RTS type multiplayer for RIMWORLD suggestions.

[Professor Cupcake]

It sounds like you want to turn Rimworld into a competitive RTS.

I could not be more against this idea.

Why? Expand your points and be constructive. Being against my idea is meaningless, placing (valid) points on the table is.

Trying to make it into anything even approaching competitive (or PvP at all) would fundamentally break the game experience.
Instead of building up your colony to try and fit the vision you have for how your people are to behave, you will look for all of the quickest ways to get the most powerful builds.
Instead of focussing on the story of survival in a harsh, unforgiving land, the focus will be on who has the best strats to attain some sort of hollow, temporary victory.
Combat is not central to RimWorld; it is merely another problem for the colony to overcome (or be ultimately destroyed by). Having the game evolve towards a combat focus would certainly hurt the game's design.

There is not a single part of this entire concept that fits in even slightly well with the rest of the game so far.

[Anduin1357]

You want to keep the option for combat open but you dont want to over emphasise it too much. The guy with the most offensive build would not fare so well in all other areas.
Nobody would like this colony and so, it would be considered a pirate faction.
It's not about victory, it's about why, what and and the end result.

[Johnny Masters]

I'm sorry, but that's one grim pessimistic view Prof. Cupcake et al.

Nothing in the history of gaming has pointed to the fact that multiplayer should "desecrate" a game, that's purism crying and the game isn't even finished yet. Also, nothing in how rimworld works seems to indicate there couldn't be a viable multiplayer (competitive or not) function, nor that said function could detract from the main game experience, if said main experience is single player sandbox.

Not sure what people mean by "turning RW into an RTS". RW is an RTS. Unless you mean things like cap points or whatever, then i agree, those aren't needed and would in fact detract from the main experience, unless, of course, its a mode. But yeah, i don't like the idea of cap points or basing entirely on other rts like starcraft, and I really dislike it being based on geothermal stations.

That being said, the idea of a multiplayer RW is really growing into me. RW is a solid game experience, but it's rather bland on the long term. There's no campaign, missions, scenarios and goals, nor yet any game modes (waves, freebuild, play as raiders, whatever). Since a story campaign is very unlikely, a multiplayer function is the next good thing, that's 1.5- 2 extra gold stars for this game, if done right.

For mechanics, i have mixed feelings for influence rings, and certainly bad feelings for control points (at least for rimworld). The way i'd do (until i think or hear of a better one) is deciding influence upon security buildings and your own pawns, and that's only for claiming stuff. If there's no one or thing shooting you back you can send pawns to slowly claim stuff (visible or invisble timer). Not unlike how imps claim stuff in dungeon keeper.

Then you should be able to build anywhere you want. There's nothing exploitable about that (not as exploitable as building a tower next to enemy TC, 7 minutes into AoE). To build stuff you need access to resources, haul the materials and then construct. If in the meantime there was no opposition, the area is rightfully yours.

I can see a multiplayer match between 2-4 colonies and each colony could even be controlled by more than one person (some RTS have that, like AoE, and its awesome).

Combat is certainly the obvious focus, but there's nothing to prevent other types of "wins". With different goals (for main game or multi) there's a plethora of ways to deal with other colonies, specially if there are random goals, plus there's always the triad: war, economy and science types of "win". Heck, we don't even need to win. Even a RP match where each player plays one pawn would provide some interesting sessions (why don't YOU cook? wait, why do I have to stay at the front line? Nah ah, that last meal is MINE, Sorry bro, i gotta eat yo ass #nohomo).

A game wouldn't be any harder to set and play than a civilization match between friends. I guess if you are the lonely kind there could be options to set research and building speed for things, which frankly is something the main game also needs (although it's already doable by mods).

Finally, albeit i don't agree how you'd implement KL, i can agree that a rimworld multiplayer experience would be utterly awesome.

[Vas]

I'd actually like co-op and competitive modes in the game.  Several ideas for such, but I don't think Tynan would ever consider it at this point.  Half my ideas I post probably aren't even looked at, and I don't like posting ideas when they aren't going to be considered.  Carpal tunnel is a b---- and typing those long things hurts.

[Professor Cupcake]

*words*

Whilst you appear to believe we disagree, it would seem that all the points you raise are essentially the same as I was trying to communicate.

[Johnny Masters]

Whilst you appear to believe we disagree, it would seem that all the points you raise are essentially the same as I was trying to communicate.

Perhaps we have not conveyed our ideas clearly then, because it has crossed me that you dislike a competitive function for RW, while i welcome such thought, albeit not limited to only combat and with reservations as to how OP presented, of course. Btw, combat is VERY central to rimworld, it's one of the surest thing in a play through, for better or worse. I actually want there to be more non-combat related challenges, but since earlier alphas till now combat is the main challenge, that's why so many people base their designs in mountain bases and killboxes.

*words*

That's not my quote, i never wrote *words*