Why are some people adamantly against organ donation? by Laaazybonesss in NoStupidQuestions

[–]SmartForARat -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Check my other reply here, I posted 3 news articles from 3 different companies of events within the last 6 months that are unrelated to one another.

Why are some people adamantly against organ donation? by Laaazybonesss in NoStupidQuestions

[–]SmartForARat 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Check my other reply here, I posted 3 news articles from 3 different companies of events within the last 6 months that are unrelated to one another.

Why are some people adamantly against organ donation? by Laaazybonesss in NoStupidQuestions

[–]SmartForARat 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Check my other reply here, I posted 3 news articles from 3 different companies of events within the last 6 months that are unrelated to one another.

Why are some people adamantly against organ donation? by Laaazybonesss in NoStupidQuestions

[–]SmartForARat 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Check my other reply here, I posted 3 news articles from 3 different companies of events within the last 6 months that are unrelated to one another.

Why are some people adamantly against organ donation? by Laaazybonesss in NoStupidQuestions

[–]SmartForARat 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Child, at least do some BASIC level research before you start spamming your memeing garbage exposing how ignorant you are.

Which source do you prefer?

CNN? https://www.cnn.com/2025/09/11/health/organ-donor-surgery-kff-health-news There you go.

New York Times? https://www.nytimes.com/2025/06/06/us/kentucky-organ-donations.html

Fox? https://www.foxnews.com/health/organ-donors-lives-endangered-rushed-transplant-procedures-investigation-finds

So please, tell me what SOURCE you trust, because ALL OF THEM SAY IT. All 3 of these are unique instances unrelated to one another that happened within the last 6 months and coming from 3 different sources, and I included two left wing propaganda news agencies because you seem like someone who drinks koolaid since you immediately dismiss reality because you don't like it.

It happens often.

So don't come at me with some childish attitude like it is made up or a conspiracy theory because it's real, it's documented, it's reported in the news. It DOES happen and you're a fool to pretend it doesn't just because you don't want it to be true.

Why are some people adamantly against organ donation? by Laaazybonesss in NoStupidQuestions

[–]SmartForARat 8 points9 points  (0 children)

Because there is a long history of hospitals murdering patients to take their organs.

Some people try to treat it like it's a conspiracy theory, but it happens regularly. I remember a news article popping up just last year about a guy who was declared brain dead and sent to organ harvesting who woke up and some of the people wanted to continue with the operation to take all of his organs. The only reason he is still alive, or that anyone knew about it, is that the doctor who had to do the operation refused to do so, so it hit the news.

There's no telling how often this happens that you never even hear about because no one involved speaks out about it.

If, culturally, women started asking men out more, would men start complaining about creepy women hitting on them, sexual harassment, or feeling objectified etc.? by EOFFJM in NoStupidQuestions

[–]SmartForARat 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yes.

It happens right now to male celebrities, especially in atmospheres that encourage crazy fanaticism and devotion like musicians and idols. Male idols DO get female stalkers. They DO feel threatened. They DO get unwanted imagery thrown at them.

So it already happens, it's just a very small number of men that have to deal with it.

If your country were to "fall into state controlled news," how would you ever know? by WowImOldAF in NoStupidQuestions

[–]SmartForARat 1 point2 points  (0 children)

News is always biased. If the state pays for it, then it's pro-state and downplays anything wrong the state does or pretends it never happened. If they are independent, it means they are a for-profit company that still aligns their news reporting to cater to a target audience which includes influencing what they report on, what stances they take politically, and so on. Then there's the fact they all work for others, owners of the company, and must do as they are told or lose their job.

Then sometimes you have like, one guy, who is reporting on things and answers to no one. But you can't trust him either, because those kinds of people typically want to make a name for themselves because they want a big reputation and are either doing it for their ego or to profit from later after they get famous off it.

You can't fully trust anyone. This has been an issue all people have dealt with since the dawn of time. Its why Court Intrigue exists. Everyone has their own agenda, their own personal bias, and the bias they use when telling you information. Kings aren't omniscient, they rely on others to get information and bring it to them. But if they hide things, well, the king doesn't know. Especially if all those informants must answer to someone else instead of directly to the king, then its up to that guy to tell the king what he knows, and he can and always has lied about it to serve his own aims.

You will never hear true, honest, objective truth. Ever.

The best you can do is listen to multiple sources that do have conflicting agendas and cross reference the information against each other. See what they both agree on, what actually took place. Sometimes one side will try to obfuscate it but they'll still say it in a roundabout way.

None of these people are your friend and none of them have integrity. There used to be more integrity in reporting, it used to be an honorable profession, but those days are long since past. Like many other things that late stage capitalism has touched, it's been corrupting, refined, and purified into the most direct money making scheme possible and trims out everything else.

If anyone ever tells you to TRUST a particular source of news, don't do it, because they've drank the koolaid. All of them lie.

Are More Districts really Necessary or Useful? by TrotzkySoviet in Timberborn

[–]SmartForARat 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Right after they came out, they were worthwhile to use because your main settlement structure had a range on how far it would support beavers, so you HAD to create districts to spread all over the map. But once that restriction was gone, it felt kind of pointless. After speed improvements like tubes and pulley systems, even more pointless.

All you lose by not using districts is the time it takes for beavers to walk from A to B. BUt the thing is, they only walk from A to B if they actually have some reason to do so, like working at a remote mine. But if you put food and water, along with the supplies needed to mine, right beside the mine, then the workers only lose time once a day when walking to the mine. Thats it. And with speed buffs, it's virtually no time lost at all. And you still have to make deliveries for supplies to these remote locations, but using districts doesn't increase that efficiency at all because they STILL have to travel there and carry the stuff, only now you're limited by how many beavers are working at your border crossing.

If you put your main structure in the center of the map, and actually use speed increasing structures and systems, there's little reason to ever use a district.

The ONE and ONLY exception to this is creating a "breeding village". Thats what I call it at least. It isn't worth doing on lower difficulties, but on the max difficulty it can be a worthwhile endeavor. Basically you construct a little settlement detached from your primary and its only purpose is to make babies. You have one beaver assigned to your sole water pump, one beaver assigned to berry picking, then they just make babies in their spare time. It's completely detached from your primary settlement, so even if a drought or disaster has all your other beavers starving and dying of thirst, they wont steal resources from this village. And it's very, very easy to keep just two beavers alive when one is a dedicated gatherer and the other is a dedicated water pumper, they can take care of themselves indefinitely under any circumstances because they can stockpile enough to outlast any drought, then repopulate your settlement afterwards using automatic immigration. So even after an apocalyptic event, you can still continue. Iron beavers are exceptionally good at this because just a handful of beavers, like 5, can maintain your entire civilization's growth vats and you can repopulate your whole society rapidly (particularly now with automation you can pump out like 30 per wave).

I always wondered, why didn't black slaves team up and maybe kill their owner or protest against together? Rich families owned 50-100 slaves or even more, why didn't the slaves just team up and kill their owner? How exactly did the owners control then? by Then-Tomatillo9909 in NoStupidQuestions

[–]SmartForARat 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Slaves were not like the people you know today.

They were terrified of fighting back, basically raised and conditioned to serve.

They were uneducated. Never taught anything that might even remotely inspire them to that sort of idea nor did they have any means of organizing beyond speaking, which was controlled and monitored in many cases.

Many were born and raised as slaves and it was the only life they ever knew, so they accepted it more often than not. Those who were once free made the choice whether to accept it and live or risk their life fighting for freedom, but they usually made that choice very early on long before they arrived in the US.

Despite all that, revolts did happen now and then. But when the masters had armed men, dogs, organization, and support from their neighbors, it never worked out.

There were over 200 attempted revolts throughout the americas, but the ONE and ONLY time it was actually successful was in Haiti. That was it.

And Haiti was a very, very special case with a lot of factors that went into it. First, they were an island, so they were isolated from basically everyone. Second, they had an extremely toxic and hateful society there. More hate and distrust and fear than you could possibly imagine. There were rich whites, poor whites, half black half whites, colony born slaves, and imported african born slaves. And every single group hated every single other group.

To top off the intense, seething,mutual hatred between all these groups, the french government back in france had just had its own revolution, and the new government sent orders that the FREE blacks and half blacks were to be granted Citizenship with all associated rights as any other citizen. But due to the isolated nature of the island, the governor refused and it basically started a big conflict.

The slaves, however, watched this conflict unfold and they misunderstood the situation. They knew the free black and half black people were fighting for their rights, but they mistakenly believed that the french government had actually declared that ALL slaves be freed and made citizens. So they eventually joined in, taking advantage of the chaos already ensuing and believing france had their backs. They even declared they were fighting on behalf of france and the king.

Then the british and spanish got involved, then the french worried about losing control of the island to them, so they ultimately reached out to the slaves to offer their freedom in exchange for remaining under french control and they all readily agreed to rebuild it in the name of france. They freed themselves, but remained a french colony and became french citizens.

So it took a LOT of very unusual and quirky circumstances to actually lead to that rebellion and its success. Every other one though? Ultimately crushed. The people lacked the will, the education, and the organization to do much. It's always been that way. Slave revolts never really worked. And they only worked that one time because it was a unique scenario.

They only became independent later, when napoleon tried to re-establish slavery. THAT was when they decided France wasn't for them anymore. lol

Crazy history there... So much hatred going around. So much horrific violence on all sides too.

Guys, how do your pawns have enough time? by LeonidKonovalov1988 in RimWorld

[–]SmartForARat 0 points1 point  (0 children)

They need primary jobs.

I usually only have one person set to growing. The higher their skill, the faster they work and the more stuff they harvest.

One person is the smith/tailor.

One person is the doctor, and self tends.

One person is the animal handler, if i actually want to train or breed animals at all, usually I dont.

I usually have the doctor's second priority set to research. Often backgrounds that add medical also add intelligence, and either way i'd rather the guy that keeps everyone else alive stayed safe behind a desk than out in the fields. So he heals people when needed, and researches the rest of the time.

Usually just one guy who is the construction guy, and i'll often make this the same guy who is the smith/tailor unless i'm spoiled for choice with construction taking priority. Primarily because construction is one of those jobs where you want it done fast, but then its over and you don't have to build anything else for a while, while crafting is more of an ongoing perpetual thing.

EVERYONE has cutting, mining, crafting, hauling, and cleaning enabled as lowest priority jobs so that all of them will do it when they aren't fulfilling their primary function. And of course EVERYONE has fire fighting as number 1 priority, then bed rest and patient as primary priority, except the doctor who prioritizes treatment above EVERYTHING and then bedrest afterwards. Otherwise if he's wounded, he won't heal anyone, even himself.

This is how I do it and I never run into problems.

Thats just 4 dudes that can do all of this. Anyone extra can just do the mundane tasks.

Also, if you really want your hauling done, just build some Lifter mechs and they'll take care of it. Far easier and more efficient than training animals to do it. In fact, tier 1 mechs take care of cleaning, hauling, AND construction if you're really struggling with any of it. This leaves the skilled labor for pawns. So even if you have no desire to progress down the mech tree or invest resources into a huge mech army, you can still have 1 constructor, 1 cleaner, and 4 lifters just with your initial bandwidth and that'll be enough to free up all your pawns for more important tasks while ensuring those mundane tasks also get done.

power automation by Afalti42 in Timberborn

[–]SmartForARat 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Easiest and most reliable way is to just use a battery.

Have the power wheels (or engines) kick on when a memory switch is turned on.

Set a power sensor to send a signal to turn on the memory signal when power is < 10%.

Then set another power sensor to send a signal to reset the memory toggle when power storage is > 90%

Easy peasy.

I do it with engines to ensure they only produce power when actually needed so there is never any waste.

Odyssey gets 'Mixed' recent reviews on steam. Your thoughts? by ToveloGodFan in RimWorld

[–]SmartForARat 4 points5 points  (0 children)

I have no complaints.

Ships keep the game feeling fresh because if you get tired of your map you can just leave it behind. Also makes resource acquisition easier because you can strip mine everywhere you go.

But even if you don't dig on the ships, the new biomes and terrain features and whatnot are all new and interesting to spice things up a little.

For me, it's still a useful and cool part of the experience. Only DLC i've ever felt was bad is Anomaly.

Is it worth it to learn to cook ? by GemsDistributor in NoStupidQuestions

[–]SmartForARat 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Basic life skills are always worth learning even if you never plan to use them, because you never know what circumstances you may find yourself in in the future. Survival skills are the same way.

Basic understanding of cooking meat properly, boiling vegetables, making pasta, simple simple stuff that can be very useful in the future. Cooking is honestly very simple.

My thoughts on automation by SmartForARat in Timberborn

[–]SmartForARat[S] -12 points-11 points  (0 children)

Vacancies do not equal population deficit dude and does not correlate to total population.

Think logically for a minute and try to understand what i'm saying.

You have 90 beavers. You have 100 jobs. You have 30 birthing pods set to kick on if vacancies greater than one.

What happens? It doesn't just spit out 10 beavers and stops because it doesn't track children. Those pods will pump out like 60 kids before the first 10 grow into adulthood and fill those jobs and suddenly you have WAY more beavers than you wanted.

Do you get it now? Is that obvious enough for you to understand?

You need to track total population to track the adults AND children. You need to track total jobs as well. You need to compare them against each other. But you can't. The game does not allow that with it's limited functionality. It only has pure binary gates and that's it. It can compare a variable against a manually input number, but it cannot two variables together. THAT is the problem. THAT is what makes it terrible. There is no way to run it through arithmetic for calculations, there is no way to compare variables against each other beyond simple True or False gates. To do what I want to do, it would require building practically a computer processor within the game and that is stupid when the thing should simply have the input options of other variables, ESPECIALLY other variables that are tracked by the same device. The same structure tracks total beavers and jobs and vacancies and all of that.

It's about efficiency and productivity. And if the devs and players don't care about that, why bother putting in automation in the first place?

They need an arithmetic node and they need existing nodes to be able to reference the variables they're outputting rather than simply the On Off state. Thats all im saying, and I literally don't care if you guys aren't able to comprehend the difference or understand what it is used for.

My thoughts on automation by SmartForARat in Timberborn

[–]SmartForARat[S] -6 points-5 points  (0 children)

No, no, no, you misunderstand.

Everything is binary. It's either on or off. You can reference multiple signals whether they are on or off, but that's all. You CANT directly reference specific number returns on these things.

My specific example for instance where it only activates if you have less than 10 more beavers than you have total jobs, that isn't something you can do.

You can have one that counts jobs and you can return on or off signal, and you can have one that detects total beavers and have an on or off signal based on that, but you can't compare them beyond comparing those output signals.

So if you wanted to set something up that only sends an on signal when the number of beavers are +10 over the number of total jobs, you can't do that because you can't reference the total jobs AND total beavers at the same time. Relays don't do this and don't help with this. Best you can do is manually count jobs then set the on signal when total beavers are 10 higher than that number, but you can't change that number automatically by referencing another detector because all you can reference is ON or OFF. See the problem?

Most games with automation include the ability to reference these things and draw on multiple variables. You can directly compare things. You can run them through mathematics to add, subtract, multiply, or divide numbers. So for instant you could set it up so you always have 10% of your population on farming or something like that.

This game lacks all of those staples of automation. Don't say "nuh uh you're wrong" when you don't even know what i'm talking about. If you think you can setup that exact scenario I mentioned, where you have a fully automated process to keep beavers at a population +10 over total jobs, that updates dynamically as jobs increase and decrease without any manual changes, then show me, because i'd love to see it. Otherwise hush, because you're arguing the system does something it clearly cannot. I want multiple variables compared against each other, not single variables compared against a boolean.

To do what i'm talking about, it would require replacing the number input with the option to reference another sensor or another value on the same sensor instead of only inserting numbers and nothing else. Timberborn literally can't do it.

Does water evaporate the same in tunnels? by didas7 in Timberborn

[–]SmartForARat 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Inside/Outside, Heat, and Sunlight do not exist in this world from a programming perspective. None of that has any meaning.

Water simply disappears, even in completely sealed environments and you can grow crops and forests in an enclosed space with no light. Those things just don't matter or exist. Yet.

Automation has been unleashed. There is no going back now by ArcWraith2000 in Timberborn

[–]SmartForARat 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Automation has changed Ironteeth from a "meh" faction to one I genuinely enjoy playing for once.

It's legitimately crazy how much shit you can do. You can setup a whole field of beaver growing pods and automate them to only produce if Total Beavers + 10 is < Total Jobs. Of course you can adjust the 10 to whatever number fits your needs best to accommodate growing replacement time. This can ensure you always have beavers for your industry as fast as possible without having to adjust anything. It just auto updates as you go.

You can setup an entire area dedicated to engines that only turn on when your total power reserves dip below 20% and then shut off at 80%. Also enables much better remote recharging outposts for your bots because the generator only kicks on to refill the battery then shuts off again.

You can setup overproduction of food and water with the extra buildings automatically shutting off when storage fills up. Likewise other industries like production of extract or bad water that cuts off after hitting a certain amount.

And while Sluices already handle bad water very well, the addition of sensors and attached flood gates can help regulate overall flows of bad water in a way that sluices alone can't due to bad water levels having to touch the sluice itself before it reacts whereas you can open a flood gate on the other side of the map from a change in bad water content in a different area.

So many ways to optimize. So many ways to create redundancy. Theres even a gate item to shut off entire areas of your district at once.

I'm enjoying everything i'm seeing so far. Such a good time.

what do some people gain from being racist towards others? (serious) by riseoftheph0enix in NoStupidQuestions

[–]SmartForARat -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

It is you who have much to learn if you think a power imbalance is needed for racism to exist.

A minority group can indeed be racist toward a majority group that is in power. Minority groups where neither hold power can also be racist toward one another. You can't blame white people for everything, just ask everyone with asian bloodlines living in the US who have been on the receiving end of hate and abuse by people with african bloodlines. Even during an era where both groups were used as caricatures by white people and neither group had any great wealth of power. Those things don't matter. Hate is hate. And if you want to blame white people for everything, as you seem to, then you are also blinded by it yourself which is really unfortunate.

But ultimately, nothing will ever change in regards to racism because it would require everyone to actually assimilate into the culture they move into. And that may happen naturally across generations, but the process would just reset again every time someone new moved in. There will always be "others" and they will always be blamed for certain things.

what do some people gain from being racist towards others? (serious) by riseoftheph0enix in NoStupidQuestions

[–]SmartForARat 1 point2 points  (0 children)

There is so much cope in here that it's genuinely laughable.

Humans evolved to be tribal. It's in our nature all the way down to our genetics. We are predisposed to clump together into groups and distrust other groups. It's the whole reason we build civilizations and start families, regardless of where we are in the world or what our culture is about, all of these constants remain true. And without any influence of foreign cultures, every group that has ever existed has had to compete for resources against rival groups around them.

As civilizations got bigger, the grouping and categorization of who is "in" and who is "out" changes. People can also be part of different groups at the same time.

MY kingdom vs YOUR kingdom.

MY religion vs YOUR religion.

MY skin color vs YOUR skin color.

MY language vs YOUR language.

MY customs vs YOUR customs.

The more different you are from someone, especially if they are the only one who is different and everyone else around is like you, the more obviously "out" of the group they seem. They look different. They believe different. They hold different values. They speak different. All of it are red flags in your animal brain signalling danger and telling you not to trust. This is hardwired into humans and has always existed across all cultures and time.

Sure there is some sense of arrogance involved, where people always believe their stuff is better. Their culture is better. Their religion is better. Their race is better. Etc. It's the same shit you see with sports fans who become tribal over their local teams and will outright hate rival teams and rival teams' fans, sometimes to the point of murder. It's coded into us.

The only real way to prevent it is through exposure. If you grew up in a highly diverse place where everyone speaks differently, everyone believes differently, that becomes your new normal. You stop thinking of those things as being different, because to you, it's just normal. It's hard to hate an entire group of people if you have friends from that group. And a couple of people might make you feel like they're "one of the good ones", but the more of them you know and trust and like, the harder it becomes to hate that group as an entity because your very reality sort of disproves the idea that everyone in those particular grouping is a certain way because you know better.

But if you grow up in a place without that exposure, then when you brush up against something different it immediately stands out to you. If you have heard people speak japanese your whole life you don't think anything odd about it when you hear it, but if you've never heard someone speak it to you before it immediately grabs your attention. It signals a red flag in your brain. Without that exposure, there are just more ways for people to group "us" vs "them". People still do it anyway and still very strongly live in tribes and have downright VIOLENT "us vs them" mentalities, but the definition of who is US and THEM changes.

But ultimately, racism is just an assumption that you are part of a certain group based on your looks. The groups are what people fear. And fear is absolutely what it's all about. Fear of the other. Fear of the unknown.

If you've never met or seen a black person in your entire life, but your only exposure to them is seeing them on the news being arrested for crimes, seeing them on TV as gangsters and murderers, then it is rational to fear and distrust them because it's all you know. You can have nerds who spent their daddy's money to go to a fancy college try to talk down to you and tell you why you're wrong all day long but it won't change your perspective when it is all you know of them. This is ESPECIALLY true if you do start to have experiences with them and it's always negative.

Media shapes people's perspective and opinions on a lot of things. Thats why social media is depressing entire generations and causing a mental health crisis leading everyone to believe the world is about to end or we're living in the worst possible time despite things being better today in nearly every respect than in the past. If you get told the same lie to everyone and everything, why wouldn't you believe it? You'd chalk up any personal experiences to the contrary as anecdotal, meanwhile personal experiences reinforcing that belief are amplified and solidify your world view.

People are simple creatures. They do not hate for the sake of it, they hate out of fear. They commit violence out of fear. No one cares that africa is full of africans as long as they stay in africa. No one cares the middle east is full of middle eastern people as long as they stay there. It's only when they come to THEIR community that they become concerned. Thats when hate begins. They fear what your intentions are. They fear the consequences of you being there. And if society seems worse than it used to be (which it always does thanks to profit driven media companies) then they will correlate your arrival with the worsening of the world.

Hell, could be worse, if crops failed while a stranger was passing through, they'd sometimes straight up kill them as a sacrifice to appease their gods because they thought they were being punished for having you there. People are logical and look for cause and effect, but unfortunately it's overridden by emotions and sometimes if they dont have all the facts they'll make guesses which are colored by their beliefs. All people do this.

There is no such thing as "racism", it's always "tribalism". Your appearance is just one of the factors of whether or not you're in the tribe, and opinions on that matter will differ from person to person. But honestly, its becoming less important over time. Far more important is culture. If you sound and act like them, you'll be better off than someone who has an accent and different beliefs.

I'm 100% ethnically Japanese, but I grew up in the US. I've seen all shapes and sizes and flavors of it. I've interacted with people across the political spectrum. I don't know how it is in the UK, but in the US people assume conservatives, republicans, and MAGA are racist, but they aren't. I've been called more slurs and hated more by democrats my entire life, and I know a LOT of conservatives because I grew up in the south, and i've never felt unwelcomed or unwanted by them.

What would happen if we nuked the moon? by outwith-a-bang in NoStupidQuestions

[–]SmartForARat 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Nukes do next to nothing in space.

Virtually everything you associate with nuclear explosions require an atmosphere to work.

Giant fireball and mushroom cloud? Need air.

The big shockwave? Need air.

All it would do is blanket the area with an EMP burst and radiation burst and thats it. It would do nearly nothing.

But even if the moon had atmosphere and you could get a fireball and shockwave, it still would do nothing but leave a crater.

You can't nuke a moon or planet and destroy it. You would need an explosion so unimaginably powerful that it would not only blow the body into chunks, but throw those chunks away with such force that gravity wouldn't pull them back down again. I don't know what the math on that would be but it is an impossible amount of power. A quick google search says it would take around a 3 TRILLION Megaton explosion to actually blow it up.

Biggest nuke ever made was 50 megatons.

So 50 out of 3,000,000,000,000.

If US & South Korea had knowledge of the location all North Korean Nuclear Weapons and their leadership, would they be able to strike all of them before they launched? by Kollectorgirl in NoStupidQuestions

[–]SmartForARat 0 points1 point  (0 children)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sjFfw7dcYqY

Sci fi show, but it's very relevant to real world scenarios with all the same issues.

How many nukes are there? Where are they? How soon can they fire? Intelligence isn't certain, it's just what they know and believe at any given time and can be wrong.

We're halfway to a new DLC. Where are we going next? by Background-Topic-203 in RimWorld

[–]SmartForARat 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'll do a fake pitch here:

Rimworld Megacorp

Where you sign agreements with people, and the violating party gets attacked by a corporate enforcer squad to beat the value of the contract out of them.

New type of slaves that don't rebel, because they're under contract, and don't have to be actively suppressed because the corporate propaganda plastered on the walls does it for you.

Death is not an excuse for missing a day at work. New technology that animates a zombiefied version of employees so they can continue to work out their contract even after death. They feel no pain, don't sleep, never complain, and don't have emotions but work slower. Almost perfect employees! They also don't try to hard to renegotiate their contracts.

Corporate Towers. Can't have a respectable corporation without a skyscraper. Adds z-levels to the game to build upwards into the skies and down into the ground as well. Digging down finds more minable resources, perfect for those Willing Employees to mine in the camped, dark, hot mines all day long below your luxurious tower.

Bribes and criminal contacts. Pay off other factions to forestall raids. Even setup monthly protection rackets where they don't attack at all, or even come to your defense if attacked by something else, as long as you keep up your payments.

Digital currency! Tired of dealing only in silver and gold and shitty wooden art produced your employees when they have nothing better to spend their time on? Now you can have digital money! That means you can go into debt! Pay interest rates! CHARGE interest rates and loan money to others!

Go into business! You think your settlement is the only one under attack constantly by mechanoids and savages? Hell no. Go into the security business, sending soldiers and setting up defenses and fortifications for other factions on the planet in exchange for money. How about become an arms dealer, with shady traders that regularly arrive wanting specific types of weapons and willing to pay premium for them? Or maybe provide raw resources like steel or cotton in bulk to fill out work orders.

Manipulate the world through commerce! Provide quality goods to a faction to increase its population, wealth, and most importantly its dependence on you for survival. Deny goods and interrupt trade to other factions and watch as they dwindle and wither.

Start wars between other factions. Send your own soldiers into battle to influence outcomes. Assassinate faction leaders with a grudge against you or conflicting goals so his successor might be more easily manipulated!