I was 'doing something wrong'.

Of course this is a silly concept but it is still a thing. The feeling like we are not playing the game the way it is meant to be played. Ultimately there should be no definitive way to play. All strategies should be acceptable and viable. You want to have an all vegan colony then go for it. You want to only use melee weapons then go for it (you will likely die of course).

Of course this is a survival game and in survival games you need to do things to survive and sometimes those things do feel like being pushed in a direction. In a wilderness survival situation we would not think that we are being forced to survive a specific way because we have to drink water. Ok, getting distracted with that one.

Basically, I feel that either the space ship needs to be removed or changed to another end game mechanic that is more in line with a sustainable colony. Giving players an end point to aim for that can just as easily be a continuation. Maybe building a trade hub, or launching a trade ship (as has been mention and suggested many times, or a 'world wonder' type structure that makes the RiwWorld dwellers revere the colony, maybe becoming The Law on this RimWorld and establishing control.

An end game placeholder that makes more since.
Of course we can just ignore the space ship very easily but because the space ship exists and because we feel we are ignoring it the concept of escape rather than sustainable colony sneaks into the thinking process about the game.

Ultimately I'm sure there will be numerous 'endgame' type mechanics but I hope that they are never game ending mechanics.

Kinda hijacked my own thread here but just wanted to splurge my thoughts out. Pretty sure it's been said before and if not said then at least thought.

Drat. Whilst writing this I happened to be browsing around and came across the original Kickstarter ideas and escape seems to be there. I just can't understand why.