Power Creep

[Professor Dragon]

On 9/7/2025 at 1:43 AM, Diff said:

. . .  stumbled on a cave, and accidentally extinguished my torch while exploring, leaving me unprepared in the dark surrounded by quartz I couldn't mine, trying to wall myself off from monsters in the dark, and chipping away at any quartzless stone I could feel around for, hoping to break into the ocean before I starved to death, before my last pick broke, and before a monster either wandered past my barricades or just spawned behind them with me with help from my exhausted temporal stability.

Oh, COME ON @Diff - now I want to know what happened! Did you make it out?  ? ? 

[Diff]

1 minute ago, Professor Dragon said:

Oh, COME ON @Diff - now I want to know what happened! Did you make it out?  ? ? 

 Lol it got bumped to the next page but just barely.

On 9/6/2025 at 2:02 PM, Diff said:

Ah I'm too stubborn for that, and it was early enough that I hadn't yet found a temporal gear to set my spawn point on that server. I eventually broke out of my grave and into the open ocean. Full on Rust World waiting for me outside, but I did drag myself home alive with my copper.

  

[Echo Weaver]

3 minutes ago, Diff said:

Something I've been wondering, how does rift activity factor into spawning for riftless rotbeasts? I see less of them when rift activity is lower in relatively shallow caves, but does that still apply deeper underground?

As far as I can tell, rift activity affects rotbeast spawning all the way down. They still spawn, but much fewer when it's calm. If I'm going caving at much depth, I do it when rift activity is calm. I think the temporal stability of an area also affects spawns, but I haven't hung around in low stability caves long enough to really get a sense of whether that's true.

[Krougal]

20 minutes ago, Echo Weaver said:

As far as I can tell, rift activity affects rotbeast spawning all the way down. They still spawn, but much fewer when it's calm. If I'm going caving at much depth, I do it when rift activity is calm. I think the temporal stability of an area also affects spawns, but I haven't hung around in low stability caves long enough to really get a sense of whether that's true.

Yes, rift activity absolutely affects underground spawning.

I don't think stability does, since stability deep underground is always low.

[CastIronFabric]

39 minutes ago, Echo Weaver said:

As I was brainstorming earlier in the thread, the kind of temporal anchor that sounds most exciting to me is one that I can carry with me to stabilize the area around me for deep mining and exploration.

 

That is exactly what Xskills does. In fact they have an option that focuses on exactly that within the temporal stability skill sets. Oh AND one does not have to wait even until mid game to get that skill

 

Edited September 11, 2025 by CastIronFabric

[Thorfinn]

15 minutes ago, CastIronFabric said:

That is exactly what Xskills does. In fact they have an option that focuses on exactly that within the temporal stability skill sets. Oh AND one does not have to wait even until mid game to get that skill

 

Well, there's your answer, then. You don't need to disable instability to get good building spots. You just need to install Xskills.

[CastIronFabric]

4 minutes ago, Thorfinn said:

Well, there's your answer, then. You don't need to disable instability to get good building spots. You just need to install Xskills.

I have a solution, thanks.

I was just chiming in on ideas of the folks here and pointing out that people do not build in areas with poor Temporal Stablity and a late game solution to that is not wise because its an early game problem.

please do not say 'but you do!' just dont.

[LadyWYT]

1 hour ago, CastIronFabric said:

I was just chiming in on ideas of the folks here and pointing out that people do not build in areas with poor Temporal Stablity

I would like to say they don't, but I've seen enough comments from players who've managed to do so...usually newer players who don't understand the mechanic yet, to be fair. Otherwise, I've seen several complaints from players who haven't built in unstable areas, but wished they could, since they enjoy playing with the mechanic but also like to have a way to build in prime spots that they find. Which is fair.

That's why I suggested some sort of tech gizmo to fix the instability--it offers a good goal to work towards in the late game, for many different applications. Not just building scenery.

@Diff I think for a temporal anchor(or whichever gizmo fixes the stability), I'd opt for something that can be picked up and transported. Most things in the game can be moved around, and it's very handy to have the ability to do so anyway in case of a misclick. Likewise, if a player is just using it to temporarily stabilize an area(such as a mining expedition or something), then they're going to want to move the device around. Even for more permanent installations, players might still want to move it once placed, due to a change in the planned architecture.

[Krougal]

Ok, in all fairness, I have to say there are surface areas where the stability does drain fast.

I just started a new world for 1.21.1 and a fairly large area around spawn was low enough to drain me to about half by the end of the day.

I kinda remember saying in the past that I suspect the spawn area is like that to encourage you to move on, as it does seem frequent to me that it is in the red.

For the record, no, I am not overly fond of the mechanic either. Still, the solution is fucking move your dumb ass out of the fucking area.

The world is big enough to find plenty of nice places to settle down.

 

[Echo Weaver]

I didn't know that XSkills had a temporal stability skill, but that's just a corner of a much larger mod I'm on the fence about. I may be more of a Vanilla+ player in general. 

28 minutes ago, LadyWYT said:

I've seen several complaints from players who haven't built in unstable areas, but wished they could, since they enjoy playing with the mechanic but also like to have a way to build in prime spots that they find. Which is fair.

Yeah, I've seen those too, and I sympathize. There's a big difference between wanting to get rid of temporal instability or just surface temporal instability and wanting to be able to build on THAT SPOT. 

Anyway, I think it's a brilliant idea for one or more jonas devices. Maybe we should summarize this thread in a post under Suggestions. I'm not sure how much the team reads it, but it seems to be more than a lot of dev teams read the forums. 

[CastIronFabric]

1 hour ago, LadyWYT said:

I would like to say they don't, but I've seen enough comments from players who've managed to do so...usually newer players who don't understand the mechanic yet, to be fair. Otherwise, I've seen several complaints from players who haven't built in unstable areas, but wished they could, since they enjoy playing with the mechanic but also like to have a way to build in prime spots that they find. Which is fair.

That's why I suggested some sort of tech gizmo to fix the instability--it offers a good goal to work towards in the late game, for many different applications. Not just building scenery.

@Diff I think for a temporal anchor(or whichever gizmo fixes the stability), I'd opt for something that can be picked up and transported. Most things in the game can be moved around, and it's very handy to have the ability to do so anyway in case of a misclick. Likewise, if a player is just using it to temporarily stabilize an area(such as a mining expedition or something), then they're going to want to move the device around. Even for more permanent installations, players might still want to move it once placed, due to a change in the planned architecture.

I have to say the important part again because I know I am correct.

If a person is looking to build a base (meaning windmills, forges, kitchens) in an area they are not going to build a base in an unstable area with the thought that by the time they get jonas parts that they could then have a stable area. Can you personally find A person who would do does? I am sure you can but the problem is what the suggested feature is trying to solve is not going to work because by the time you get jonas parts your base is going to be near completed with your base anyway and YES its not uncommon for a person to spend 100+ hours on their base before they ever even see a jonas part.

That is just not going to work.

Edited September 11, 2025 by CastIronFabric

[Echo Weaver]

Just now, CastIronFabric said:

I have to say the important part again because I know I am correct.

No, you don't need to say it again. We disagree with you. Try to get over it.

[CastIronFabric]

1 minute ago, Echo Weaver said:

No, you don't need to say it again. We disagree with you. Try to get over it.

The majority of people will want to find an area that is stable in early game, even if they can build in an unstable area in theory the vast majority of people will no do so. Furthermore, the vast majority of people WILL spend a TON of hours on their base long before they get a jonas part. As such they will read such a feature and say 'F that'

[Yerik]

On 9/9/2025 at 11:10 AM, Echo Weaver said:

carry around at least a stack of rope ladder

When exploring, always, always bring stacks of ladders!

[Krougal]

28 minutes ago, CastIronFabric said:

The majority of people will want to find an area that is stable in early game, even if they can build in an unstable area in theory the vast majority of people will no do so. Furthermore, the vast majority of people WILL spend a TON of hours on their base long before they get a jonas part. As such they will read such a feature and say 'F that'

Considering this isn't even what this thread was about until you hijacked it, why do you keep arguing?

You made your point, no one cares. This seems to be a constant with you. Were you dropped on your head repeatedly as a child?

[LadyWYT]

4 minutes ago, Krougal said:

Considering this isn't even what this thread was about

Well to try to steer the thread back on topic: when I think of power creep, I think of stuff you find in a lot of MMOs...World of Warcraft especially. Back in the olden days, the player was mostly a nobody, and went on the hero's journey battling low level threats like kobolds to facing off against major threats like Ragnaros or the Lich King. And then at some point there was a turn, where the threats got more and more epic until the player is the default "champion of the known multiverse" or whatever...at which point everything stops making believable sense. Aside from just the power creep in the lore and story though, there was also just the way the player was on the never-ending treadmill of replacing gear. The best stuff you could possibly obtain at the end of an expansion became somehow worse than the most basic gear of the new.

Going at power creep from a different angle...Skyrim had similar problems, but in a different fashion. Now don't get me wrong, Skyrim is a very fun action game, but you can do everything...literally everything...on one character. It destroys a lot of the worldbuilding, but it also puts a damper on a lot of replay value. If you're playing a mage character there's no reason not to use heavy armor and weapons too, same as if you're playing a warrior there's no drawbacks to learning magic either. Pretty much everything is the same, unless you deliberately go out of your way via mods or roleplaying to assign things value.

In any case, I don't think Vintage Story suffers from either of those problems, and I really hope it never does. The game has a pretty good balance of things right now, in my opinion, and if it became just another action game slog of always chasing the stronger enemy, it would lose most of what makes it special.

[Thorfinn]

5 hours ago, CastIronFabric said:

please do not say 'but you do!' just dont.

Oh, I won't. I just never notice unless  it's spinning like it does when you walk into a rift.

It always comes as a surprise when my stability is lower after doing some smithing than before.

[Thorfinn]

1 hour ago, LadyWYT said:

when I think of power creep, I think of stuff you find in a lot of MMOs...World of Warcraft especially.

I think of Terraria. Where the 2-point increase in power making flaming arrows is really significant, but your endgame sword can be reforged to, in some circumstances, 70k dps.

[LadyWYT]

1 hour ago, Thorfinn said:

I think of Terraria. Where the 2-point increase in power making flaming arrows is really significant, but your endgame sword can be reforged to, in some circumstances, 70k dps.

I can't say that I've ever played Terraria, but from what I understand it is rather ridiculous on just how much damage things can crank out.

[KoviBat]

3 hours ago, LadyWYT said:

In any case, I don't think Vintage Story suffers from either of those problems, and I really hope it never does. The game has a pretty good balance of things right now, in my opinion, and if it became just another action game slog of always chasing the stronger enemy, it would lose most of what makes it special.

For now, the player doesn't suffer from much power creep. For example, from a flint spear to a gold/silver spear, the damage only goes up by 2.3 points (3.5 for throwing). From a Copper Falx to a Steel Falx, only 1.5 points. From a Crude bow to a Recurve bow is a 1 point increase, and from a Crude to a Steel arrow, only 3.25. We experience very small amounts of growth in damage. Enemies have extreme power creep. Between each tier, their damage goes up, but their health goes up exponentially, the difference between each getting larger by two points each time. Damage, I'm fine with. But the health increase dramatically outweighs the rate our weapon damage increases, by about ten times. Difference between a Surface Drifter and a Double-Headed Drifter is 42. Difference between a Surface Shiver and a max tier Shiver is 46. Difference between least and most damage we can deal is 4.

What I'm worried about is that this enemy power creep sets a precedent for player power creep, which I'd prefer not happen. By tipping the balance in favor of the enemies, the initial reaction would be to give the players more power to balance it out, and I think this is the wrong move. It's a problem D&D has as well. Fights drag on because enemies have a lot of health, and you can only do so much damage in one turn. I would like the enemy health, and only their health, to be brought down to a more reasonable level to bring the scales somewhat closer to even. This will make the fights we have be less tedious and more fun. From there, there's still room to expand behaviors and add more enemies.

[LadyWYT]

11 minutes ago, KoviBat said:

What I'm worried about is that this enemy power creep sets a precedent for player power creep, which I'd prefer not happen. By tipping the balance in favor of the enemies, the initial reaction would be to give the players more power to balance it out, and I think this is the wrong move. It's a problem D&D has as well. Fights drag on because enemies have a lot of health, and you can only do so much damage in one turn. I would like the enemy health, and only their health, to be brought down to a more reasonable level to bring the scales somewhat closer to even. This will make the fights we have be less tedious and more fun. From there, there's still room to expand behaviors and add more enemies.

Ah okay, that makes a lot more sense when you put it that way. Honestly the current enemy health pools feel fine to me, but I wouldn't go any higher than that. Going lower would make them feel less like a supernatural threat as well, though I would perhaps lower the health pools of natural creatures like bears and wolves a bit. Unnatural threats should feel unnaturally resilient, but natural creatures should feel dangerous but quite mortal.

As for the nightmare level enemies, you really don't encounter them particularly often, and special nightmares like the double-headed drifter are even less common. I think the key to balancing here isn't to nerf their hp or give the player enough power to trivialize them, but rather give the player just enough power to be able to deal with that threat level only if they don't get complacent. In other words, steel tier equipment(and higher, in the event of potential Jonas tech) should make nightmare-level more manageable, but nightmare level should still wipe the floor with the player easily enough should the player get overconfident.

20 minutes ago, KoviBat said:

Difference between least and most damage we can deal is 4.

On this note though, maybe weapon tier needs to be looked at. It seems that weapon tier should be important when it comes to what kind of threats it can handle, but may not actually matter in practice. If high tier enemies had built-in resistance to low tier weapons, to the extent that the player actively needs something like a tier 4 weapon to think about countering nightmare enemies, then I might be more inclined to throw out most of what I said above and lower enemy health pools across the board. Although in that case, players get forced into meeting particular requirements for certain content, instead of being able to take skill-dependent risks(like going after the first boss with no armor and a handful of spears). Should players be taking that kind of risk? Eh, probably not, but that's really for the player to decide. 

[Echo Weaver]

13 hours ago, KoviBat said:

What I'm worried about is that this enemy power creep sets a precedent for player power creep, which I'd prefer not happen. By tipping the balance in favor of the enemies, the initial reaction would be to give the players more power to balance it out, and I think this is the wrong move. It's a problem D&D has as well. Fights drag on because enemies have a lot of health, and you can only do so much damage in one turn. I would like the enemy health, and only their health, to be brought down to a more reasonable level to bring the scales somewhat closer to even. This will make the fights we have be less tedious and more fun. From there, there's still room to expand behaviors and add more enemies.

Yeah, this really clarifies what the issue is. 

Thinking aloud... I can't go-toe-to-toe with a nightmare rust beast regardless. I suppose if it were alone, I had an open field, and I was generally better at either dodging or dealing ranged damage, I could do it. I only see nightmares during temporal storms. I assume you can go deep enough to find them, but I haven't seen a reason to go that deep, and if I do I'm willing to go to serious lengths not to be in an open cave while doing it. 

My storm strategy is that I have pit traps along one side of my base that can be accessed from vertically-placed trapdoors in my basement. I can open a trapdoor and stab them with a spear or falx and dodge most damage, then open the second one if I need access to loot them. In this situation, using iron weapons, I haven't found that it takes an absurd amount of time to kill a nightmare. The trick is making sure they don't have opportunity to hit me.

[Scorpixel]

22 hours ago, LadyWYT said:

I can't say that I've ever played Terraria, but from what I understand it is rather ridiculous on just how much damage things can crank out.

Terraria handles powercreep pretty well up to Plantera (the boss right before late-game). Before that there's lots of options (although some still needing buffs or the nerf bat) against a widening variety (and complexity) of enemies, however after that it's a rather linear numbers fest with very obvious must-haves (gameplay is still excellent, just more straightforward). Although there's a need to clarify that the super-duper deleteverythingonscreen weapons are late-late or post-game stuff that are either used fifteen minutes before closing the world for good or for building.

Base VS combat is rather simple, which i think does fit the gameplay. What needs more spice is the enemies. More Specifically the capabilities between tiers, or variants.

Rapid-firing common ideas: drifters throwing whole boulders, locusts with a cone spraying attack or with shock on contact, triple shot/shotgun spread bowtorns, leaping shivers. Even recolouring would be enough of a visual cue to make the player know that a pesky one might need a different approach.

[Bruno Willis]

I've just fought and been murdered by the two headed drifter a few times, and I noticed through my blood and trumpet screaming, that I'd managed to hook loot out of the over-friendly drifter while desperately swinging my falx. I didn't kill them, but I ended up getting a temporal gear and a bunch of gears anyway.

I think adding the auto-loot feature to the falx is a really interesting solution to the crazy high health of scarier drifters. The point isn't to kill them, it's to have tense moments and be rewarded for taking big risks. I can see myself ducking out into the temporal storms now, swiping the scary guys until they drop things, grabbing the glowing cogs and running back inside. That's much more interesting that having to kill everything, to me at least.