Stabilizing Temporal Stability

[Eric Schott]

Have you ever found the perfect place to settle on a great outlook will a beautiful view, close to resources and filled with wonder? But then you realized that it's temporally unstable?

I like the stability mechanic overall but don't think it should be a factor that completely rules out a location as a potential base.

My proposed solution would be to have local temporal stability be influenced by player-placed blocks. More unnatural blocks around the player should decrease the amount of instability experience by them - perhaps having more advanced blocks like furniture and processed items be more influential than simple blocks like cob. This would still allow temporal stability to be a factor in choosing a base location as it will have impacts on the player while the base is being established. But long term, the player can overcome this downside and turn any location into a stable zone by their continued work and presence there.

 

For the details of this implementation, I don't think there's a system that exists that allows detection of player-placed blocks in an area. A simple version of this system may be able to be created by using map data, looking at how many blocks viewed from the sky are natural (rocks, grass, etc.) And which are unnatural (cob, thatch, farmland, fences, etc.). This would avoid a potentially computationally expensive "block aura" system that would need to be run for each unnatural block in a location. Someone with a better understanding of the information already available in the engine may have a more effective suggestion on how this could be done more effectively.

I suspect that temporal stability is a fixed attribute of world locations based on some depth data, proximity to entities such as rifts, and some randomness spread around. I don't suggest modifying the actual stability map of the world with this change, but rather tap into the local modifier that is already used to decrease temporal stability around rifts and whatnot. The presence of a lot of "homey" blocks could create an inverse rift effect that would increase the local stability.

I also think it would be fine if this effect was capped at neutral so the player could only prevent the gear from turning counter clockwise using this system. This would prevent the player from creating zones where they can completely recover their blue bar in a short time. Rather the system could only be used to create a safe haven where stability will not drain so long-term accomodations can be made without being forced out due to instability. This would also maintain the draw of temporally stable locations (which turn the gear clockwise) as desirable base locations as this would be something the player could not cultivate on their own.

 

tl;dr: Being near player-placed blocks should decrease how quickly the player loses temporal stability so any place can become a base.

Edited June 14 by Eric Schott

[PhotriusPyrelus]

I have never had this problem, but if it is a problem, this seems like a reasonable solution.

[Maelstrom]

In my experience almost all unstable surface areas are not that big a problem.  It only adds another layer of resource management to all the other resources to be managed, in this case hunger, inventory, time and now location.  Admittedly, most will find this added amount of management tedious or otherwise unfun but being the weird left field non-conformist I is; I actually like this added challenge occasionally.

[Thorfinn]

I've only run into it once. Ever since, stability is just another factor in whether someplace is an ideal place to set up shop. When I remember, anyway. I don't spend all that much time there anyway.

I think it depends on what one thinks stability is. If it's a measure of how "close" the Rust World "plane" is to the seraph's world's "plane" at that point in the multiverse, I'm not sure why a new sofa should affect that. If it's more of a psychological thing, it makes sense. Pulling up a chair in a scenic location should help recover your "stability".

But from what I know of the lore, I am leaning much more toward thinking it's the former.