Pawn Editors Need to be Base Game

[Crimson]

It's pretty clear that the majority of players depend on them and when an update or DLC comes out it breaks them and their ability to play. A basic pawn editor that's vanilla would prevent the dependence on mods and waiting for the mod to be updated.

A pawn editor could easily be balanced by a point system similar to project zomboid.

[Darklight]

Jack Reaver a écrit :

For anyone who's seriously still arguing against a character editor because it's "cheating."
You can edit xenotypes, no dev mode required. In fact you can edit sanguophage and remove all but the archo traits for an immortal, regenerating, disease immune, super metabolic efficient super pawn which can transform pawns into that xenotypes. That's before micromanaging the traits to make them even more powerful.

I would argue 5 pawns with maxed all stats and best traits still isn't as good as this because here you potentially have infinite pawns and you can slap on aptitudes to "micromanage" your pawns into being the perfect start.

You absolute goofs everything you're complaining that a character editor would do is already in game. So what's the complaint here? That people should need to spend $25 to break the game's balance?

Similar could be said for Ideology to a lesser extent. You can just make a super Ideology which just buffs your pawns so they get constant mood buffs, lose negative mood buffs, free cannibalism/organ harvesting/etc, and can just do stuff better.

Them giving you the option to create your own xenotypes and the fact you can use that to break the game isn't justification to add a function that does nothing but effect balance. Everything about a pawn besides their names and style effects balance. More importantly changes how the devs wanted the game to be.

This isn't just about "cheating", it's about style of play and the devs vision for what that is. You enforcing a different standard just because "options" isn't an argument for this until the devs change their mind on that fact which they very much could.

"Your colonists are not professional settlers – they’re crash-landed survivors from a passenger liner destroyed in orbit." They wanted you to take random but flawed characters into an unknown planet. Survive with what skills you have and encounter other random but flawed characters and build a story upon that against the random events you encounter.

I very much wish things were different where not every detail of a pawn had a game-play effect and that you could modify aspects of a character to your role-playing enjoyment. That's just not how the pawns work though, and a character editor does nothing but effect that.

[gabelstapler]

Yeah, just before starting, so you dont go insane trying to get someone with medical AND other passions that isnt a slow learner. Its a massive annoyance every time you want to start a game

[Jack Reaver]

Darklight a écrit :

You enforcing a different standard just because "options" isn't an argument

I didn't realize asking for more options was forcing other people to use those options. I saw this same exact logic applied to Lethal Company and why there shouldn't be an Arachnophobia mode. This same logic gets used a lot when people argue against something they don't like or they don't see value in so they basically just accuse the opposition of forcing ♥♥♥♥. Is it forcing though? No not really it's asking for more options that support their own style of play. It doesn't destroy other people's playstyles. Does it effect balance? No more than some stupid OP genotype.
"Them giving you the option to create your own xenotypes and the fact you can use that to break the game isn't justification to add a function that does nothing but effect balance."
This is a nothing statement, it means nothing, and it says nothing. What about creating a xenotype gives it more function than editing an individual character? Since it's the same exact thing but on a larger scale, one lets you develop an individual, the other develops a race. The only difference is that creating a character is more personal, creating a race builds more world but in no way does creating a pawn "a function that does nothing but effect balance." Unless you mean to say xenotypes are "a function that does nothing but effect balance." Everything you said that applies to a character editor applies to the xenotype editor.
No it's not an excuse, it is a justification for why they should because if they really cared all that much about balance the Xenotype editor wouldn't be a thing. Most the time I don't use the xenotype editor because genuinely it's way less balanced than a pawn editor (without abusing sanguophages), and it's way less personal. Any balance mistake I make in making a race is going to be more impactful than a single pawn and it will haunt me for the entire playthrough because those races will continue to generate.

Maltsi a écrit :

Jack Reaver a écrit :

BECAUSE WE CAN'T. No one here is asking for the ability to make powerful pawns they're asking for the ability to edit existing pawns to create character not something OP.

You can do that already. Reroll character until you get one with right skin color and age (because those are the only things that cannot be changed) and then start the game and use dev mode to make it the way you want.

Hair, face, skin, favorite color, clothing material, you can't even get the list of things you can't do right. All of this is also made even worse when you add mods which adds more more possible pawn visuals/materials.
All I can really say is I'm happy someone like you isn't on the dev team or else every time I wanted to start a game I would have to generate a world, get a random spot, and a random cast of pawns. If I wanted to re-roll those pawns or get a different spot on the world would have to start from square 1 and regenerate a new world.
EDIT: Forgot to mention that there would be console commands to change your spawned on map once you get in game and a chance you just spawn in the not-pacific drowning instantly.

Plus this is all ignoring the fact that if this was implemented in vanilla you could pretty easily assume Ludeon would probably put in an individual point system for skills, traits, passions, etc. By doing that they would also pave the way for the modding community to balance their own added content around it.

[Pooh]

Maltsi a écrit :

Can't even use prepare carefully numbers since that mod hasn't worked in years.

People like you ruin the Steam forum, lmao.

It ran just fine.

[Bouncer]

Darklight a écrit :

Jack Reaver a écrit :

For anyone who's seriously still arguing against a character editor because it's "cheating."
You can edit xenotypes, no dev mode required. In fact you can edit sanguophage and remove all but the archo traits for an immortal, regenerating, disease immune, super metabolic efficient super pawn which can transform pawns into that xenotypes. That's before micromanaging the traits to make them even more powerful.

I would argue 5 pawns with maxed all stats and best traits still isn't as good as this because here you potentially have infinite pawns and you can slap on aptitudes to "micromanage" your pawns into being the perfect start.

You absolute goofs everything you're complaining that a character editor would do is already in game. So what's the complaint here? That people should need to spend $25 to break the game's balance?

Similar could be said for Ideology to a lesser extent. You can just make a super Ideology which just buffs your pawns so they get constant mood buffs, lose negative mood buffs, free cannibalism/organ harvesting/etc, and can just do stuff better.

Them giving you the option to create your own xenotypes and the fact you can use that to break the game isn't justification to add a function that does nothing but effect balance. Everything about a pawn besides their names and style effects balance. More importantly changes how the devs wanted the game to be.

This isn't just about "cheating", it's about style of play and the devs vision for what that is. You enforcing a different standard just because "options" isn't an argument for this until the devs change their mind on that fact which they very much could.

"Your colonists are not professional settlers – they’re crash-landed survivors from a passenger liner destroyed in orbit." They wanted you to take random but flawed characters into an unknown planet. Survive with what skills you have and encounter other random but flawed characters and build a story upon that against the random events you encounter.

I very much wish things were different where not every detail of a pawn had a game-play effect and that you could modify aspects of a character to your role-playing enjoyment. That's just not how the pawns work though, and a character editor does nothing but effect that.

The intense gameplay effect of having 4 siblings who are all farmers.
The mess of balance of having a black family of 3 generations.
The broken vision by having 5 old men and a bear.
And heaven forbid you're ever allowed to start with a gay couple with a child! The sheer horror of it all!

And as said countless times before, we have existing options that completely break the game and thus the "vision". Starting with 10 pawns with huge stats and powerful traits (which you can already do with scenario editor, by the way) is nothing compared to literally removing every single threat from the game.

[whatamidoing]

posthum a écrit :

whatamidoing a écrit :

Character editors are unarguably not essential. Rimworld existed before character editor mods, and it would still exist without them.

Humanity existed before power plants, thus electricity is non-essential? BS much?
Things do not start out as essential, they become essential by popular demand.

No, things are essential because they're required. Electricity isn't essential to human life, and many people live without it to this day. It is essential for a life with modern luxuries.

[Pooh]

Maltsi a écrit :

It is well known fact that prepare carefully is buggy mess (and has been many many years by now) and will corrupt your save files eventually when you reach end game

Never had any issues. I run about 40 mods, including ones I've made myself.

[whatamidoing]

posthum a écrit :

I'm also getting the impression that some of the posters in this thread are simply trolling at this point.

"I don't need something, therefore it should not be included in the game despite ample proof for popular demand" is just a trollface spelled out.

Ample proof? You have a thread with, like, three guys. You really don't understand statistics or how to interpret data, do you?
Even then, why should the devs consider popular demand? They seem more interested in making the game they want to make, and it's brought Rimworld very far.

[posthum]

Pooh a écrit :

Maltsi a écrit :

It is well known fact that prepare carefully is buggy mess (and has been many many years by now) and will corrupt your save files eventually when you reach end game

Never had any issues. I run about 40 mods, including ones I've made myself.

I'm running well north of a hundred mods and have not encountered save file corruption due to Prepare Carefully either. If that is a thing however, that's just yet another reason to get on top of including character creation in the vanilla client.

[posthum]

whatamidoing a écrit :

Ample proof? You have a thread with, like, three guys. You really don't understand statistics or how to interpret data, do you?
Even then, why should the devs consider popular demand? They seem more interested in making the game they want to make, and it's brought Rimworld very far.

Your ad hominems reek of desperation. Read the entire thread included the numbers quoted some five or so pages back before getting personal.

*edit* What has brought Rimworld pretty far are the features contributed by a slowly decaying modding scene.

[Darklight]

Jack Reaver a écrit :

Darklight a écrit :

You enforcing a different standard just because "options" isn't an argument

I didn't realize asking for more options was forcing other people to use those options. I saw this same exact logic applied to Lethal Company and why there shouldn't be an Arachnophobia mode. This same logic gets used a lot when people argue against something they don't like or they don't see value in so they basically just accuse the opposition of forcing ♥♥♥♥. Is it forcing though? No not really it's asking for more options that support their own style of play. It doesn't destroy other people's playstyles. Does it effect balance? No more than some stupid OP genotype.
"Them giving you the option to create your own xenotypes and the fact you can use that to break the game isn't justification to add a function that does nothing but effect balance."
This is a nothing statement, it means nothing, and it says nothing. What about creating a xenotype gives it more function than editing an individual character? Since it's the same exact thing but on a larger scale, one lets you develop an individual, the other develops a race. The only difference is that creating a character is more personal, creating a race builds more world but in no way does creating a pawn "a function that does nothing but effect balance." Unless you mean to say xenotypes are "a function that does nothing but effect balance." Everything you said that applies to a character editor applies to the xenotype editor.
No it's not an excuse, it is a justification for why they should because if they really cared all that much about balance the Xenotype editor wouldn't be a thing. Most the time I don't use the xenotype editor because genuinely it's way less balanced than a pawn editor (without abusing sanguophages), and it's way less personal. Any balance mistake I make in making a race is going to be more impactful than a single pawn and it will haunt me for the entire playthrough because those races will continue to generate.

No, it has nothing to do with forcing people to use options. I'm pretty sure the word 'force' or 'forced' was never used. it's about maintaining how the developers wanted the game to be played in vanilla while allowing people the OPTION to download and install a mod if they disagree.

Also for the record, I've stated many times including with you that it is an option I liked. I play with a character editors all the time. It has nothing to do with what I'm saying and arguing though and is not a reason I'm disagreeing with you so don't use that as a crutch.

I also never said it destroyed other peoples play styles. I said it destroyed the developers intended play style for the game. When you want something that goes against what the developer wants, that is what modding communities are for.

Which is my only point here. There is nothing wrong with character editors, there is nothing wrong with the reasons people use them. They just aren't vanilla base game until the developers decide otherwise.

As for my comment on xenotype creation, the point of that because you clearly didn't grasp it is that creating your own xenotypes function isn't to create imbalance, much like scenario editors function isn't to create imbalance.

Just because you CAN doesn't equate to them being the same as a character editor who's function (to edit pawn information) is by nature a imbalanced function because every detail of a pawn besides name and style effects balance.

ESPECIALLY given in by doing so you remove the randomness and flaws of the pawns you start with which is NOT the intended way to play. If you want to do so, nobody is stopping you or me in doing so. It just doesn't belong in vanilla until the developers changes how they want that vanilla play style to function.

[whatamidoing]

posthum a écrit :

whatamidoing a écrit :

Ample proof? You have a thread with, like, three guys. You really don't understand statistics or how to interpret data, do you?
Even then, why should the devs consider popular demand? They seem more interested in making the game they want to make, and it's brought Rimworld very far.

Your ad hominems reek of desperation. Read the entire thread included the numbers quoted some five or so pages back before getting personal.

*edit* What has brought Rimworld pretty far are the features contributed by a slowly decaying modding scene.

The modding scene has been growing, though. Again, every major version since release has had more mods released for it than the previous.

[Darklight]

Bouncer a écrit :

The intense gameplay effect of having 4 siblings who are all farmers.
The mess of balance of having a black family of 3 generations.
The broken vision by having 5 old men and a bear.
And heaven forbid you're ever allowed to start with a gay couple with a child! The sheer horror of it all!

And as said countless times before, we have existing options that completely break the game and thus the "vision". Starting with 10 pawns with huge stats and powerful traits (which you can already do with scenario editor, by the way) is nothing compared to literally removing every single threat from the game.

The intended play style is random colonists who crash-land on a planet and the survivors of which strive to survive with what skills they have. Those survivors don't get to happen to be a 5 star chef, the greenest thumb gardener you ever saw, the most renown gunslinger of the universe, the smartest man, and bob the builder who just happened to be on a cruise ship, and happened to be the only survivors of the crash.

Vanilla and modded are different. If you want all those people to happen to survive a crash, or you want 5 old men and a bear, a gay couple with a child, sure go for it.

As I've said countless times as well, the ways you can already break the game doesn't matter in this conversation. Them giving you options to create scenarios, or xenotypes, that you can abuse isn't the same as adding in something that can only effect character balance and goes against what the developers want vanilla to be.

Again, if you disagree with that play style which is perfectly fine to do so, for most of my games I do. Download a mod for their intended use, to alter games to how YOU want to play them.

[Bouncer]

Darklight a écrit :

Bouncer a écrit :

The intense gameplay effect of having 4 siblings who are all farmers.
The mess of balance of having a black family of 3 generations.
The broken vision by having 5 old men and a bear.
And heaven forbid you're ever allowed to start with a gay couple with a child! The sheer horror of it all!

And as said countless times before, we have existing options that completely break the game and thus the "vision". Starting with 10 pawns with huge stats and powerful traits (which you can already do with scenario editor, by the way) is nothing compared to literally removing every single threat from the game.

The intended play style is random colonists who crash-land on a planet and the survivors of which strive to survive with what skills they have. Those survivors don't get to happen to be a 5 star chef, the greenest thumb gardener you ever saw, the most renown gunslinger of the universe, the smartest man, and bob the builder who just happened to be on a cruise ship, and happened to be the only survivors of the crash.

Vanilla and modded are different. If you want all those people to happen to survive a crash, or you want 5 old men and a bear, a gay couple with a child, sure go for it.

As I've said countless times as well, the ways you can already break the game doesn't matter in this conversation. Them giving you options to create scenarios, or xenotypes, that you can abuse isn't the same as adding in something that only effects character balance and goes against what they wanted that to be.

Again, if you disagree with that play style which is perfectly fine to do so, for most of my games I do. Download a mod for their intended use, to alter games to how YOU want to play them.

You can start with skill boosting items so you can start every game with Bob the Builder & friends. And even just hitting the random button a few times is gonna give you 5 very strong pawns very fast.

Also, "crashlanded randoms" is one of multiple base scenarios, and only its flavor text (which doesn't even mention that it's a cruise ship, just that something went wrong). Are you going against the "intended way to play" if you select Tribal Start or Rich Explorer, or if you change the flavor text to something else?

Or is RImworld a story generator and, as such, the stories should be able to start in a variety of ways?

And yeah, I know there's mods, but it's absurd I have to rely on mods for something as basic as relationships when you have such a crazy amount of depth and control on just about everything else.

[Jack Reaver]

Darklight a écrit :

Bouncer a écrit :

The scenario editor and other tools are way more powerful at cheesing the game than any character creator would. My most braindead easy colony by far was one where everybody was a cannibal, and that wasn't even intentional min-maxing. You can literally turn off all threats except animals, too. You can already make a perfect start.

You also go for "min max bad!" when I've only stated specific colonists for flavour and roleplay. The base game allows an insane level of customisation rivalled by few other games, but it won't let you give your pawns specific traits or relations.

You honestly think giving yourself some extra food and resources at the start of the game is more easy than starting off with a 20 skill, max passion, good trait colonists? Colonists that can do everything and anything and do so at max capabilities. K.

As for what I've stated, I've stated that imperfect colonists is the way the developers wanted the vanilla experience to be. By adding a character editor, regardless of YOUR reasons for wanting it, the consequences of doing so is people min/maxing colonists in the vanilla experience.

Both bad points, so let me go through them.
Let me go ahead and open up the scenario editor, remove sleeping sickness, extra colonists, start with all the research for a spaceship, the materials to build it along with an impenetrable base, survival meals for a year, glitterworld meds, best prosthetics, etc etc.
Genuinely it is stupid to think it's better to have 3-5 perfect colonist than to have say 10 perfectly decent colonists which already can random roll pretty high stats armed with the ability to instantly start installing end game prosthetics, armor, weapons and build a spaceship to leave the planet. The raider coming in to kick down your door doesn't care if you have perfect 20s in any stat except melee and shooting. Hell your pawn doesn't care about having perfect 20s in most their stats because there's only so much time in a day. Chances are each pawn will only be able to use 2-4 out of all of them depending on which stats.
As for the minmaxing colonist IT ALREADY EXISTS. You can just re-roll until you get the best colonist for you, sure it's not perfect but min-maxing always has existed in Rimworld. Here's another thing, you're throwing the baby out with the bathwater. All of CC bunk because some people want to minmax when that's not even a problem.

Nobody is asking for perfect 20s and even if they did you would still be wrong!

As for your other comment let me steal from you.
Character Creator's "function isn't to create imbalance." To say otherwise is to say the same of xenotypes and the scenario editor.

Darklight a écrit :

ESPECIALLY given in by doing so you remove the randomness and flaws of the pawns you start with which is NOT the intended way to play.

Same thing applies to Xenotype editor. Frankly the reroll button too.

Also I really want you source on how this game is "supposed to be played." Since you cited that part of the steam description earlier and I didn't respond because it's such a bad argument. They aren't professional colonizers yet they start with a massive mood bonus for crashlanding into a Rimworld. They can create a settlement with housing, refrigeration, electricity, etc all in under a week. The kicker being that all this can be built by someone who knows very little about construction. You're implying it's supposed to be random yet we can re-roll our colonists until we get the exact person we want. It's a crashlanding yet we choose where to crash at any spot in the world.
You have taken what's essentially promotional writing and interpreted it literally and have made the implication it's all supposed to be random when a ton of the game design when it comes to starting the game is actually pretty static.

And on top of all this you say "It just doesn't belong in vanilla until the developers changes how they want that vanilla play style to function."
They already did when they released Ideology, IE the one that you can force all colonists to be cannibals. They further pushed it with the release of Biotech.

Unless you speak for the developers of course because it sounds like you think you do with how often you bring up "their vision."