安装 Steam
登录
|
语言
繁體中文(繁体中文)
日本語(日语)
한국어(韩语)
ไทย(泰语)
български(保加利亚语)
Čeština(捷克语)
Dansk(丹麦语)
Deutsch(德语)
English(英语)
Español-España(西班牙语 - 西班牙)
Español - Latinoamérica(西班牙语 - 拉丁美洲)
Ελληνικά(希腊语)
Français(法语)
Italiano(意大利语)
Bahasa Indonesia(印度尼西亚语)
Magyar(匈牙利语)
Nederlands(荷兰语)
Norsk(挪威语)
Polski(波兰语)
Português(葡萄牙语 - 葡萄牙)
Português-Brasil(葡萄牙语 - 巴西)
Română(罗马尼亚语)
Русский(俄语)
Suomi(芬兰语)
Svenska(瑞典语)
Türkçe(土耳其语)
Tiếng Việt(越南语)
Українська(乌克兰语)
报告翻译问题






Wanna say sorry for wasting your time earlier.
Though I WISH there was more I could do, unless I'm missing it, I don't see an error on my end, and I'm not sure how to replicate it. Will come back with a log if I realized I missed something. Clearly I need to double check.
Now I'm not sure if its a new incompatibility with Better Intimacy, but that's the only thing that has a chance to do weird crap as it disables the hook up system.
Well, if it were me (and it's not, I certainly appreciate the work you and other modders put in), I'd first lean into making it so that the initial romance is unlikely to happen. But when and if it does, then it would assign a secret penalty to the pairing that can be anywhere from 0 to relevant_config_value and that affects all their romance-based/sex-based interactions.
The penalty would only be generated at the start of the relationship, because if you keep on generating it over time with bad odds, eventually the relationship is going to fall apart. That way you end up with some relationships where "love wins" while others are more fraught.
It is, unsurprisingly, very difficult to emulate the complexity of human relationships with math and code.
Yeah, I'm getting up there in years. Time slips away like that.
> There will be no wrong gender romances. Instead there will be a setting to allow people to have separate romantic and sexual orientations. So people can choose whether they want simple or complex relationship rules.
So does that mean we can effectively have the way the mod works now by setting everyone's romantic orientation to bisexual but having their sexual orientation still be varied? Or will they refuse to have sex?
I was responding to you responding to my comment about romance attempts. Not marriage proposals.
"There will be no wrong gender romances. Instead there will be a setting to allow people to have separate romantic and sexual orientations. So people can choose whether they want simple or complex relationship rules."
Looked into it. Apparently it's been on life support since 1.1 and is quite buggy these days. Unfortunate. Thanks for the recommendation anyway though, it'd be perfect if it was still maintained.
Well, apparently there was a big hullabaloo about the way relationships worked in late 2018 so things probably got changed around.
> What you are describing is how this mod currently works.
Well, no, like you said before, contra-orientation marriage won't happen even on rare cases despite contra-orientation romance being able to.
> I've already told you what the intended changes are.
I'm failing to grasp which changes you're referring to when you mention nuance.
Well, you are in the minority with that opinion. Most people I hear from want it gone. Perhaps you should try Psychology instead, it uses the Kinsey scale.
I'm very familiar with vanilla's romance code, and I can assure, it does not happen. Adding it was one of the features for this mod. What you are describing is how this mod currently works.
I've already told you what the intended changes are. I've been working on this update for years at this point, and I'm not looking for suggestions about the underlying systems.
Maybe it's just me, but only one outcome being possible doesn't do much for me in the drama department. I'd rather success be possible if rare.
> Orientation has to mean something, or else why have it in the first place?
Orientation, in my opinion, should be about defining the pawn's *preference*, it doesn't have to be black and white. That's why I was asking about things like adjusting the contra-orientation penalty. I don't want to set it to 0.
> vanilla does not allow romance attempts if either party is the wrong gender for the other's orientation
My understanding is that it does happen in vanilla but you can't initiate it manually and it's statistically quite rare and there needs to be factors like high pawn beauty, etc... But that could've changed or could've been a bug, who knows.
> I've come up with a better way to achieve the nuance I wanted when I added it in the first place.
What did you have in mind?
I think that one person proposing and their partner declining because they don't view themselves that way is interesting. It creates a sense of drama and could lead to them breaking up. Orientation has to mean something, or else why have it in the first place?
Marriage outside orientation is not possible in vanilla, because you have to be lovers first, and vanilla does not allow romance attempts if either party is the wrong gender for the other's orientation.
But none of this matters, because as I've already said, it's going away. Wrong gender pairings have been a constant cause of user complaints and I've come up with a better way to achieve the nuance I wanted when I added it in the first place.
...How is knowing what the outcome will be an interesting story? Love never wins? Even in vanilla, it's possible for a contra-orientation marriage to happen. I'm honestly a bit baffled by the thought process here.
@Tyrant I'm gonna be honest, I don't always remember the reasons behind a decision, but this was one I made at the beginning when deciding the direction I wanted to take this mod. I do know that I wanted to increase the chances of having 'bad' outcomes. Asking someone out and getting turned down is a more interesting story than never asking in the first place.
Pawns will never accept a marriage proposal outside their orientation. Again, this is to create interesting stories.
[Ref 764123F4]
at BetterRomance.SettingsUtilities.GetRelationSettings (Verse.Pawn pawn) [0x0002c] in D:\Program Files (x86)\Steam\steamapps\common\RimWorld\Mods\WayBetterRomance\Source\SettingsUtilities.cs:300
at BetterRomance.SettingsUtilities.MinAgeToHaveChildren (Verse.Pawn pawn, Verse.Gender gender) [0x00013] in D:\Program Files (x86)\Steam\steamapps\common\RimWorld\Mods\WayBetterRomance\Source\SettingsUtilities.cs:361
at RimWorld.Recipe_ImplantIUD.AvailableOnNow (Verse.Thing thing, Verse.BodyPartRecord part) [0x00041] in <24d25868955f4df08b02c73b55f389fe>:0
- TRANSPILER rimworld.divineDerivative.romance: IEnumerable`1 BetterRomance.HarmonyPatches.Recipe_ImplantIUD_AvailableOnNow:Transpiler(IEnumerable`1 instructions)
May I ask why?
The default orientation chances are inherited from the original mod in a long chain of updates. The only decision I made in that regard was not to change them. I'm not interested in arguing with everyone and their mother about what makes sense to them. It's adjustable for a reason.
The relationship status of the other person is never taken into account when considering a potential action. This was a core design decision and is consistent throughout the mod.
▪ Instead of "'wrong' gender romances", maybe "contra-orientation"?
▪ Any ETA on the rework?
▪ Will we be able to adjust penalties for contra-orientation romance?
▪ The defaults for non-straight commonalities strains credulity in my opinion. A PRRI 2024 Generational Change Report clocks Gen Z at 15% bi, 5% gay, 8% other.
▫ Given your reasons for the high defaults, maybe you'd consider roughly double that, like 30% bi, 10% gay, 10% asexual? It'd make whether a pawn is straight or not 50/50.
▪ Pawns that are single are too desperate, they keep hitting on pawns in closed relationships, even against their preferences. Any plans to adjust or let us configure this?
▫ I know about adjusting the base rate, I just feel there should be separate settings for hitting up "fully taken" pawns.
@destiny akino If I were to implement such a thing, it would not be as simple as replacing a trait. I'd want it to be more nuanced, like Edges of Acceptance . So, maybe someday, but no plans right now.
Aside from those two that this mod adds, I'm only using only vanilla traits, and they're calculated at 0.1% chance. That's six times more rare than misogynist on female pawns and misandrist on male pawns.
To my tastes, "almost nonexistent" isn't a good spot for traits that can generate on baseline pawns. I would either increase the commonality rates considerably (perhaps making Philanderer a bit more common for male and Faithful a bit more common for female), or I'd set the commonality to 0 to disable them outright.
I could just make a personal patch, of course, but handling them in the same place as every other thing I'd want to tweak for this mod (i.e. in its mod options GUI) would be ideal.
I'd suggest to the author to make the default spread 30% bisexual, 10% gay, 10% asexual. But I'm not entrenched into the idea or anything.
I currently use "We Are United" mod for this functionality. Not sure if you'd heard of it, but worth checking out if you haven't!
On a separate note: RotR's latest update seems to have broken your compatibility patch:
[WayBetterRomance] Error encountered while patching Romance on the Rim: System.InvalidProgramException: Invalid IL code in (wrapper dynamic-method) MonoMod.Utils.DynamicMethodDefinition:RomanceOnTheRim.QuestNode_Root_Crush.GetSinglePawns_Patch1 ()
Full Log: https://gist.github.com/HugsLibRecordKeeper/8349490a00ec339f3c94ad303333772d
Is the sexuality trait assigned at birth (probably the easiest solution), or at a specific age milestone (perhaps more realistic, but more cumbersome I would imagine), or is one just not assigned to them at all unless it pops up in the milestone choices (probably the worst solution)?
In the core game, sexuality traits can be generated in the initial pawn generation pass. In that scenario, it takes up one of the three slots. It's a very irritating and very hardcoded issue.
Ideally, they should only be added in the second pass.
Looking at the code, it doesn't seem like there's a fix for it... Maybe it's the Harmony patch for TraitSet_GainTrait?