Once you play banished, you've pretty much played all colony sim.
Only game remotely different is rimworld but I've been seeing lots of rimworld clones began to pop out
Rimworld differs from other colony sims in 2 major ways: >its combat focused >you are supposed to throttle your own development and hold back, since enemies scale with your colony's wealth
Honestly the dynamic is so different, that its superficial to put it in the same genre as Anno, Settlers or Banished. Its really its own thing. Dwarf Fort is nowhere near as focused on combat and tactics, or on holding back growth; both security and food are very easy to do, and its basically a game about getting bored and fricking around until misery happens.
I have never played Rimworld, but meaning to try it eventually, see it pop up in discussions from time to time.
It's interesting that you say you have to hold back development due to enemy scaling.
I wonder if this is the intention of the developer? I would think that the enemies scaling is intended to keep thing interesting, and avoid you getting bored that your colony becomes too strong and nothing is a threat anymore.
If it is really that bad, that you feel you need to hold back development, then isn't the issue that the enemy scaling is poorly set, and should be toned back?
>I wonder if this is the intention of the developer? I would think that the enemies scaling is intended to keep thing interesting, and avoid you getting bored that your colony becomes too strong and nothing is a threat anymore.
Yes.
>If it is really that bad...
A common noob trap is to get a good run, develop well, and then decide "you know what my colony needs? a room dedicated to golden statues" and then the next raid is 2x bigger and they burn down your base.
New players stockpile too much food, too much materials, hire too many colonists, for which they build too many rooms, and this all adds to a hidden score called "colony wealth". The enemy raid difficulties scale off that.
Advanced players will only keep very good colonists, only stockpile food and materials they need short to mid term, only cook and craft as much as they need, only mine iron, gold, jade when they need it, etc. Keeping your colony lean and fit, rather than fat and bloated.
And I have played very few games where this was the difference between good and bad play. Maybe you can argue Civilization V also had a similar mechanic, where you could over-expand, but it was so obvious and in the open there, that even new players would get it. In most games you want to spread like a plague and bulk up as fast as possible.
I would recommend RimWorld, btw. And remember, losing is fun. Doing damage control as things burn is the most fun.
It's more like, if you only focus on production and amassing wealth, and not enough on defenses and training, then you attract bigger raids that you're not prepared to deal with. I think "holding back" is the wrong way to put it, it's more about finding a balance between security and economy. Admittedly, there are a lot of cheesy ways to manipulate your wealth, and not innovating at all and simply training your pawns to be as powerful as possible IS a strategy that works, but it's not the only one.
Oh, interesting. It's another layer of strategy then. Basically collecting wealth makes you a bigger target, therefore not investing in properly defending your amassed resources means you will lose it. And it makes sense that you would more likely to be targeted for raids if you have more stuff to steal.
Yeah, I'll try the game soon.
>Yeah, I'll try the game soon.
dont get the dlc until you know how to play the game btw. they just overcomplicate shit for new players.
Seconding this. Play the base game until you understand stuff, then get ONE of the DLCs and play that, then get the other, etc.
A bit like Paradox games, where if you install the whole thing you are met with 50 different mechanics that old players were introduced to over time, and you have no clue what to do.
That's a lot of cope to say don't have a well functioning, thriving, efficient, organized, successful colony and instead be one bad RNG event away from disaster at all times.
Not that it helps either way because guess what, your colony wealth will always be increasing no matte how 'lean' you try to run things. Unless you intentionally never advance, never build anything, always have your colonists second away from a mental break from shitty conditions, you will always be increasing your wealth and thus increasing your raids, which in turn increases your wealth because you've now had a ton of shit dumped onto your colony from all the people who died.And raids get bigger over time regardles of wealth, so you need more defences to handle them which increases your wealth which increases the raids which.... it's a badly designed system because the developer has no idea how to make the game challenging besides this kind of unironic artificial difficulty.
Not him but a nice thing about Rimworld I found is the modding scene, plus since it's a singleplayer game you can adjust things as you please in devtools or whatever. I like the standard vanilla expanded package
>it's a badly designed system because the developer has no idea how to make the game challenging besides this kind of unironic artificial difficulty.
Frostpunk (probably the best one available)
Against the Storm (artificial difficulty but its still fun)
Timberborn
i personally didn't like the tropico games, and avoid colony simulators because they tend to oversaturate mechanics and ui elements while not being much more fun beyond that kind of "civilization" experience where its a nice story to tell to a friend. i.e. the "emergent storytelling" meme.
>Against the Storm (artificial difficulty but its still fun)
y r u gey
8 months ago
Anonymous
it has artificial difficulty though? its done in the right way where the slider goes up on your terms and as you progress it becomes incentivized, but its the textbook definition and some people don't like that style of progression versus traditional difficulty settings, their loss.
8 months ago
Anonymous
How is it "artificial difficulty" when its literally the intentionally designed difficulty working as intended?
Its just normal difficulty, you are being moronic.
8 months ago
Anonymous
>Also known as fake difficulty, artificial difficulty is when a game's mechanics make the game more difficult in different ways
do you just not know what it is? its not always a negative thing, i'm not using it as an insult, the game allows you to scale the difficulty per settlement, adding mechanics as you go higher, and you're intended to reach certain overarching progression points to better handle those mechanics. ex. you don't unlock the full rainpunk utility until you get to a certain point, after which you can start using the difficulty that actually makes use of rainpunk tech.
8 months ago
Anonymous
This is a 40IQ definition for 40IQ Black folk (such as yourself).
8 months ago
Anonymous
sorry you got mad over nothing anon i won't hold it against the storm (your raging autism)
8 months ago
Anonymous
>artificial difficulty is when a game's mechanics make the game more difficult in different ways
That's what game difficulty is in general. All game difficulty, in all games, can be found under this definition.
When people were memeing about artificial difficulty, the actual things cited were unresponsive controls, bad hitboxes, auto camera going stupid, input latency, w/e. Things that make the game harder, even though they aren't supposed to. Unintended difficulty.
>Anon doesn't know how to play within constraints to advance even if he can't do that exclusively
Fast Castle into "Scout rushes are OP and gay", amirite?
>and I have played very few games where this was the difference between good and bad play. Maybe you can argue Civilization V also had a similar mechanic, where you could over-expand, but it was so obvious and in the open there
In Civ V, you can play wide, but you have to master all of the game's other mechanics first, and absolutely know what you're doing with your civ, your start, and your win condition.
It's more like, if you only focus on production and amassing wealth, and not enough on defenses and training, then you attract bigger raids that you're not prepared to deal with. I think "holding back" is the wrong way to put it, it's more about finding a balance between security and economy. Admittedly, there are a lot of cheesy ways to manipulate your wealth, and not innovating at all and simply training your pawns to be as powerful as possible IS a strategy that works, but it's not the only one.
>If it is really that bad, that you feel you need to hold back development, then isn't the issue that the enemy scaling is poorly set, and should be toned back?
You know how in Elder Scrolls games, if you spend too much time trading and crafting, you get a high level character with low level combat skills? And enemies are now very, very hard for you to handle?
Rimworld is balanced like that.
holy frick I don't know what this is but it triggered childhood nostalgia for some shareware of the month club shit my mom used to get back when we still had a Packard Bell computer in the 90s.
I have some faint memory of playing the demo for this, and iirc it was set up like a reality TV show, with cameras around camp. I think the demo ended with you beating up the other dwarves who lived underground?
The two strong memories I have left of it was how fiddly it was to place buildings, and how unintuitive it was who works what and when. But that might've been because I was young and didn't understand english.
The first mission is tutorial that's made like tv competition. Various clans fight for right of fullfilling odin's wish. I think screenshot is from beginning of next mission.
I fricking hated this game, it was almost impossible to micromanage the economy and you either starved or you had no hands to mine the tunnels. But then again, I was 13 when I played it last time.
This looks like some piece of shit mobile phone game that I need to wait up for like 8 hours so I can get enough resources to build a fricking outhouse that will take me another 4 house to build unless I pay out the ass to speed up or instantly complete the building time.
you do not want a "modern game"
that means >always online >micro transactions >dlc fest >forced diversity (black romans? gay and troony amazons??) >leftist agenda >ads ads ads >unoptimized pajeetware >bugs >early access (never gets real full release) >soulless artstyle >30gb uncompressed audio and video files >cloud only saves
Frostpunk (probably the best one available)
Against the Storm (artificial difficulty but its still fun)
Timberborn
i personally didn't like the tropico games, and avoid colony simulators because they tend to oversaturate mechanics and ui elements while not being much more fun beyond that kind of "civilization" experience where its a nice story to tell to a friend. i.e. the "emergent storytelling" meme.
Are there any city builders that have a win condition? I know the point of a city builder is that it never ends, but for me, I need a tangible goal to strive towards. Thank you for any answers.
Anno 1800 always consistently provides with new objectives. I never actually got to the end, but it does feel like eventually you "win". So you will always have tangible goals to strive towards.
the item stealing mechanic was awesome, but trying to move a lot of military and retreating wounded units is a wheelbarrow of dicks
I honestly prefer the combat in 2, and everything else really
But when I want to build cities I do it in Sunflowers Anno
i mean settlers 1, 2 and 7 were pretty good. 7 still plays good, just has balance issues and the AI is a bit moronic but its fine.
main problem with settlers was settlers 8 got turned into a S7 asset flip mobile game with pay2win gems, so naturally no-one played it and Ubisoft did surprised pikachu face.jpg
i just want a city builder game that fully commits. make me the fricking god of the city, give me the power to make laws as well as directing the flow of traffic and infrastructure.
this
theres been 1000s of these fricking games released on steam in the last 10 years
at first i was happy for more dorf fort or banished clones but now we're drowning in them
https://store.steampowered.com/app/1928540/Horticular/
anyone else tried this demo for this garden builder? i want to like it but the habitat system makes absolutely no sense to me and it randomly chooses the 5x5 plot for the animal
Is it the newest settler game from ubisoft?
Because that shit was the most sterile and dumbed down version of that game I ever saw.
Even worse than settler 5.
>OHHH BOY a game like settlers 3 and 4 >boot up and find black guy on the home screen >find out game is funded by the German government
my first impressions are not good.
>OHHH BOY a game like settlers 3 and 4 >boot up and find black guy on the home screen >find out game is funded by the German government
my first impressions are not good.
um how is that progressive, CHUD, africans have always existed everywhere and there have never been homogeneously white populations at any point in history.
>there have never been homogeneously white populations at any point in history.
Didn't know that Greeks, Romans, germanic tribes, vikings were all ethnically diverse societies with black and brown people among them.
settlers peaked with 2
everything is garbage for moronic children
replay it like once a year, maximum comfy, peak soul
but i swear the ships are getting dumber with age
the shipyard maps take hours and hours because they dont want to ferry geologists, maybe its cause they look kinda israeli
Once you play banished, you've pretty much played all colony sim.
Only game remotely different is rimworld but I've been seeing lots of rimworld clones began to pop out
Rimworld differs from other colony sims in 2 major ways:
>its combat focused
>you are supposed to throttle your own development and hold back, since enemies scale with your colony's wealth
Honestly the dynamic is so different, that its superficial to put it in the same genre as Anno, Settlers or Banished. Its really its own thing.
Dwarf Fort is nowhere near as focused on combat and tactics, or on holding back growth; both security and food are very easy to do, and its basically a game about getting bored and fricking around until misery happens.
I have never played Rimworld, but meaning to try it eventually, see it pop up in discussions from time to time.
It's interesting that you say you have to hold back development due to enemy scaling.
I wonder if this is the intention of the developer? I would think that the enemies scaling is intended to keep thing interesting, and avoid you getting bored that your colony becomes too strong and nothing is a threat anymore.
If it is really that bad, that you feel you need to hold back development, then isn't the issue that the enemy scaling is poorly set, and should be toned back?
>I wonder if this is the intention of the developer? I would think that the enemies scaling is intended to keep thing interesting, and avoid you getting bored that your colony becomes too strong and nothing is a threat anymore.
Yes.
>If it is really that bad...
A common noob trap is to get a good run, develop well, and then decide "you know what my colony needs? a room dedicated to golden statues" and then the next raid is 2x bigger and they burn down your base.
New players stockpile too much food, too much materials, hire too many colonists, for which they build too many rooms, and this all adds to a hidden score called "colony wealth". The enemy raid difficulties scale off that.
Advanced players will only keep very good colonists, only stockpile food and materials they need short to mid term, only cook and craft as much as they need, only mine iron, gold, jade when they need it, etc. Keeping your colony lean and fit, rather than fat and bloated.
And I have played very few games where this was the difference between good and bad play. Maybe you can argue Civilization V also had a similar mechanic, where you could over-expand, but it was so obvious and in the open there, that even new players would get it. In most games you want to spread like a plague and bulk up as fast as possible.
I would recommend RimWorld, btw. And remember, losing is fun. Doing damage control as things burn is the most fun.
Oh, interesting. It's another layer of strategy then. Basically collecting wealth makes you a bigger target, therefore not investing in properly defending your amassed resources means you will lose it. And it makes sense that you would more likely to be targeted for raids if you have more stuff to steal.
Yeah, I'll try the game soon.
>Yeah, I'll try the game soon.
dont get the dlc until you know how to play the game btw. they just overcomplicate shit for new players.
Seconding this. Play the base game until you understand stuff, then get ONE of the DLCs and play that, then get the other, etc.
A bit like Paradox games, where if you install the whole thing you are met with 50 different mechanics that old players were introduced to over time, and you have no clue what to do.
That's a lot of cope to say don't have a well functioning, thriving, efficient, organized, successful colony and instead be one bad RNG event away from disaster at all times.
Not that it helps either way because guess what, your colony wealth will always be increasing no matte how 'lean' you try to run things. Unless you intentionally never advance, never build anything, always have your colonists second away from a mental break from shitty conditions, you will always be increasing your wealth and thus increasing your raids, which in turn increases your wealth because you've now had a ton of shit dumped onto your colony from all the people who died.And raids get bigger over time regardles of wealth, so you need more defences to handle them which increases your wealth which increases the raids which.... it's a badly designed system because the developer has no idea how to make the game challenging besides this kind of unironic artificial difficulty.
Not him but a nice thing about Rimworld I found is the modding scene, plus since it's a singleplayer game you can adjust things as you please in devtools or whatever. I like the standard vanilla expanded package
>it's a badly designed system because the developer has no idea how to make the game challenging besides this kind of unironic artificial difficulty.
>Against the Storm (artificial difficulty but its still fun)
y r u gey
it has artificial difficulty though? its done in the right way where the slider goes up on your terms and as you progress it becomes incentivized, but its the textbook definition and some people don't like that style of progression versus traditional difficulty settings, their loss.
How is it "artificial difficulty" when its literally the intentionally designed difficulty working as intended?
Its just normal difficulty, you are being moronic.
>Also known as fake difficulty, artificial difficulty is when a game's mechanics make the game more difficult in different ways
do you just not know what it is? its not always a negative thing, i'm not using it as an insult, the game allows you to scale the difficulty per settlement, adding mechanics as you go higher, and you're intended to reach certain overarching progression points to better handle those mechanics. ex. you don't unlock the full rainpunk utility until you get to a certain point, after which you can start using the difficulty that actually makes use of rainpunk tech.
This is a 40IQ definition for 40IQ Black folk (such as yourself).
sorry you got mad over nothing anon i won't hold it against the storm (your raging autism)
>artificial difficulty is when a game's mechanics make the game more difficult in different ways
That's what game difficulty is in general. All game difficulty, in all games, can be found under this definition.
When people were memeing about artificial difficulty, the actual things cited were unresponsive controls, bad hitboxes, auto camera going stupid, input latency, w/e. Things that make the game harder, even though they aren't supposed to. Unintended difficulty.
>Anon doesn't know how to play within constraints to advance even if he can't do that exclusively
Fast Castle into "Scout rushes are OP and gay", amirite?
>and I have played very few games where this was the difference between good and bad play. Maybe you can argue Civilization V also had a similar mechanic, where you could over-expand, but it was so obvious and in the open there
In Civ V, you can play wide, but you have to master all of the game's other mechanics first, and absolutely know what you're doing with your civ, your start, and your win condition.
It's more like, if you only focus on production and amassing wealth, and not enough on defenses and training, then you attract bigger raids that you're not prepared to deal with. I think "holding back" is the wrong way to put it, it's more about finding a balance between security and economy. Admittedly, there are a lot of cheesy ways to manipulate your wealth, and not innovating at all and simply training your pawns to be as powerful as possible IS a strategy that works, but it's not the only one.
>If it is really that bad, that you feel you need to hold back development, then isn't the issue that the enemy scaling is poorly set, and should be toned back?
You know how in Elder Scrolls games, if you spend too much time trading and crafting, you get a high level character with low level combat skills? And enemies are now very, very hard for you to handle?
Rimworld is balanced like that.
Rimworld is a doll house simulator. You need overwhelming force to protect your Rat friends from cat nazis.
Manor Lord will be THE ONE.
Banished is not comfy at all
To this day anno 1404 is still king
maybe you should play more videogames instead of being a walmart projector
For me, it's ONI. Shame it chugs when you're really getting things going. It tickles my autisms otherwise.
yeah ONI is comfy, its my go-to game on a 2nd screen while watching something game
t.2k hours each into Dorf Fart and Rimjob
oni cant hold a candle to clonk
fricking children
holy frick I don't know what this is but it triggered childhood nostalgia for some shareware of the month club shit my mom used to get back when we still had a Packard Bell computer in the 90s.
I remember when banished was released and everyone was talking about how it would be better if there were militias, raids and combat.
Settlers, despite being a colony management game in the surface, is more of a logistics management game than anything.
Rimworld is more about the story telling and unit need micromanagement. Anno is more about city development.
>now I have to start reading the incoherent words of zoomer writers with stupid misspelled names because their parents are braindead morons
Wake me up when they remaster the good game.
I have some faint memory of playing the demo for this, and iirc it was set up like a reality TV show, with cameras around camp. I think the demo ended with you beating up the other dwarves who lived underground?
The two strong memories I have left of it was how fiddly it was to place buildings, and how unintuitive it was who works what and when. But that might've been because I was young and didn't understand english.
The first mission is tutorial that's made like tv competition. Various clans fight for right of fullfilling odin's wish. I think screenshot is from beginning of next mission.
I fricking hated this game, it was almost impossible to micromanage the economy and you either starved or you had no hands to mine the tunnels. But then again, I was 13 when I played it last time.
>Steam Next Fest
>city builder
>demo available
https://store.steampowered.com/app/1330430/Celestial_Empire/
Cook the rice, goy- I mean baizuo.
Looks great
This looks like some piece of shit mobile phone game that I need to wait up for like 8 hours so I can get enough resources to build a fricking outhouse that will take me another 4 house to build unless I pay out the ass to speed up or instantly complete the building time.
you could say the same about literally every city builder game on pc after seeing those ads
Just tried it, seems to be a shallower Anno with a Chinese theme. Not too bad but if that's it i would just play Anno directly
Settlers hasnt really been good for 2 decades
>A whole ass super chill new banger
Gaming journalisn't.
>A whole ass
Those words aren't in the headline. Who are you quoting?
is it anything like settlers 3 or 4?
if not then not interested
Fricking this. Settlers 3 and 4 are by far the best settlers games. A modern game that copied the formula is exactly what I dream of.
you do not want a "modern game"
that means
>always online
>micro transactions
>dlc fest
>forced diversity (black romans? gay and troony amazons??)
>leftist agenda
>ads ads ads
>unoptimized pajeetware
>bugs
>early access (never gets real full release)
>soulless artstyle
>30gb uncompressed audio and video files
>cloud only saves
>Releasing in early access
I'll wait, thanks
Mythra of the lake what is your wisdom?
whats the title?
pioneers of pagonia
thanks lads ill look it up : )
i grew up on Settlers 3 and 4, absolutely chill games.
Pioneers of Pagonia. I had to look up OP's gay little article to find out because nothing in the image says what it is.
What are some good entry level city builders on steam?
Frostpunk (probably the best one available)
Against the Storm (artificial difficulty but its still fun)
Timberborn
i personally didn't like the tropico games, and avoid colony simulators because they tend to oversaturate mechanics and ui elements while not being much more fun beyond that kind of "civilization" experience where its a nice story to tell to a friend. i.e. the "emergent storytelling" meme.
>Frostborn
aren't the devs heavy leftlibtards? I feel like a lot of devs in that genre are.
frostpunk devs are polish, so their version of sligtly left leaning is equivalent to waffen SS in the US
i dont know anon i don't do background checks on game developers i just play games that look like they'll be fun and it was.
how do you know what redditcore games are? i didn't know that.
Frostpunk is redditcore have a nice day
>Frostpunk (probably the best one available)
Holy shit frick off
Are there any city builders that have a win condition? I know the point of a city builder is that it never ends, but for me, I need a tangible goal to strive towards. Thank you for any answers.
Rimworld has a few
Anno 1800 always consistently provides with new objectives. I never actually got to the end, but it does feel like eventually you "win". So you will always have tangible goals to strive towards.
Anno 1404 has a campaign and various scenarios with objectives
Tropico series
Against the Storm has win conditions, and it's more like a set of smaller city builds with differing issues/advantages for the maps.
impression games
anno solved city builders years ago, 1800 is peak
>duuuuude I can't wait to play the same game I played in 98/01!!
>I can't wait to play a good game
Yes
Nice, me neither
Me neither. Finally some good fricking games.
Settlerbros, all 7 of us are eating good!
Can't wait.
Why can't they make a city builder like Dark Cloud 2?
All Settlers after 2 became progressively worse. Being able to move your units in 3 was the shark jumping moment
the item stealing mechanic was awesome, but trying to move a lot of military and retreating wounded units is a wheelbarrow of dicks
I honestly prefer the combat in 2, and everything else really
But when I want to build cities I do it in Sunflowers Anno
i mean settlers 1, 2 and 7 were pretty good. 7 still plays good, just has balance issues and the AI is a bit moronic but its fine.
main problem with settlers was settlers 8 got turned into a S7 asset flip mobile game with pay2win gems, so naturally no-one played it and Ubisoft did surprised pikachu face.jpg
i just want a city builder game that fully commits. make me the fricking god of the city, give me the power to make laws as well as directing the flow of traffic and infrastructure.
>super chill fantasy twist
So its a casual town builder with no real complexity or challenge with a fantasy theme, I cant fricking wait.
this
theres been 1000s of these fricking games released on steam in the last 10 years
at first i was happy for more dorf fort or banished clones but now we're drowning in them
https://store.steampowered.com/app/1928540/Horticular/
anyone else tried this demo for this garden builder? i want to like it but the habitat system makes absolutely no sense to me and it randomly chooses the 5x5 plot for the animal
Das absolut wichtigste in jedem Siedler Spiel.
this is a psyop to normalise city life/being a cog.
Is it the newest settler game from ubisoft?
Because that shit was the most sterile and dumbed down version of that game I ever saw.
Even worse than settler 5.
are the characters black?
>are they black?
maybe they are just german
>an all new banger
no cap?
>OHHH BOY a game like settlers 3 and 4
>boot up and find black guy on the home screen
>find out game is funded by the German government
my first impressions are not good.
That dude looks like a Bogdanoff
>browneers of gayoynia
>not 1 but 2 pairs are visible in the picture and both are interracial
it is ... progressive?
um how is that progressive, CHUD, africans have always existed everywhere and there have never been homogeneously white populations at any point in history.
>there have never been homogeneously white populations at any point in history.
Didn't know that Greeks, Romans, germanic tribes, vikings were all ethnically diverse societies with black and brown people among them.
i’m out
any German anons here? please explain to me why your games and media are very cucked?
For me, it's The Crust.
Moon homies + Factorio - combat.
I just hope that AI voice acting is a placeholder.
None beats Anno 1404
>he doesn't like settlers 4
degenerate
settlers peaked with 2
everything is garbage for moronic children
replay it like once a year, maximum comfy, peak soul
but i swear the ships are getting dumber with age
the shipyard maps take hours and hours because they dont want to ferry geologists, maybe its cause they look kinda israeli
>early shitcess
almost had me for a second there