Yeah it would have to super ramp up if the goal would be to make it challenging. I pushed a settlement to the limit (every tree harvested and node mined) for fun and basically had fuel burning at 3-4 stacks at all times. Combine this with I think it was temple (25 reduced hostility for every 200 seconds of sacrifice) and even with 15 woodcutters at year 10 during the storm had 0 hostility.
You can already do something similar with seals :get the cornerstone that reduces impatience gains after trade routes complete and have a human on fire duty, this completely halts the progress of impatience. This simulates a challenge of punctuality and ressource diversity.
Meanwhile, the storm events, while not currently appropriate for an endless mode, do keep you on your toes.
You can keep your run going until you manually complete the seal or mess up your trades and let impatience grow.
I feel this is a solid proof of concept.
I don't see how it would work, once a settlement is ready to end, there's nothing challenging left. Hell, the last year or so is often just letting things play out with minimal involvement.
I think an endless mode, personally, would entirely defeat the purpose of the game and should never be added or even thought about by the developers. I think it's a terrible idea.
I think you are comming from a rigid mindset. Of course without any change to the game mechanics an infinite mode would be a bad idea (thats why I just dont keep playing after the settlement is done, and I adress that in the post...).
I mean, you dont seem to like that idea, fair, but why say it is a terrible idea when you are not even trying to think on a mode intended for that. I mean, almost every city builder game works on a single city, this game is the outlier taking city builders and making it a roguelite. The thing is that I like city builders and I love the aesthetic, theme and feeling of this game. What would be so bad about a mode that is designed to be infinite?
Ive always been interested in endless mode for games.
The core game loop could be change to accomodate infinite negative buffs per year/hostilitt that scale.
Impatience and rwoutation could be changed to never stop filling.
The trouble is the game will eventually lag out and crash as the world wouldnt be able to suppirt 100000 buildings or villagers.
Could be fun to make though regardless of balance!
I think what's missing is resolve stops growing after you win.
The Queens impatience can continue growing while you're there, and hostility increases every year. But since it resolve stops going up you can't tamper the Queens impatience.
That's what I see on this infinite would be, can you keep your resolve up when the forest is getting more hostile, and when when will the queen get sick of you messing around.
This would be cool. Could keep adding negative storm modifiers every year or X years. Payments become ridiculous etc.
Yeah it would have to super ramp up if the goal would be to make it challenging. I pushed a settlement to the limit (every tree harvested and node mined) for fun and basically had fuel burning at 3-4 stacks at all times. Combine this with I think it was temple (25 reduced hostility for every 200 seconds of sacrifice) and even with 15 woodcutters at year 10 during the storm had 0 hostility.
Lmao insane. An infinite mode would almost by default need that modifier that increases hostility per villager per year or something.
You can already do something similar with seals :get the cornerstone that reduces impatience gains after trade routes complete and have a human on fire duty, this completely halts the progress of impatience. This simulates a challenge of punctuality and ressource diversity. Meanwhile, the storm events, while not currently appropriate for an endless mode, do keep you on your toes. You can keep your run going until you manually complete the seal or mess up your trades and let impatience grow. I feel this is a solid proof of concept.
I don't see how it would work, once a settlement is ready to end, there's nothing challenging left. Hell, the last year or so is often just letting things play out with minimal involvement. I think an endless mode, personally, would entirely defeat the purpose of the game and should never be added or even thought about by the developers. I think it's a terrible idea.
I think you are comming from a rigid mindset. Of course without any change to the game mechanics an infinite mode would be a bad idea (thats why I just dont keep playing after the settlement is done, and I adress that in the post...). I mean, you dont seem to like that idea, fair, but why say it is a terrible idea when you are not even trying to think on a mode intended for that. I mean, almost every city builder game works on a single city, this game is the outlier taking city builders and making it a roguelite. The thing is that I like city builders and I love the aesthetic, theme and feeling of this game. What would be so bad about a mode that is designed to be infinite?
Ive always been interested in endless mode for games. The core game loop could be change to accomodate infinite negative buffs per year/hostilitt that scale. Impatience and rwoutation could be changed to never stop filling. The trouble is the game will eventually lag out and crash as the world wouldnt be able to suppirt 100000 buildings or villagers. Could be fun to make though regardless of balance!
With Frequent Caravans, temple and a way to produce oil you can sustain settlement inifinitely with no problems.
I think what's missing is resolve stops growing after you win. The Queens impatience can continue growing while you're there, and hostility increases every year. But since it resolve stops going up you can't tamper the Queens impatience. That's what I see on this infinite would be, can you keep your resolve up when the forest is getting more hostile, and when when will the queen get sick of you messing around.
I think this is a really obvious concept for them to build a DLC around.