Hostile World

I decided just now to see if the subreddit for this had any worthwhile content. I don’t know why, since I’ve been lurking here since forever. However, I found a thread there about what features would be cool to add, and for mysterious reasons it inspired me.

Since it’ll likely go wasted there, I’m picking up the idea and bringing it over here.

I think Cataclysm would be improved greatly by adding a concept of, basically, random events. Acid rain and zombie hordes are kind of weak examples of this idea, but I think the game would benefit from turning it up to 11. Good random events would reward players for being aware of their surroundings, mobile, prepared, and smart enough to recognize what kinds of threats they can deal with. They would also help considerably in making the game more immersive, both by making the world feel more alive (and, not at all incidentally, hostile) and by giving the player a sense of an ongoing catastrophe that they’re trying to survive.

Disclaimer: The rest of this is me brainstorming. Not all ideas are guaranteed to be good. Not all possible good ideas are guaranteed to be represented.

What kind of random events am I talking about? I’ve basically got two categories - environmental and factional.

Environmental events reflect the fact that the world is broken. The Earth was disposed to occasional extremes even before people started opening up gates to other worlds, and of course things are much worse now. Furthermore, unnatural forces that are utterly inimical to human life have been loosed. Let’s see some of that.

[ul][li]Unseasonal temperatures and weather conditions. Heat/cold at the wrong time, snow that instantly melts, etc. [/li]
[li]Hail[/li]
[li]Rains of creatures. Possibly neutral, possibly not[/li]
[li]Cloud cover so thick the Sun may as well have never bothered rising[/li]
[li]Nights where Something That Isn’t The Moon rises. I’d tell you what it is, but just looking at it out of the corner of your eye makes you feel sick…[/li]
[li]Nights when the moon is unnaturally bright, and all the wolves and dogs band together in packs to hunt anything that moves[/li]
[li]Clouds of poisonous gas drifting over the landscape[/li]
[li]Earthquakes, which possibly open chasms[/li]
[li]Windstorms - chance to be knocked down while outside, increased movement costs, random flying debris damaging everything.[/li]
[li]Flooding - incredible spot rainstorms cause an entire map tile to be covered in water. Probably difficult to implement, moving fluids around is hard.[/li][/ul]

Factional events, on the other hand, would reflect the fact that there are a lot of groups of enemies in the setting and that they should be actively doing things. Giant ants should be building new hives, mi-go should be looking for research subjects, hordes of zombies should be shuffling around being atmospheric, the blobs should establish new pits or take over living creatures or something, the triffid infestation should spread, et cetera.

Implementation of all this is obviously nontrivial. I’d suggest that it might be wiser to have as much of this as possible be global - maintaining information about what strange things have happened to the player this way would facilitate design elements like disabling random events altogether or opting for an especially eventful life. Some of the environmental events (darkness during day, being outside at night being traumatic, etc) seem like they’d be relatively easy to implement, and having giant bees build a new hive seems like it could be accomplished by just changing a map tile. Others, such as a patrol of mi-go wandering around, seem more difficult… but then, we do have zombie hordes to use as a starting point. Other elements are seriously problematic - earthquakes actually damaging things is likely to require some thought about rules for how that’ll work, and implementing things like a roof caving in without it feeling utterly arbitrary is likely to be hard.

Another advantage to taking an approach where random events are a system unto themselves, then, is that the events can hopefully be made modular and not heavily interdependent. An early implementation might be to just get a simple events system in and the “dark during the day” event happening once in a great while.

I’m sure ideas like this have been suggested before - I’m hoping that providing details and some thoughts on why this is a good augmentation for Cataclysm’s current gameplay will help it find fertile ground.

Much support on all the environmental stuff, more of it the better imo

The factional stuff i believe has been theorized of already, in particular NPC factions aswell as migrating wildlife herds
[sup][sup]tho i wouldn’t like to see more triffids than there already are as i feel those are way too destructive >_>[/sup][/sup]

Cheers on the decently written suggestion
I’ll just fill my pipe and await to hear what the devs among us have to say :slight_smile:

i’d love “ice world” mode.
Lore: Tie it to ice labs and tears in reality: There was a significant tear in reality that the scientists managed to close around the cataclysm day. Through this, a huge amount of the world’s thermal energy was transferred to another dimension.
End result: Temperatures down by -15C on average across the globe = Ice Age.

Problem: For it to be really interesting, we’d need snow blocking access and LOS = lots of coding.

…but i find it exciting as an idea.

That’s not exactly how the global climate works though, it’s not a closed system. Even if it were possible for large amounts of heat to be removed rapidly enough to have a noticeable effect on a local area, once the offending portal was sealed or otherwise removed the more temperate atmosphere would equalize itself in short order.

If anything you’d have more of a volcanic winter screnario, the lore does say that there are alot of portals that opened up and continue to allow noxious alien chemicals to billow forth in huge plumes. While much of it is stated to have fallen back to earth in the form of acid rain, that also means it might share other qualities with the major producers of acid rain in the real world, mainly volcanic ash and droplets of sulfuric acid or other sulfide derivatives which are capable of obscuring the Sun and resulting in global cooling due to the reflection of solar radiation.

Glancing over the OP, I got this perfect idea.

Right in the middle of the fantasy domain, whereas Rebuild and Rebuild_2 failed if my general point was right in the first place, lies this perfect position for these ideas. Even if several-thousand years old races and their archenemies don’t fit in the same mold made for fantastic events that shape life on some futuristic planet Earth, saying the changes you proposed affect the post-apoc gameplay substantially is, however, a solid ground. Yet you might ask - for what?

Whereas we (the CataDDA crowd) had to face giant perils (acid rain, for example) the key goal was to overcome the greatest obstacle of all - the decline of human population through surviving the roguelike setting. Thus “ripping the player a new one” counts as a substantial increase in overall difficulty, such as replacing area-effects with global ones (“Clouds of poisonous gas drifting over the landscape”). If there were actual hazards like extreme-low night temps limiting the gameplay further, the hardships one would have to endure could intensify the search for another hero character, instead of “plain John” one introduced now at Day_0.

Altough not viable at this point, as I see it, your Cataclysm ideas just might have a love child with, say, Civilization strategy/management approach and install a brand new after-cataclysm child which just might be fun for everyone. Specific conditions you wrote about could matter greatly if managing a newfound settlement was a thing; having floods, rainstorms, even over-agressive packs of wild beasts hampering one’s advancement would be great pins in the gear-wheels that could drive such an amazing effort to view the Cataclysm from a different angle than DDA’s.

While I haven’t bothered much looking into modding capabilities of FreeCiv, I know it has an open-sourced margin and a big, supportive community. Even though I’m more of a fool for resolving battles via “hands-on” approach (Total War series, perhaps?), the “situational candy” you’ve made me think about would definitely drive me back into trying this imaginary “new Civ”. Hell, if I knew any better I’d prolly say some gamedev team is creating a very similar thing right now, scheduling its release to coincide with the general “undead-zombie” hype that’s been going on for years.

If you’re into game design, go for it. Some future modders would be thankful.

[quote=“Shopkeeper, post:4, topic:9902”]That’s not exactly how the global climate works though, it’s not a closed system. Even if it were possible for large amounts of heat to be removed rapidly enough to have a noticeable effect on a local area, once the offending portal was sealed or otherwise removed the more temperate atmosphere would equalize itself in short order.

If anything you’d have more of a volcanic winter screnario, the lore does say that there are alot of portals that opened up and continue to allow noxious alien chemicals to billow forth in huge plumes. While much of it is stated to have fallen back to earth in the form of acid rain, that also means it might share other qualities with the major producers of acid rain in the real world, mainly volcanic ash and droplets of sulfuric acid or other sulfide derivatives which are capable of obscuring the Sun and resulting in global cooling due to the reflection of solar radiation.[/quote]

Well, yes and no. Its true that anything local would be quickly restored and outbalanced by the huge (comparatively) global climate. So what i meant to say was that the loss of heat would be global in scope. Thus, some balance would take many years to be restored as we “slowly” add more heat from the sun into the system.
I’m aware that with real life physics this cannot happen over a period of e.g. 2hrs, unless the catastrophe is so great that the loss of heat will be the least of the problem.
No good ideas to overcome it on this approach, but it sounds very cool to me regardless :smiley:

The volcanic winter idea also sounds fine, but tbh i don’t care too much about the lore, so long as is sounds slightly plausible (b-movie style is fine) and has the surviving-in-arctic-conditions clause.

This whole thing could be a world option or mod i guess.

Besides this, i need to say that i strongly support the OP’s ideas, so long as they are implemented in a sensible way.
They sound like they would evolve one of the most important (imo best) aspects of cata: Surviving

Off-topic (Sorry, I have to ask):

Eris Shrugged? All hail Discordia, right?

I’m pretty sure we had a thread along the lines of this one before, but this one takes a much wider scope of what kind of events it hopes to bring to the table. I’m much more in favour of doing environmental events first, as factional ones will come naturally as npc and monster AI’s improve/get some further love and attention.

Just something I wondered about hordes. Is it possible in the future to have smaller hordes… or, well, groups of bandits? Or alternatively, a caravan of merchants, patrolling old guard types, and whatnot?

[quote=“BigLie, post:7, topic:9902”]Off-topic (Sorry, I have to ask):

Eris Shrugged? All hail Discordia, right?

[spoiler]What, do you need a replacement Pope or Mome card? :smiley:

Finding the Principia Discordia in-game made my day, once upon a time.
[/spoiler]

I don’t see why code for group behaviour can’t be adapted to model different types of groups!

re: the settlement idea, I had thought about something similar a while back, and it’s been simmering in the depths of my brain.
You start out not as a sole survivor, but as a member of a group. You pick one of the (un?)fortunate survivors to control, and either rally an ally or two to follow you, or strike out on your own. Either way though, you want to preserve that shelter, because if you die, that’s your stock of future adventurers, but they can get killed on their own if you’re not carefull, leading to a total loss of that group.
As you explore, you could befriend other such groups, and once they’ve accepted you fully they become or supply future stock of adventurers. (special NPCs would most likely be exempt).
This sort of thing could also lead to new features and playstyle, such as various characters resting for extended periods of time if e.g. they are badly wounded, meanwhile you’d take direct control of other characters in the meantime.
I’m not even sure what all work would be involved, but I think the outcome would be pretty awesome.

The settlement playstyle sounds actually awesome, especially if it allows you to switch between them to do different stuff, so you make dedicated (mechanic/scavenger/hunters/hacker) characters.
(Also I would get to play as John and Ann at the same time, that would be awesome)

That sounds like what I used to do, dividing work between two survivors in the same world. I had to save and quit to switch characters, and while the world was updated linear-ly, the time from each survivor’s perspectives was a comical braided pretzel of a mess.

Still, it was incredibly entertaining having one guy work on the vehicle during daytimes, then switching to the other guy doing supply raids by night.

I wouldn’t want survivor groups to get too big, since I kinda prefer this ‘steer one guy manually’ approach.

Additionally, it would be cool to have survivors in the group that can be assigned to more mundane tasks like crafting and learning things related to crafting. So they could stay in the base to be relatively squishy and get busy crafting all sorts of things while other characters could spend their time exploring.

I was looking at the group, and that same thought was going through my mind. Work as a group, or as yourself. You can work together/lead a group, but food, water, bedding, lighting, and electricity(When you get more advanced) , or strike off alone, and worry about you, and nothing else for now. you can have people scout out location, writing books filled with their knowledge, teaching, farming, building, creating, expanding, all of that. Different factions go about things differently, some are very nomadic, others are very isolated, some want to end humanities suffering, and others fight to live. A bit of Mad Max stuff, a bit of Rot and Ruin, kind of survival and working together factions. Also loners, who have their own territory, and means. And the bigger it is, the more noticeable it is. You can attempt to attract people to your group, but that puts you at risk of attracting the wrong people, like the murdering psychopathic group I mentioned before.

I like the idea of influencing multiple characters more than I like the idea of directly controlling multiple characters.
That said, I don’t want DDA to become turn-based Dwarf Fortress. (Don’t get me wrong–I love me some Dwarf Fortress; I just don’t want this to be that.)

More to the OP’s point, though:
Non-trivial random events could enhance replayability, but the world as-is provides plenty of hostility for a first playthrough.

For example: me.
I haven’t made it to winter yet. My current character is in mid-summer and doing quite well.
I have no idea what threats are going to develop (sidenote: I greatly appreciate everyone’s thoughtful use of the spoiler tag on these forums).
Mi-go’s and blobs scare the pee out of me.
There’s a crater to the northeast that I kind of want to go explore, but I’m also kind of afraid to.
So, I feel like the game is giving me plenty of challenge. If I also had to deal with random days of no sun and wandering poisonous clouds, it might be too much.

I very much like the idea, but I think it should be an opt-in feature.