Why is Tynan so stubborn about his garbage combat system?

[SaintD]

Everything wrong with this game comes down to basically one thing: the combat system. To say it's garbage is like saying the World Wars were 'somewhat unfortunate'. It's a system that produces utterly nonsensical, and thus ludicrously frustrating, results at every level, and forces players to create killboxes and get as 'gamey' as they can to deal with it as larger raids become a matter of sheer maths you can't otherwise win, against an enemy with infinite meat for any grinder.

Historically, Tynan has responded to this by trying to force players out into the open, using insects as a can opener to try and get people out of their mountain, and absolutely refusing to offer any level of fortification that has occurred for all known human history. Breaching raids, drop pod raids......all of it boils down to a stubborn refusal to face the actual problem that pushes players behind a killbox - the combat system is insultingly bad. The only way to deal with the terrible combat is to build elaborate ways to circumvent it, to do whatever weird, unintuitive, game exploiting thing you can to remove pawns and direct combat entirely from the equation because at the end of the day, the combat is so utterly arbitrary and nonsensical, you can't put an automatic weapon in front of a clear field and expect it to kill even a single person before they reach it.

I feel like Rimworld is a game that succeeds IN SPITE OF one of the biggest parts of the experience being 1/10 for implementation. This guy has a book about how to design a game, but when we really drill down into Rimworld vanilla by removing all the mods....it's an initially interesting game that in the long term reveals itself to be a pretty bad experience because of the implementation of the combat.

Tynan.....isn't a great game designer.

[Sally smithson]

i mainly fix the combat through a lot of mods that dont overhaul combat.
I have two main pawns which cannot be lost due to headcanon. They have a couple of implants, statusses and other things that make them hard to kill.
Once the RWBY mod is updated i will implement that one too, it might trivialize combat but i have a tendecy to get co(c)ky.
And when one of them dies, it is Defenitly my fault. Which reduces my savescumming behaviour.

TLDR: Mods can be used to fix your combat issues

[Big [REDACTED] Marty]

the vanilla combat is meh

CE makes it slightly more complicated, and engaging with many new mechanics to contend with and exploit

CE however makes centipedes utter OP

raids get very silly, very fast
many 10s or 100s of raiders charging into your defenses with about the tactics of a bayonet charge

[Noeat]

its kinda funny, when:
dev make combat in way that push players behind killbox
players are behind killbox
dev change his mind and he dont change combat, but he will punish players behind killbox
and in the same time make drop pod raids what punish players who are in open area for not being in mountains

i mean, when your idea is force players to cover behind killboxes and live in mountain.. then why u then punish them for that? and IF u dont wanna force them to tunnels in mountain, then why u punish them for being in open area by drop pods?

looks like this system is so bad that even dev have no idea what to do with it..

[grapplehoeker]

I like cheese ;)

[jerrypocalypse]

引用自 SaintD：

People wouldn't need to feel a need to hide behind walls if the combat system and the situations it creates weren't so unfit for purpose.

I just wanted to address this bit. It's been proven many times in gaming that people will take the easy way, regardless if it's fun or not. Killboxes and walls are the easy way, claiming that people using these methods is proof the combat is "bad" is a bit of a logical fallacy.

[glass zebra]

It's a combat system that forces you to think about the encounters you get instead of choosing one solution that always works without risk. That is the sole reason I like the combat instead of having the combat like in most games, that breaks down to just repeating the same thing over and over again because in rimworld "you can't put an automatic weapon in front of a clear field and expect it to kill even a single person before they reach it."
Citing always-win "solutions" you see online spread by people that the devs tackles in updates and use both of those things as a negative really baffles me. Someone found a flaw in a system, the dev fixes it. That's bad?
People like finding hammer-only solutions to all kind of problems. And they like to brag with their meta solutions. That does not mean that you or anyone else is forced to use them or that they are good. If you are playing on a higher difficulty, they game always tries to make you handle problems instead of disabling them. If you wanna do that, you have to do that in the scenario editor. Having dangers that you can't disable by simple solutions is the whole point of having them.

[Noeat]

引用自 glass zebra：

It's a combat system that forces you to think about the encounters you get instead of choosing one solution that always works without risk. That is the sole reason I like the combat instead of having the combat like in most games, that breaks down to just repeating the same thing over and over again because in rimworld "you can't put an automatic weapon in front of a clear field and expect it to kill even a single person before they reach it."
Citing always-win "solutions" you see online spread by people that the devs tackles in updates and use both of those things as a negative really baffles me. Someone found a flaw in a system, the dev fixes it. That's bad?
People like finding hammer-only solutions to all kind of problems. And they like to brag with their meta solutions. That does not mean that you or anyone else is forced to use them or that they are good. If you are playing on a higher difficulty, they game always tries to make you handle problems instead of disabling them. If you wanna do that, you have to do that in the scenario editor. Having dangers that you can't disable by simple solutions is the whole point of having them.

point is why u force ppl to being behind killbox, when u dont want that?
it make no sense force them to make killbox and cover behind killbox if u want them to not being behind killbox

the same is when u dont wanna them behind killbox in mountain tunnels, then it make no sense, when u force them into mountains tunnels by implementing drop pod raids.. u just force them by this mechanic to live in mountains

[Jigain]

引用自 glass zebra：

It's a combat system that forces you to think about the encounters you get instead of choosing one solution that always works without risk.

There we go, I'm glad someone gets it. It's not at all about "punishing" those that use killboxes, or "punishing" those that don't. It's about making it so that no one solution fits every single circumstance. Sometimes you need to take defensive positions. Other times you need to go on the offensive. Playing tower defense with some management included isn't what Tynan had in mind for his game, which is why we have infestations, sappers, termites, sieges, mech clusters and the like to make us have to adapt to the threat.

[glass zebra]

引用自 Noeat：

point is why u force ppl to being behind killbox, when u dont want that?
it make no sense force them to make killbox and cover behind killbox if u want them to not being behind killbox

the same is when u dont wanna them behind killbox in mountain tunnels, then it make no sense, when u force them into mountains tunnels by implementing drop pod raids.. u just force them by this mechanic to live in mountains

That's a made up point you are attacking as the dev never forced people to make kill boxes or mountain bases. People chose to do so and don't like the trade offs or that it doesn't work all the time.

[VoiD]

引用自 Noeat：

its kinda funny, when:
dev make combat in way that push players behind killbox
players are behind killbox
dev change his mind and he dont change combat, but he will punish players behind killbox
and in the same time make drop pod raids what punish players who are in open area for not being in mountains

i mean, when your idea is force players to cover behind killboxes and live in mountain.. then why u then punish them for that? and IF u dont wanna force them to tunnels in mountain, then why u punish them for being in open area by drop pods?

looks like this system is so bad that even dev have no idea what to do with it..

Old discussion, but he never, ever wanted players to hide behind any exploits, in fact when people have started doing this he called them goofy AI exploits and he said he didn't want his game to look like that, he hated them, always had.

"...It'll have to look like a fortress, not a goofy video game AI exploit trap.""
https://ludeon.com/forums/index.php?topic=13012.msg131761#msg131761

"Enemies will now use a new style of breach raid to get through your defenses. They’ll bring special wall-breaking tools and tunnel into the side of your base instead of using the main entrance. Tribals do this with a new breach-axe, while pirates use grenades, and mechanoids use a new mechanoid type called the termite. This new strategy option for the AI adds more variation and dynamism to the defensive combats - fighting through bedrooms is very exciting! Making the AI analyze bases, find good breach paths, and follow them effectively was an interesting and novel problem. Of course, all the old raid strategies still exists and the breach raids only show up from time to time to add variation."
https://steamcommunity.com/games/294100/announcements/detail/2995438840867001420

Every. Single. Update ever made since 2015 created raids and attacks meant to ignore killboxes completelly, infetations, drop pods, sappers, mech clusters, termites, enemy bases outside of your map, sieges, fallen ships, some people in this forum, including a mod seem to be in denial about this, but he was very clear in his words and his stance never changed, in his most recent interview he even said he likes "the simple ones" and claims they are useful, and they are expected, as in, as a game designer he expects that players will build them, because they do, that is no endorsement, it's just a statement of fact, he never said clearly "killboxes are not an exploit of the AI" like he said "killboxes make the game look like a goofy AI exploit trap"

And, as you can see, he is not and was never intended to make this game look like that, you can expect the next batch of updates to create even more creative and aggressive ways to ignore killboxes completelly.

His design never pushed anybody behind anything, people just decided not to deal with the actual gameplay and exploit it instead, the game was never meant to be easy, and not every story was meant to be successful, the challenge was never meant to be proportional to the rewards as he says here: https://youtu.be/VdqhHKjepiE

Not every story was supposed to be a success, he values stories of defeat just as much as stories of triumph, losing good pawns and dealing with the consequences is part of his vision too, including a total loss of your base, running away and starting over. I'd guess he'd prefer if every player played in ironman mode as well.

[jerrypocalypse]

引用自 Noeat：

引用自 glass zebra：

It's a combat system that forces you to think about the encounters you get instead of choosing one solution that always works without risk. That is the sole reason I like the combat instead of having the combat like in most games, that breaks down to just repeating the same thing over and over again because in rimworld "you can't put an automatic weapon in front of a clear field and expect it to kill even a single person before they reach it."
Citing always-win "solutions" you see online spread by people that the devs tackles in updates and use both of those things as a negative really baffles me. Someone found a flaw in a system, the dev fixes it. That's bad?
People like finding hammer-only solutions to all kind of problems. And they like to brag with their meta solutions. That does not mean that you or anyone else is forced to use them or that they are good. If you are playing on a higher difficulty, they game always tries to make you handle problems instead of disabling them. If you wanna do that, you have to do that in the scenario editor. Having dangers that you can't disable by simple solutions is the whole point of having them.

point is why u force ppl to being behind killbox, when u dont want that?
it make no sense force them to make killbox and cover behind killbox if u want them to not being behind killbox

the same is when u dont wanna them behind killbox in mountain tunnels, then it make no sense, when u force them into mountains tunnels by implementing drop pod raids.. u just force them by this mechanic to live in mountains

The dev isn't forcing anyone to use killboxes. He also isn't forcing anyone to live in mountains. Mountains even have their own risks, infestations. Every base and defense style has its own threats.

[glass zebra]

Rimworld always tackled exploits - not just the combat ones - and even embedded them into game mechanics. Stuff like making traps be a resource drain if you wanna use them heavily, stuff like Thrumbos not being killed by some beers etc. This is one reason I like the game. That exploits get's tackled in updates constantly and even sometimes in creative ways. I don't get why this is a downside.

[Noeat]

引用自 glass zebra：

引用自 Noeat：

point is why u force ppl to being behind killbox, when u dont want that?
it make no sense force them to make killbox and cover behind killbox if u want them to not being behind killbox

the same is when u dont wanna them behind killbox in mountain tunnels, then it make no sense, when u force them into mountains tunnels by implementing drop pod raids.. u just force them by this mechanic to live in mountains

That's a made up point you are attacking as the dev never forced people to make kill boxes or mountain bases. People chose to do so and don't like the trade offs or that it doesn't work all the time.

i geel so sorry for u, if u arent able understand it..
look.. when u make action, it brings reacion
when u punish ppl with drop pods, when they arent in mountains, then u force them to go into mountains..

when u punish them for not using killbox, then they start use killbox

its the same like when u will be threaten "u cant go out before u make homework" ,,then u will be forced to do homework before u can go out..

think about it

[Astasia]

引用自 Noeat：

point is why u force ppl to being behind killbox, when u dont want that?

You seem to be confused. Tynan wants players to use killboxes, the game is designed around them, the higher difficulties are tuned expecting you to have a proper killbox for major raids, he has confirmed as much in interviews and there's a reason there are so many killboxes on display on the store page. Killboxes are only meant to handle certain kind of threats though, there are other threats that are weaker that avoid the killbox to make sure there is variety in the game. You don't need a killbox to deal with a siege or breach, those are much smaller threats with different solutions.

[Noeat]

引用自 VoiD：

引用自 Noeat：

its kinda funny, when:
dev make combat in way that push players behind killbox
players are behind killbox
dev change his mind and he dont change combat, but he will punish players behind killbox
and in the same time make drop pod raids what punish players who are in open area for not being in mountains

i mean, when your idea is force players to cover behind killboxes and live in mountain.. then why u then punish them for that? and IF u dont wanna force them to tunnels in mountain, then why u punish them for being in open area by drop pods?

looks like this system is so bad that even dev have no idea what to do with it..

Old discussion, but he never, ever wanted players to hide behind any exploits, in fact when people have started doing this he called them goofy AI exploits and he said he didn't want his game to look like that, he hated them, always had.

"...It'll have to look like a fortress, not a goofy video game AI exploit trap.""
https://ludeon.com/forums/index.php?topic=13012.msg131761#msg131761

exactly..and thats why he need change and rework whole combat mechanic.. because now what he do lead only to killbox
he need rework this core feature to make it close to his idea about fortress and not killbox
im pretty sure its just by incompetency to make it how he want it.. and probably not intended to force ppl make killboxes

but seriously.. punish them for being in open area by drop pods? force them to go into mountains and cover in tunnels? its kinda opposite to what he want, isnt it? if he dont wanna killboxes, then is kinda weird when he force ppl to make them..