Sir_Joshula

What an amazing looking update!

However, 1 concern: I'm currently playing a heavily modded playthrough at the and am near the end and want to complete it. I can see in the 1.1 update that "If you’re using complex mods, I recommend that you set your Steam branch to version-1.0" which I will do but if the mods themselves are updated then they may no longer be compatible with 1.0. Is this likely an issue that I need to look at or will the game be able to sort that out automatically? Do i need to turn off the mod 'autoupdate' or something?

I'm hoping modders will use the multi-version mod support and not break support from 1.0. But ultimately it's up to what they decide to do with their mods.

I don't know of a way to freeze Workshop updates, though I am lobbying Valve for such functionality!

TheWolfwiththeDragon

I was thinking of things like the fact that bridges can only support light structures now, and I have medium-heavy buildings that rests on bridges. What will happen to them?

Nothing now, but you won't be able to build new ones.

TheWolfwiththeDragon

How is it with old saves after a new patch drops? I’m quite new and play unmodded. Will they be compatible or is the safest thing to keep them separate.

Old saves are fine if unmodded. The post has full details on this.

apollo_road

Changed sandbags to be constructed of textile stuff instead of steel

YES. Thank you lord. I understand making sandbags out of steel used to be for balance but it always broke muh immershun. Thanks for the work Tynan

It was actually historical going back to 2013. Back then 'metal' was almost the only resource in the game, and so of course sandbags were made of it.

goibie

Does it auto update? I know it says available for testing but I don’t want to start up my game and break my saves lol.

Nothing will happen automatically, currently 1.1 is only on the unstable branch which you have to specifically opt into.

I appreciate your appreciation.

This looks cool, is it for a mod or something?

I could see generating new backstories along these lines.

daleksdeservevictory

That's honestly one of my favorite things to have happened

Thank you for reminding me. I love how this comic could make a joke out of me screwing up the game design (in fact, sometimes it seemed like half the comics were about various things I screwed up...), then another joke out of me fixing it.

I hope people can eventually forgive that, uh, improvement... it's all for your benefit, I promise!

I'll miss your comics /u/daleksdeservevictory, I read every one.

Does this happen? I thought we set it up so disfigured only applies to face/head body part injuries.

RuneLFox

Hey Tynan! Didn't expect you to grace my thread! :D

WOW, though. Thanks for the informative reply. That's a really funny edge case, I'll pass it on to the team!

I don't know if it's part of the same thing, should it be the case that females would get the thought because their torso is uncovered, which doesn't matter for males?

Yes, it should be the case.

I just looked this up for amusement's sake. Turns out it's actually because of a bugfix.

We set it up so people who have no legs won't get 'naked' thoughts from not wearing pants. It checks if any of the pawn's not-missing body parts are in the BodyPartGroupDef called Legs. If not, it thinks the pawn has no legs, so it sets 'hasPants' to true since the check isn't needed.

Animal bodies don't have BodyPartGroupDefs configured because they're only used for apparel. Thus the check for not-missing body parts in the Legs BodyPartGroup always returns false.

So the reason animals always think they have pants is because they always think they have no legs.

It's Swedish!

Those sad, knowing eyes.

Ever seen Band of Brothers?

Wow, this is unbelievable.

SirkovTheWanderer

Tynan,

I'm curious. Now that Rimworld has been fully released for an entire year, what's next for you? Will you continue to code and update the game, similar to the Terraria devs? Or will you take a much deserved break before plying your creativity towards a new project?

Nothing's announced yet :) The FAQ on ludeon.com explains why.

DonkeyCongas

I understand that, but presumably there's some reason behind making insect meat that way. I'm wondering if it's mechanical or just 'insects are gross' or something else

Want to decouple the insect balancing from the food economy balancing.

If insects represent an injection of food, it messes up the food economy in a really unstable and unpredictable way. Insect meat isn't something you obtain through specific allocation of effort, it just happens as a side effect of an infestation which you have no control over.

It's also thematic to make it gross, and makes it interesting if you have to eat it anyway.

Eh. I've seen worse in the MOMA.

At some moment in early 2013 I needed art for an animal for this game I was making. So I opened up Photoshop. It was a western-themed game, so I traced out this buffalo-looking thing.

I'll call it... muffalo. I thought. Sounds stupid. Just a temp name. It amuses me, at least.

I made the body. But buffalo heads are kind of complicated. So I just used the Photoshop oval tool to make an oval and shaped the chin a bit. The eyes? Half-circles. Because on the Simpsons when someone looks sleepy they shape the eyes like that.

I'll need to get a real artist to do this when I have any money, I thought.

In a final moment of creative flair, I made him blue.

Why not? It'll be fun. Blue.

Now he's on a mug.

pollackey

Your reverse psychology won't work on me.

EDIT: Illustration :P

That was a risky click.. whew!