Temporal storms feel too easy.

[nougsoc]

The temporal storms in Vintage Story feel a little too.. easy. 

When a temporal storm happens in the game, I think most players, including myself, will just hunker down in their homes and wait it out. Which is realistic, because in real life is anybody gonna try and take on a hurricane outside? No, but I think the mechanic just acts like a slight nuisance that happens every so often, where some powerful mobs spawn, which can easily kill you if you're not careful, but can be easily overcome with kill pits or safe-rooms. The only times I think a temporal storm is a big threat is if you're caught in one far away from your base, or if you're in a place like the resonance archive, which is dangerous on its own.

The mechanic isn't bad, I just think it could be improved, personally I think the storms could have a higher chance to spawn temporal mobs indoors rather than outside, making your usual hiding spot a potential death trap. Or the the glitch effect could be upped drastically to make you almost blind the environment around you, but only in intense, heavy storms. Or even have the storm-spawned mobs be able to target livestock or take out crops, (that might be too devastating). Another cool addition in multiplayer could be if you couldn't be able to communicate to other players at all during storms, either through voice chat or text chat, the text effects are neat, but they could be entirely jumbled during storms so they would be impossible to read.

 

This is my personal opinion on the temporal storms, I'm curious as to what others think of the storms, or what modded/vanilla changes could do to make them harder. 
 

[CastIronFabric]

the things I care the least about in this game

-monsters roaming around my base because my lighting is not perfect.

-Temp stablity telling me I can not build somewhere

-Temporal storms.

-the story 'missions'

When I say 'I do not like' I do NOT mean I want them fixed, I mean I want them gone if I cant disable it in the settings.

To be fair, I do not mind going to a place (like a cave) to do some combat where I have to gear up for it bit but I find them existing in my base to be like gnats or sugar ants I have to deal with from time to time. 

So they can change the storms all they want, I am still leaving it off. Even if I have to get something from the storms, I will just creative those items in my game play. There is always 7 days to die if I want tower defense play

Edited January 2 by CastIronFabric

[pigfood]

IMO, the mechanic is plain bad. High level enemies can rapidly kill you, no matter your gear. Early game, you are guaranteed to die, if you get slightly unlucky with enemy spawns. A no-death challenge is a lot worse than playing russian roulette.

Yes, the sane thing to do right now is to hide out and hope for the the best. Anyone who tries to fight is plain crazy, there is a huge risk of dying (no matter the gear or skill) with little upside. I don't particularly approve of exploiting broken spawn mechanics. Working kill-boxes are a bug, not a feature.

[LadyWYT]

11 hours ago, nougsoc said:

This is my personal opinion on the temporal storms, I'm curious as to what others think of the storms, or what modded/vanilla changes could do to make them harder. 

A cookie for you, since what you listed is quite different than what usually turns up regarding the topic. 

If you've not tried it already, I highly recommend Temporal Symphony. That mod changes the text warnings into immersive visuals and sounds, which makes the storms much spookier in my opinion. The cues aren't easy to miss, but you do need to pay attention as there will be no text warning to check in the message box. https://mods.vintagestory.at/temporalsymphony

11 hours ago, nougsoc said:

I just think it could be improved, personally I think the storms could have a higher chance to spawn temporal mobs indoors rather than outside, making your usual hiding spot a potential death trap.

You might give this mod a try then, though a quick look at the comments section will illustrate why this isn't a good change for the vanilla game: https://mods.vintagestory.at/show/mod/35820

Hiding isn't a very exciting option, however, it's the one that offers the best safety, and the player needs a safe option to choose if they so wish. The cost for that safety though is being limited to indoor tasks as one waits out the storm--one doesn't get something for nothing, after all.

11 hours ago, nougsoc said:

Or the the glitch effect could be upped drastically to make you almost blind the environment around you, but only in intense, heavy storms.

No. Some players have sensory issues and get ill from such effects, and currently struggle with the storms as a result so this definitely isn't a good change in that regard. I myself don't have those issues, however, I'm not keen on cranking up the visual glitching to the point I start getting headaches either.

 

11 hours ago, nougsoc said:

Or even have the storm-spawned mobs be able to target livestock or take out crops, (that might be too devastating).

Like you already said, this one is too punishing, especially with how much effort livestock takes. I will note that it is possible to lose livestock from stray bowtorn shots or drifter rocks, but it's rare. It's mostly an issue with male animals, as they will pick a fight with whatever hit them.

 

11 hours ago, nougsoc said:

Another cool addition in multiplayer could be if you couldn't be able to communicate to other players at all during storms, either through voice chat or text chat, the text effects are neat, but they could be entirely jumbled during storms so they would be impossible to read.

This is already a feature that renders the text unreadable for some players. Given how important communication is when playing multiplayer anyway, I don't think it's a good idea to cut off the communication in a scenario where it's quite critical. I'll also note that it's an effect that would be easily circumvented by just using Discord or a similar third-party program, and it's not really ideal for players to feel like they have to use a third-party program to communicate effectively in the game.

 

11 hours ago, nougsoc said:

I'm curious as to what others think of the storms, or what modded/vanilla changes could do to make them harder. 

Just quoting this part again for clarity, but personally I think the storms are mostly fine as they are and shouldn't be made easier or harder. They're there to serve as an unnatural disaster that the player needs to plan around, which makes for some interesting worldbuilding that helps Vintage Story stand out as something other than just another survival game. Obviously, it's also not a mechanic that everyone enjoys, hence the reason to turn off the storms or otherwise sleep through them.

One change that I am in favor of though is making the storm cues more immersive, like what Temporal Symphony does. I will also note that Temporal Symphony also seems to be the most popular mod when it comes to temporal storms, no contest. 

A few other changes williams_482 noted here would also be good: 

Basically:

1. Give the player some better methods to track the storms, like increased rift activity when a storm is approaching or a craftable device to tell the time remaining until the next storm. Such a change would make it easier for the player to plan around the storms, especially if they haven't played that particular world in a while.

2. Limit monster spawns to a certain radius from the player. That makes the hiding option better, since players can more reliably avoid monsters by staying indoors, while also smoothing out storm combat by preventing the player from getting jumped by monsters should they choose to go out and fight(that is, they'll at least have a brief window to notice the approaching monsters).

3. Scale monster strength to the storm's strength. Light storms could be limited to tier 0-2 monsters, medium storms to tier 1-3, and heavy storms tier 3+. Special monsters like the double-headed drifter can spawn in any storm. Such a change would make the early storms more manageable for players who wish to fight, while making late game storms more lucrative since the stronger monsters have more consistent drops.

One other change I'm in favor of, courtesy of @Bruno Willis and @MKMoose, is allowing scrap metal and a few rusty gears to be collected prior to/immediately after a temporal storm. It repurposes existing assets, while giving some useful loot options to more cautious players, without the loot being too useful. To help give more purpose to the scrap metal than just dye, bombs, and scrap weapons, I think scrap armor should also be added. Perhaps such equipment could give tier 2 protections, but at a low durability, making it useful but not so much that it will outperform bronze.

[MKMoose]

5 hours ago, nougsoc said:

The mechanic isn't bad, I just think it could be improved, personally I think the storms could have a higher chance to spawn temporal mobs indoors rather than outside, making your usual hiding spot a potential death trap.

This is a really difficult thing to balance for the vanilla experience, because while some people find storms too easy in various ways, you may also see complaints (especially from newer players) that the storms shouldn't cause enemies to spawn indoors at all, because a beginner with Stone-Age gear just isn't prepared to defeat a corrupt or nightmare monster that happens to materialize near them. Currently, there is no mechanic that would reduce indoor spawns, so you can still get jumped, especially in rooms that are on the larger side. There have been related suggestions to make the monsters announce themselves in some way (e.g. by first spawning a small rift, and only then having the monster come out of it), to give the player a heads-up when they spawn, which would at least help slightly with beginners dying suddenly where they thought they would be safe.

I've recently argued that the main way to make storms more engaging (and potentially harder by extension) is to give the player more reason to go out into the storms. The incentives that we have currently are very weak, since storms aren't the primary source of any resources, so the player doesn't really have a good reason to leave their hiding spot. The advantage of this solution is that as long as the resources acquired from storms are not required for anything particularly important, then the less experienced or casual players won't be significantly disadvantaged if they choose to stay inside, especially during the heavier storms. There is also the option to give the player something unique to do indoors during storms, but outside activities are more conducive to increased difficulty and would also naturally allow the player to see storm effects in their full glory.

 

2 hours ago, sushieater said:

Yes, the sane thing to do right now is to hide out and hope for the the best. Anyone who tries to fight is plain crazy, there is a huge risk of dying (no matter the gear or skill) with little upside.

I frankly have no idea how good most people are at fighting storms, but I can survive them quite easily with iron or better gear, as long as I stay either in a fenced-off enclosure (recently I've used a ~15x15 area just because that's what I happened to have) or near a small shelter with at least two exits and ideally with a bunch of windows as well (I've used my greenhouse a few times), to have more control over what I fight and when. The ability to hide for a moment to heal in relative safety is extremely valuable if you don't have good gear yet, but ideally you'll want to fight all the way through a storm to prevent enemies from accumulating.

I tend to lose about 10-40 health per storm in total, though that depends heavily on the equipment I use, the type of storm and a lot of other random factors. Drifters aren't really a threat due to how slow they are and they mostly just deal some chip damage with their rocks unless I whiff an attack. Bowtorns aren't much worse unless multiple spawn at the same time, though it's often best to make sure no other enemies are nearby before chasing them. The real threat is T3+ shivers for me, although those can also be sort of cheesed quite easily sometimes since their hitbox is wider than one block.

[LadyWYT]

2 minutes ago, MKMoose said:

I frankly have no idea how good most people are at fighting storms, but I can survive them quite easily with iron or better gear, as long as I stay either in a fenced-off enclosure (recently I've used a ~15x15 area just because that's what I happened to have) or near a small shelter with at least two exits and ideally with a bunch of windows as well (I've used my greenhouse a few times), to have more control over what I fight and when. The ability to hide for a moment to heal in relative safety is extremely valuable if you don't have good gear yet, but ideally you'll want to fight all the way through a storm to prevent enemies from accumulating.

This is just my experience, but once I acquire iron equipment I just don my armor and go run around like a maniac outside killing whatever monsters I can catch. Depending on how much damage I sustain in the process, I may duck back inside a couple of times to heal, or eat in the event that I'm not carrying any pie or a bowl of stew.

For full context, I play Blackguard at Standard difficulty settings. If I don't have the equipment to be fighting in the storm, I'll be lounging around indoors either working on something that can be done indoors, or potentially just sitting there watching a video/browsing the web, etc(perks of a second monitor). Of course, if I don't feel like fighting in that storm, I'll also happily employ the same strategy.

10 minutes ago, MKMoose said:

The real threat is T3+ shivers for me, although those can also be sort of cheesed quite easily sometimes since their hitbox is wider than one block.

Definitely agree on the shivers being the most serious threat. Even tier 2 is no joke. They're tanky and fast with a decent attack, and have more unpredictable behavior than drifters or bowtorn. None of these comments are complaints, by the way; I do feel like they're a fair opponent.

 

15 minutes ago, MKMoose said:

I tend to lose about 10-40 health per storm in total, though that depends heavily on the equipment I use, the type of storm and a lot of other random factors.

This tracks with my own general experience as well. I tend to have a rougher time underground due to the cramped spaces, and the fact that things worse than shivers and bowtorn can be found there.

[MKMoose]

27 minutes ago, LadyWYT said:

This is just my experience, but once I acquire iron equipment I just don my armor and go run around like a maniac outside killing whatever monsters I can catch. Depending on how much damage I sustain in the process, I may duck back inside a couple of times to heal, or eat in the event that I'm not carrying any pie or a bowl of stew.

For full context, I play Blackguard at Standard difficulty settings.

My intention was largely to suggest a general strategy that I've found reliable even as I was starting out, but running around like a maniac is an option as well. A bit more risky on higher difficulty or for classes other than a Blackguard, though. 

 

1 hour ago, LadyWYT said:

One change that I am in favor of though is making the storm cues more immersive, like what Temporal Symphony does. I will also note that Temporal Symphony also seems to be the most popular mod when it comes to temporal storms, no contest. 

I think most of the work on temporal mechanics should focus on making them more immersive, more interesting in terms of visuals, sounds and feedback to player actions, and overall more fleshed out as an integral part of the world. That includes much more than just what Temporal Symphony does, although it would be a start. If any significant gameplay changes come out of it, then I'll be very interested, but I think other areas are at least equally deserving of improvements. Temporal stability and storms have been added in 1.12, if I recall correctly (rifts even earlier), with almost no meaningful changes since then besides new monsters.

I'll quote myself on that from another post where I was admittedly kinda complaining, but it reflects the main things I'd like to see adjusted quite well:

Quote

• surface instability, although technically is a continuous value, mostly ends up boiling down to the positive/negative binary - this creates distinct regions of instability, and doesn't really feel like something that permeates the whole world to me, because it is irrelevant most of the time or practically in full effect on those less common occasions; it also doesn't help that it's static, which reinforces the barrier between stable and unstable areas, and it's completely invisible, which easily makes it seem arbitrarily tacked on,
• temporal storms are almost entirely self-contained and poorly integrated into the world - they start immediately with no warning aside from the chat messages and end just as suddenly, which makes them feel extremely artificial; there is no variation or in-between events - either it's a storm, or stability is completely normal and unchanging,
• different mechanics barely interact and aren't consistent with each other - one is static, one is completely random, one is cyclical, storms have no relation whatsoever to rift activity and rifts themselves, ambient instability has little to no effect on rifts; it often also feels like there's three separate monster spawning systems that follow different rules and only one of them relies on rifts.

 

2 hours ago, LadyWYT said:

3. Scale monster strength to the storm's strength. Light storms could be limited to tier 0-2 monsters, medium storms to tier 1-3, and heavy storms tier 3+. Special monsters like the double-headed drifter can spawn in any storm. Such a change would make the early storms more manageable for players who wish to fight, while making late game storms more lucrative since the stronger monsters have more consistent drops.

I'll mention that this is already an effect somewhat (though it's pretty weak), and you've said yourself elsewhere that storm strength affects the number of enemies. Both would be very easy to modify just by adjusting two numbers in the code for each, so I wouldn't mind to see some changes there.

I do also quite like the idea to allow rare spawns in any storm even with only T0-T2 spawns (currently they only have a chance to replace T3 and T4 spawns), since then they become mini-bosses of sorts in low storm strength, and less experienced players aren't locked out of their loot behind more dangerous storms.

 

3 hours ago, LadyWYT said:

To help give more purpose to the scrap metal than just dye, bombs, and scrap weapons, I think scrap armor should also be added. Perhaps such equipment could give tier 2 protections, but at a low durability, making it useful but not so much that it will outperform bronze.

I'm not sure if it makes much sense to add another early-game item to give more uses to a resource which tends to be obtainable in much larger quantities in mid and late game. Not that it's a bad idea, but I don't think it would solve the stated issue of scrap metal having limited uses. Making the scrap bomb better would be the first step for me, and I think any new uses for scrap metal should ideally also be consumable items which can be useful all the way into the endgame.,This would make the player choose between different consumables if they only have a limited amount of scrap, and make it more likely that different players with different playstyles will find their preferred use for it.

Additionally, I was thinking to allow crafting a very limited supply of Jonas components out of metal parts, recycyled scrap metal and some other resources, which could be useful to largely solve the issue with Jonas components being random drops. Could require disassembling one component (or more) to turn it into another, to still require the player to actually find the required number of components in the first place instead of crafting them from "nothing". Something similar was mentioned in this thread.

[The Lerf]

Well it doesn't sound like the storms are too easy... you're saying they're too easy to disengage with and ignore. 

So I'm not sure about the source for this, but more than a few times I've heard that the devs want Temporal Storms to feel like tower defense. Obviously, they haven't nailed that yet, but there are ways we can go about changing or adding things about storms to make it feel defensive, and less able to be ignored.

Something I would really like to hear people's opinions on is the introduction of consequences to ignoring Temporal Storms. I have a few ideas floating around in my head about it, that absolutely should not all be implemented at the same time for the health of the game, but that I think would add an interesting set of decisions to make about storms.

The first is giving mobs the ability to open/break down doors, given enough time. Or alternatively, a new specific monster type that is the only one who can open doors, and only spawns during storms. With enemies being able to gain access to your home under the right circumstances, we'd want to remove the ability for them to spawn inside rooms (and given that the game is already programmed to define rooms, that shouldn't be too hard). This means that you must now patrol your home in order to keep it safe, but as long as you do, you will be guaranteed safety, given you've built it right. It also means that how you build your base from then on will be a factor you consider: Do you have too many entrances and exits to defend? Will your courtyard be the reason your base falls? And so on.

The second is limited destruction of player placed structures. Minecraft devs had this concept in it's infancy with Endermen moving blocks, but they were too worried about annoying players. I have no such reservations, and would love to see a portion of spawned enemies make efforts to destroy fences and weak building blocks. This would reduce the amount of enemies that aggro to the player, and give some flavor during and after the storm. In my head, these blocks aren't straight up destroyed, but replaced with damaged clutter like we have already in the game, so that way the player can know what got destroyed and where, in order to replace it. Ignoring enemies during storms would mean you need to dedicate time to repairing and replacing things around the outside of your base.

A third idea is kind of a system to tack on to the side of either of the previous ones. But a quota of enemies to kill in order to prevent consequences from happening to you, or to end the storms faster. With storms being used to farm flax, gears, and Jonas tech, I know this isn't ideal. But perhaps the storms can have a definite number of enemy spawns that can happen, say 30 mobs. You kill 30 mobs, and the storm ends. If you don't kill 30 mobs, the storm continues until some reasonable amount of time later.

This is flexible, of course, I haven't thought to hard about these things or have the modding skill to try them out. But man would I love to see Temporal Storms improve in literally any way, because I don't hate them either. They're just badly implemented at the moment.

Edited January 3 by The Lerf

[LadyWYT]

29 minutes ago, The Lerf said:

Something I would really like to hear people's opinions on is the introduction of consequences to ignoring Temporal Storms. I have a few ideas floating around in my head about it, that absolutely should not all be implemented at the same time for the health of the game, but that I think would add an interesting set of decisions to make about storms.

Honestly, the easiest solution here is to just make temporal storms drain more temporal stability than they do currently. The player should still have the option of hiding in light storms, since they are most likely still early in the game when these occur and thus not equipped to deal with them. Medium storms, however, could leave the player almost fully drained of stability, while heavy storms could drain stability entirely and thus force the player to either kill monsters to restore it, sacrifice temporal gears to restore it, or die.

I will also note that this is a somewhat harsh solution, so it may not be the most ideal one to implement.

34 minutes ago, The Lerf said:

The first is giving mobs the ability to open/break down doors, given enough time. Or alternatively, a new specific monster type that is the only one who can open doors, and only spawns during storms. With enemies being able to gain access to your home under the right circumstances, we'd want to remove the ability for them to spawn inside rooms (and given that the game is already programmed to define rooms, that shouldn't be too hard). This means that you must now patrol your home in order to keep it safe, but as long as you do, you will be guaranteed safety, given you've built it right. It also means that how you build your base from then on will be a factor you consider: Do you have too many entrances and exits to defend? Will your courtyard be the reason your base falls? And so on.

I would drifters and shivers are both more than capable of breaking down doors, though I don't think either is really smart enough to open them. The best counter here, I feel, is to just enable the player to install a door bar to fortify the entrance and stop monsters from being able to break in(assuming the player actually remembered to bar the door).

 

37 minutes ago, The Lerf said:

The second is limited destruction of player placed structures. Minecraft devs had this concept in it's infancy with Endermen moving blocks, but they were too worried about annoying players. I have no such reservations, and would love to see a portion of spawned enemies make efforts to destroy fences and weak building blocks. This would reduce the amount of enemies that aggro to the player, and give some flavor during and after the storm. In my head, these blocks aren't straight up destroyed, but replaced with damaged clutter like we have already in the game, so that way the player can know what got destroyed and where, in order to replace it. Ignoring enemies during storms would mean you need to dedicate time to repairing and replacing things around the outside of your base.

Gonna have to disagree here. Chiseled blocks are the primary concern, given that no player wants to lose hours of chiselwork. Exempting chiseled blocks, however, makes it very easy to game such a system. Same problem with limiting the blocks that enemies can break--players will just stop building with those blocks so their stuff stops getting trashed.

As for fences...it's not a good idea to let monsters destroy these, since that would logically enable precious livestock to easily escape or otherwise be harmed.

Base maintenance in general...I'm not entirely against it, but I'm also not generally for it either. There's a time and place for such things, but I don't want to end up spending the majority of my time just fixing everything that is broken/trying to break down. Do keep in mind that completing the main story does require the player to spend a decent amount of time away from home, so maintenance that is too demanding is going to end up discouraging such travels.

43 minutes ago, The Lerf said:

A third idea is kind of a system to tack on to the side of either of the previous ones. But a quota of enemies to kill in order to prevent consequences from happening to you, or to end the storms faster. With storms being used to farm flax, gears, and Jonas tech, I know this isn't ideal. But perhaps the storms can have a definite number of enemy spawns that can happen, say 30 mobs. You kill 30 mobs, and the storm ends. If you don't kill 30 mobs, the storm continues until some reasonable amount of time later.

I'd be more in favor of having the chances of special spawns increased the more normal monsters the player kills during a storm. That way, the player can have some control over how many chances at "the good loot" they get, and rely a little less on RNG. As it stands now, it's not unusual to have no special spawns during a storm.

Of course, to make sure that players don't cheese this by building an automatic monster killer, the player themselves needs to be credited for the kill in order for it to count toward a special spawn. No last hit from a player? The kill doesn't count.

[The Lerf]

2 hours ago, LadyWYT said:

Honestly, the easiest solution here is to just make temporal storms drain more temporal stability than they do currently. The player should still have the option of hiding in light storms, since they are most likely still early in the game when these occur and thus not equipped to deal with them. Medium storms, however, could leave the player almost fully drained of stability, while heavy storms could drain stability entirely and thus force the player to either kill monsters to restore it, sacrifice temporal gears to restore it, or die.

I will also note that this is a somewhat harsh solution, so it may not be the most ideal one to implement.

The end goal of all of this is to reimagine Temporal Storms in a way where despite not being well equipped, players in the early game will still be able to participate in storms without hiding. In this hypothetical scenario, imagine the storm being rebalanced in the early game so fighting without falling into a death spiral is possible, and hard enough in the endgame so that the losses suffered by hiding become a setback.

 

2 hours ago, LadyWYT said:

I would drifters and shivers are both more than capable of breaking down doors, though I don't think either is really smart enough to open them. The best counter here, I feel, is to just enable the player to install a door bar to fortify the entrance and stop monsters from being able to break in(assuming the player actually remembered to bar the door).

Drifters and Shivers are capable of it sure, but restricting this broken door mechanic specifically to Temporal Storms is the purpose. I would not want each night to require the same level of vigilance that a storm would need with this. Besides, you wouldn't need a bar on the door... gotta think like a player would. Dropping any blocks in front of the door would stop anything from entering because I'm not giving them the ability to destroy blocks like the player can. And to me, that sounds like barricading the doors for invasion.

2 hours ago, LadyWYT said:

Gonna have to disagree here. Chiseled blocks are the primary concern, given that no player wants to lose hours of chiselwork. Exempting chiseled blocks, however, makes it very easy to game such a system. Same problem with limiting the blocks that enemies can break--players will just stop building with those blocks so their stuff stops getting trashed.

As for fences...it's not a good idea to let monsters destroy these, since that would logically enable precious livestock to easily escape or otherwise be harmed.

Base maintenance in general...I'm not entirely against it, but I'm also not generally for it either. There's a time and place for such things, but I don't want to end up spending the majority of my time just fixing everything that is broken/trying to break down. Do keep in mind that completing the main story does require the player to spend a decent amount of time away from home, so maintenance that is too demanding is going to end up discouraging such travels.

We're already in a situation where players are gaming such a system, and I think that's unavoidable. The same min-maxxers who will chisel every block of their structure are most likely the same ones with a surface-to-mantle farm, so I'm willing to overlook it. It's not a mechanic that I envision as bad as Valheim, but more like how you have to replace bricks in the cementation furnace. I don't imagine these 'broken' structures losing their functionality though, just be cosmetic in nature. When a drifter would damage a fence, the fence model would change to a broken one, and it would still be 1.5 blocks tall and prevent pathfinding through it. Maybe if it was done to cobblestone block, it would just add the mold or rust overlays found in ruins to it. This could be a way to collect previously unattainable clutter, or could be farmed to create an older, grosser aesthetic build. Maybe the hammer gets a functional use without the chisel in the off hand, and becomes the optimal way of repairing things without replacing them.

The idea of base repair would only come into play if you ignored the storm and hid. To say, look what you allowed to happen through inaction or fear, which I feel resonates with the lore a bit. And if you were away from home when a Temporal Storm hits, well then your base is in an unloaded chunk and it doesn't really matter.

The goal of these ideas is to disincentivize hiding or ignoring storms, and I don't think that you can provide too much positive reinforcement (loot) without making farms too lucrative. So yes, I think there should be a bit of extra work involved if you don't bother to defend yourself.

2 hours ago, LadyWYT said:

I'd be more in favor of having the chances of special spawns increased the more normal monsters the player kills during a storm. That way, the player can have some control over how many chances at "the good loot" they get, and rely a little less on RNG. As it stands now, it's not unusual to have no special spawns during a storm.

Of course, to make sure that players don't cheese this by building an automatic monster killer, the player themselves needs to be credited for the kill in order for it to count toward a special spawn. No last hit from a player? The kill doesn't count.

With a determined set of spawns, the devs could specifically say that, for example, heavy storms get 3 top tier enemies, or even set that to increase as more time passes in the world. This would solve one RNG layer, and let your chances to get Jonas parts be determined by your rolls on when you harvest them.

This is all just spitballing, by the way. The more I think about it, the more I like the idea of these things.

Edit: elaborating on broken door mechanic

Edited January 3 by The Lerf

[Broccoli Clock]

While enemies cannot break down doors, walls, or dirt/stone, then no temporal storm is difficult. A 2x2 room with a torch and you are safe, I would wager 100% safe but there may be a strikingly small percentage chance of something spawning on the one block you are not on, but it's got to be bloody low.

You can turn storms off, and honestly at this point I think that's the best option for people who live at either end of the scale ("too easy, just an interruption" < == > "too hard, don't like them") because in reality I feel they will remain a "blunt object" for some time. The particular enemy type may change, the rate/ratio they spawn may change but ultimately I don't see storms changing in meta any time soon (although I could be wrong).

I, however, like to farm the storms, for Jonas parts or gears for translocators, and in that sense I tend to have a small horde base for that task. Is it "easy" yes.

I'd say the only real challenge is up and out in the open surface during a storm, and that can be mitigated quite a bit if you have the right armour/weapons/heals combined with enough space to run around in.

 

Will we ever get truly difficult storms? I doubt it, not with the meta like it is now. 

 

 

 

 

 

[CastIronFabric]

1 hour ago, Broccoli Clock said:

While enemies cannot break down doors, walls, or dirt/stone, then no temporal storm is difficult. A 2x2 room with a torch and you are safe, I would wager 100% safe but there may be a strikingly small percentage chance of something spawning on the one block you are not on, but it's got to be bloody low.

You can turn storms off, and honestly at this point I think that's the best option for people who live at either end of the scale ("too easy, just an interruption" < == > "too hard, don't like them") because in reality I feel they will remain a "blunt object" for some time. The particular enemy type may change, the rate/ratio they spawn may change but ultimately I don't see storms changing in meta any time soon (although I could be wrong).

I, however, like to farm the storms, for Jonas parts or gears for translocators, and in that sense I tend to have a small horde base for that task. Is it "easy" yes.

I'd say the only real challenge is up and out in the open surface during a storm, and that can be mitigated quite a bit if you have the right armour/weapons/heals combined with enough space to run around in.

 

Will we ever get truly difficult storms? I doubt it, not with the meta like it is now. 

 

 

 

 

 

what are we really talking about here.

Options

A. do nothing and stare at a wall for several mins

B. Fight them

a lot of arguments could be made about option B such as 'should this game become another 7 days to die' or 'this is really not a combat sim' to 'well you can turn it off'

but I want to know who is defending option A.

[LadyWYT]

8 hours ago, The Lerf said:

We're already in a situation where players are gaming such a system, and I think that's unavoidable.

I do agree that some cheese is unavoidable.

 

8 hours ago, The Lerf said:

The same min-maxxers who will chisel every block of their structure are most likely the same ones with a surface-to-mantle farm, so I'm willing to overlook it. It's not a mechanic that I envision as bad as Valheim, but more like how you have to replace bricks in the cementation furnace. I don't imagine these 'broken' structures losing their functionality though, just be cosmetic in nature.

Maybe, but digging a hole from the surface to the mantle is a lot more work than just tapping some blocks to turn them into chiseled ones. Thus my expectation with such a change is that more players will end up opting for the cheese, defeating the intent of the change.

As for the "broken" bits being strictly cosmetic and not actually affecting anything...doesn't that defeat the purpose of the change? If it's just a cosmetic change then there's no actual threat to the player and they can continue to ignore the monsters, while being more frustrated that they can't maintain aesthetics.

8 hours ago, The Lerf said:

When a drifter would damage a fence, the fence model would change to a broken one, and it would still be 1.5 blocks tall and prevent pathfinding through it.

For fences specifically, I'd be less inclined to allow monsters to damage them, and more inclined to just let shivers climb over them. Drifters aren't built for climbing, and neither are bowtorn. Shivers, however, look like they could quite easily clamber over fences. I'm also guessing that it would be easier to code shivers to climb, than it would be to try to account for broken fences and related mod behavior(monster or otherwise).

 

8 hours ago, The Lerf said:

Maybe the hammer gets a functional use without the chisel in the off hand, and becomes the optimal way of repairing things without replacing them.

Ultimate AoE villager experience. 

 

8 hours ago, The Lerf said:

The idea of base repair would only come into play if you ignored the storm and hid. To say, look what you allowed to happen through inaction or fear, which I feel resonates with the lore a bit. And if you were away from home when a Temporal Storm hits, well then your base is in an unloaded chunk and it doesn't really matter.

Maybe, except the monsters aren't really noted to target animals, crops, or structures. Spoilers ahead, but:

Spoiler

The Nadiya villagers do hide in their fortress during temporal storms, but by talking to one of them(Indira, I think) you can find out that they aren't too worried about what they leave outside the fortress, as the monsters only seem interested in human targets.

To be fair, I do think breaking down an unfortified door in order to get to the player is fine, but otherwise if monsters are just pillaging the landscape just because, I think they lose a lot of their strangeness. They aren't quite mindless beasts, as there is some intelligence there, but it's not intelligence that's anywhere near the same level as humans, seraphs, or the average animal. I would say they're more like fleshy ghosts, if anything.

Lore aside, the main hurdle I see to "monsters can break blocks" is...how does the behavior get accounted for in the code? Are the monsters breaking blocks only if there is no other way to get to the player, or do they break blocks if no player is within sight? Can they break blocks if they get stuck trying to pathfind to the player, despite a clear route existing? To me, trying to code it seems like it will create many more problems than the code actually solves.

[Cryo Stratos]

On 1/2/2026 at 2:50 PM, CastIronFabric said:

the things I care the least about in this game

-monsters roaming around my base because my lighting is not perfect.

-Temp stablity telling me I can not build somewhere

-Temporal storms.

-the story 'missions'

When I say 'I do not like' I do NOT mean I want them fixed, I mean I want them gone if I cant disable it in the settings.

To be fair, I do not mind going to a place (like a cave) to do some combat where I have to gear up for it bit but I find them existing in my base to be like gnats or sugar ants I have to deal with from time to time. 

So they can change the storms all they want, I am still leaving it off. Even if I have to get something from the storms, I will just creative those items in my game play. There is always 7 days to die if I want tower defense play

I support this opinion. I wish the whole mechanic was gone, gameplay and lore. Most importantly, they should go away from houses and bases. Many games have a hard mechanic that mobs can't spawn near bases. VS needs the same.

[Thorfinn]

I think the fact that there is a minimum spawn distance in normal play, but not in storms, speaks strongly to the notion that the intent is not to make another tower defense game. Had they not made that one change, ok, maybe, but this is a step in the wrong direction.

I'm ok with the storms as is. I've tried Symphony, and I'd be fine with that, too. Drop rates are fine. There just needs to be enough Jonas tech worth doing to make it worthwhile. Powered armor. Vibroblades. Several versions of that magic motor you can only get in creative. Something.

[EDIT]

Oh, or how about procedurally-generated tech devices tied to a world seed. It would take some puttering around to discover what you can do with the various pieces parts, so Wiki is no use, and some recipes could even be included in procedurally-generated dungeon loot tables. Might need something other than the crafting grid. A score of different items, up to nine at a time, that all have to be in the right places. OTOH, if there were some indication that the pieces you have in place are good for at least one device recipe -- "OK, in this world the gronkled fribulator is only used in the top center and bottom left" is useful information.

Edited January 4 by Thorfinn

[Zane Mordien]

7 hours ago, Cryo Stratos said:

I support this opinion. I wish the whole mechanic was gone, gameplay and lore. Most importantly, they should go away from houses and bases. Many games have a hard mechanic that mobs can't spawn near bases. VS needs the same.

What am I missing? All of the things that he mentioned can be turned off when you create the world or you can turn them off after you create the world with world configuation commands. You can also play Homo Sapiens mode and add the map or whatever you want to add back in the settings. 

[CastIronFabric]

12 hours ago, Zane Mordien said:

What am I missing? All of the things that he mentioned can be turned off when you create the world or you can turn them off after you create the world with world configuation commands. You can also play Homo Sapiens mode and add the map or whatever you want to add back in the settings. 

exactly.

we turn them off, we are just letting everyone know we do not like the mechanics. We are just expressing to the world that we do not even like the IDEA of the mechanics so for us its not a question of 'fixing'. we just turn it off and that is that. Everyone needs to stop it with the Homo Sapiens suggestion. We like the ruins, we like the translocators, we even like killing monster (just not in our base) so I have no idea why people think the Homo Sapiens mode is a good fix for not wanting storms. We just turn it off so we can still have ruins and translocators and traders.

 

Edited January 4 by CastIronFabric

[Zane Mordien]

45 minutes ago, CastIronFabric said:

exactly.

we turn them off, we are just letting everyone know we do not like the mechanics. We are just expressing to the world that we do not even like the IDEA of the mechanics so for us its not a question of 'fixing'. we just turn it off and that is that. Everyone needs to stop it with the Homo Sapiens suggestion. We like the ruins, we like the translocators, we even like killing monster (just not in our base) so I have no idea why people think the Homo Sapiens mode is a good fix for not wanting storms. We just turn it off so we can still have ruins and translocators and traders.

I would assume expressing ones opinions on this subject matter is not being unreasonable

Not everything is about you. I was not attacking you or asking for you to explain anything. I very purposefully did not respond to your original post becuase I have already tried talking to you and it was pointless for both of us. Also where did I say anything was unresonable? I was trying to understand what Cyro was thinking. He may not be thinking about it the exact same way as you or maybe he doesn't understand what can be adjusted in the settings. I wanted to understand his take on the issue.  

I still think you should post whatever you want as a suggestion and maybe the Tyron will create that as an option in the settings. If you don't ask it will never happen. I would personally support you having the option to turn off whatever you want. Just keep in mind that maybe it isn't that easy for them to program the game to only spawn mobs in caves and never on the surface. Doesn't seem like it would be, but there are a lot of things I think should be easy that are not.

[CastIronFabric]

2 hours ago, Zane Mordien said:

Not everything is about you. I was not attacking you or asking for you to explain anything. I very purposefully did not respond to your original post becuase I have already tried talking to you and it was pointless for both of us. Also where did I say anything was unresonable? I was trying to understand what Cyro was thinking. He may not be thinking about it the exact same way as you or maybe he doesn't understand what can be adjusted in the settings. I wanted to understand his take on the issue.  

I still think you should post whatever you want as a suggestion and maybe the Tyron will create that as an option in the settings. If you don't ask it will never happen. I would personally support you having the option to turn off whatever you want. Just keep in mind that maybe it isn't that easy for them to program the game to only spawn mobs in caves and never on the surface. Doesn't seem like it would be, but there are a lot of things I think should be easy that are not.

please do not do this, I am sorry I added that last sentence my apologies. I even edited and removed the last sentence

 

Edited January 4 by CastIronFabric

[The Lerf]

On 1/3/2026 at 12:37 PM, LadyWYT said:

Maybe, but digging a hole from the surface to the mantle is a lot more work than just tapping some blocks to turn them into chiseled ones. Thus my expectation with such a change is that more players will end up opting for the cheese, defeating the intent of the change.

As for the "broken" bits being strictly cosmetic and not actually affecting anything...doesn't that defeat the purpose of the change? If it's just a cosmetic change then there's no actual threat to the player and they can continue to ignore the monsters, while being more frustrated that they can't maintain aesthetics.

For fences specifically, I'd be less inclined to allow monsters to damage them, and more inclined to just let shivers climb over them. Drifters aren't built for climbing, and neither are bowtorn. Shivers, however, look like they could quite easily clamber over fences. I'm also guessing that it would be easier to code shivers to climb, than it would be to try to account for broken fences and related mod behavior(monster or otherwise).

It's an idea to prompt engagement, and encourage players to participate in storms. If they find themselves annoyed by their base being altered, then they must fight the enemies off. If they cheese it by chiseling, it would actually make storms harder since there's no structures to pull aggro from the player. To that, I shrug and say suit yourself. There's no cheese-proof plan without literally forcing the player out via temporal instability drain, and then if a player isn't ready they will surely die. It provides a choice of active involvement of defense, or preparing and repairing. And I think you overestimate how many players will cheese a mechanic that adds immersiveness and something to do, even if it's annoying. Personally, I like playing with cave-ins, and a portion of the community loves loose soil/sticky soil, along with every other mod that adds the strangest of minutiae.

The broken bits could be cosmetic, they could not. It doesn't really matter to me, because what matters is that frustration from the player who didn't bother to defend and now has consequences for it. If your goats and chickens were at risk, would you fight them? If your cozy cabin got splotches of rust all over it, would you defend it? These questions are interesting to me, because if a player says 'well, I'd rather not...' then there's already an option for them. Turning Temporal Storms off. But for others, it means you can do something if the fight doesn't go your way, or you're unprepared.

On 1/3/2026 at 12:37 PM, LadyWYT said:

Maybe, except the monsters aren't really noted to target animals, crops, or structures. Spoilers ahead, but:

  Hide contents

The Nadiya villagers do hide in their fortress during temporal storms, but by talking to one of them(Indira, I think) you can find out that they aren't too worried about what they leave outside the fortress, as the monsters only seem interested in human targets.

To be fair, I do think breaking down an unfortified door in order to get to the player is fine, but otherwise if monsters are just pillaging the landscape just because, I think they lose a lot of their strangeness. They aren't quite mindless beasts, as there is some intelligence there, but it's not intelligence that's anywhere near the same level as humans, seraphs, or the average animal. I would say they're more like fleshy ghosts, if anything.

Alright, this is new to me. I haven't made it to the village yet, because it's literally a 30 minute boat ride away and I would rather play the game than do that.

On 1/3/2026 at 12:37 PM, LadyWYT said:

Lore aside, the main hurdle I see to "monsters can break blocks" is...how does the behavior get accounted for in the code? Are the monsters breaking blocks only if there is no other way to get to the player, or do they break blocks if no player is within sight? Can they break blocks if they get stuck trying to pathfind to the player, despite a clear route existing? To me, trying to code it seems like it will create many more problems than the code actually solves.

Pffft, I dunno. I'm just some guy, not a programmer. I imagine some mobs would be designated to aggro the player on spawn, and some would be designated to attack structures. And then once they destroy a block (or multiple?) then they would aggro towards the player. Or maybe destroying a block takes the whole time of the storm, to allow the player to intervene. If they can't reach the player, they attack structures/roam. I don't know how much destruction would be appropriate, but I was not thinking that you'd walk outside to a completely demolished base. Just like a few parts of your base that had signs of damage. Figuring out the code for it isn't my job though, but I doubt it's impossible if you're coding to create the illusion of it.

[LadyWYT]

41 minutes ago, The Lerf said:

Pffft, I dunno. I'm just some guy, not a programmer. I imagine some mobs would be designated to aggro the player on spawn, and some would be designated to attack structures. And then once they destroy a block (or multiple?) then they would aggro towards the player. Or maybe destroying a block takes the whole time of the storm, to allow the player to intervene. If they can't reach the player, they attack structures/roam. I don't know how much destruction would be appropriate, but I was not thinking that you'd walk outside to a completely demolished base. Just like a few parts of your base that had signs of damage. Figuring out the code for it isn't my job though, but I doubt it's impossible if you're coding to create the illusion of it.

I'm not a programmer either, just making some guesses based on what I do know about coding. Complex creature behavior tends to be one of the more difficult things to implement.

 

42 minutes ago, The Lerf said:

It's an idea to prompt engagement, and encourage players to participate in storms. If they find themselves annoyed by their base being altered, then they must fight the enemies off. If they cheese it by chiseling, it would actually make storms harder since there's no structures to pull aggro from the player.

Perhaps, but it's also not uncommon for players to opt for the most efficient strategy possible, even if the strategy itself is rather cheap and unfun. Maybe it would encourage players to engage with the storm, but the more likely scenario I see is that more players just end up turning the storms off, or complaining about the storms feeling boring due to how easy it is to simply chisel a mob-proof bunker.

Although come to think of it, all the player would really have to do is just set a claim on whatever chunks they wish to protect, since things inside of protected areas can't be altered for obvious reasons.

44 minutes ago, The Lerf said:

If your cozy cabin got splotches of rust all over it, would you defend it? These questions are interesting to me, because if a player says 'well, I'd rather not...' then there's already an option for them. Turning Temporal Storms off. But for others, it means you can do something if the fight doesn't go your way, or you're unprepared.

For me personally, no I wouldn't bother defending it, as I would very likely be modding out that mechanic.  Some players enjoy this type of base defense, but I very much am not one of those players. I don't mind fighting monsters, but I can't stand it when they tear up my lawn! Even moreso if I've spent hours making everything look just right. To me, it's punishment for playing the game and not fun at all, and it's one reason I despise Valheim raids.

It's also, as you noted earlier, a mechanic that's easily circumvented by just ensuring you're not near any of your stuff.

51 minutes ago, The Lerf said:

The broken bits could be cosmetic, they could not. It doesn't really matter to me, because what matters is that frustration from the player who didn't bother to defend and now has consequences for it.

Maybe. But I don't really see it solving the "boredom" problem for players who don't really care about aesthetics, if the changes are only cosmetic and don't actually affect utility. When it comes to players who enjoy building(which I daresay covers a decent portion of the playerbase and a wide range of settings preferences) I don't really think it's a great idea to deliberately sabotage those efforts. At best, such a change would need to include some sort of toggle in the settings to stop monsters from griefing structures.

[CastIronFabric]

15 hours ago, The Lerf said:

It's an idea to prompt engagement, and encourage players to participate in storms. If they find themselves annoyed by their base being altered, then they must fight the enemies off. If they cheese it by chiseling, it would actually make storms harder since there's no structures to pull aggro from the player

Have you played 7 days to die? I have about 1300 hours in that game but I played a long time, the general direction being advocated here is going into that direction. Again, not in specifics but in general objectives

 

[Zane Mordien]

16 hours ago, LadyWYT said:

When it comes to players who enjoy building(which I daresay covers a decent portion of the playerbase and a wide range of settings preferences)

How many of that decent portion turn off temporal storms? I'd bet it's the vast majority. Most of the massive base builders I’ve ever watched on youtube turn off the storms because it interrupts their base building time. 

16 hours ago, LadyWYT said:

To me, it's punishment for playing the game and not fun at all

I'm not advocating for a horde base defense for the temporal storms, but your response to the idea is exactly how a lot of players feel about the temporal storms now. Also if this was a mechanical you just wouldn't do your temporal storm in your normal base. As CastIronFabric has mentioned games like 7DTD has this mechanic and most players have a home base that looks pretty if they care about that stuff and then a fighting base that gets damaged. 

 

On 1/3/2026 at 12:37 PM, LadyWYT said:

Lore aside, the main hurdle I see to "monsters can break blocks" is...how does the behavior get accounted for in the code? Are the monsters breaking blocks only if there is no other way to get to the player, or do they break blocks if no player is within sight? Can they break blocks if they get stuck trying to pathfind to the player, despite a clear route existing? To me, trying to code it seems like it will create many more problems than the code actually solves.

I'm not sure where the lore issue is, but yes they can code mobs to do this. The mobs already do this to an extend. If a bear can't get to you, it runs away. If you charge a Bowtorn, they run away unless you get too close and they hit you with their Trex arms. Maybe they aren't ready yet to do this everywhere yet, but since they are going to work on complex animal behaviors in the furture it doesn't seem out of line they could add complex temporal storm behaviors.

 

On 1/4/2026 at 12:44 AM, Thorfinn said:

I'm ok with the storms as is.

So was I, but that doesn't stop changes from happening. I don't believe we have seen the last temporal storm change by a long shot. I strongly believe they will nerf the small hiding hole exploit at some point. When they do that, I hope they add some way to survive for most players. 

 

On 1/2/2026 at 3:27 PM, MKMoose said:

Bowtorns aren't much worse unless multiple spawn at the same time, though it's often best to make sure no other enemies are nearby before chasing them. The real threat is T3+ shivers for me, although those can also be sort of cheesed quite easily sometimes since their hitbox is wider than one block.

I'm the reverse I guess. I have fences to deal with the shivers. The bowtorns always find a gap in my defense to shot me while I'm dealing with the darn shivers.

 

@The Lerf Thanks for throwing out some ideas. Usually, its just a bunch of us complaining in these threads.

[LadyWYT]

5 minutes ago, Zane Mordien said:

How many of that decent portion turn off temporal storms? I'd bet it's the vast majority. Most of the massive base builders I’ve ever watched on youtube turn off the storms because it interrupts their base building time. 

I would say it probably depends on the demeanor of the player. If they don't like the mechanic and don't otherwise care, they'll turn it off. If they enjoy the ambience and lore, they'll likely keep the storms turned on.

Regarding YouTube, I wouldn't really use YouTubers as a good metric of what makes something good or not. YouTubers are typically focused on being entertaining first and foremost, which means they're going to be tailoring their games and editing their videos to make entertaining content, which doesn't always translate to using the settings they actually enjoy playing with.

10 minutes ago, Zane Mordien said:

I'm not advocating for a horde base defense for the temporal storms, but your response to the idea is exactly how a lot of players feel about the temporal storms now.

Similar, yes, but as I've made pretty clear, I don't agree with the players expressing such sentiment about the current temporal storms. To me, the current temporal storms are just another challenge to tackle. I can't stop them from happening, so I need to figure out how to deal with them. It's interesting world-building, as well as an interesting thing to plan around for adventures, as otherwise there's really no reason to bother with planning.

As for a horde base defense though, that feels like a change that goes too far. Even if I go out and aggressively stack a pile of monster corpses, there's always going to be that monster or two that happily tears something up despite my best efforts. I'll also note that based on some of the comments on this mod, such a damage mechanic doesn't seem like it would be a particular popular change to temporal storms either: https://mods.vintagestory.at/show/mod/35820

Is it the worst idea I've ever heard? No, hence why I also commented that if such a change were made, I would highly recommend/appreciate an option to turn off mob griefing. That way the more hardcore players can have their base defense, while other players can keep the ambience of storms but turn that specific thing off. 

21 minutes ago, Zane Mordien said:

I'm not sure where the lore issue is, but yes they can code mobs to do this. The mobs already do this to an extend. If a bear can't get to you, it runs away. If you charge a Bowtorn, they run away unless you get too close and they hit you with their Trex arms. Maybe they aren't ready yet to do this everywhere yet, but since they are going to work on complex animal behaviors in the furture it doesn't seem out of line they could add complex temporal storm behaviors.

The main "lore issue" I see is that monsters are described to be pretty specific in what/who they target, and not so much be mindlessly bent on destruction. Basically, if there's a humanoid target in a house, it makes sense that they'll try to break down the door or smash windows, but it doesn't really make sense for them to tear up an empty building.

As far as coding behavior like that...yes, it's certainly possible, but what leaves me scratching my head is I'm not sure how you can get the monsters to determine which structures are worth destroying and which are not. The easiest solution seems to be to just allow them to start breaking nearby blocks if they can't reach a player, but at that point they become mindless griefers and not monsters with uncanny intelligence.

26 minutes ago, Zane Mordien said:

I strongly believe they will nerf the small hiding hole exploit at some point. When they do that, I hope they add some way to survive for most players.

I would hope so as well, if they make that sort of change. Given what's depicted in the Temporal Storm tapestry though, I think "small hidey hole" is meant to be a viable, if boring, option. Safety does have a price, after all.

 

28 minutes ago, Zane Mordien said:

@The Lerf Thanks for throwing out some ideas. Usually, its just a bunch of us complaining in these threads.

Agreed. I can appreciate a well-written idea, even if I don't agree with it.

[CastIronFabric]

53 minutes ago, Zane Mordien said:

How many of that decent portion turn off temporal storms? I'd bet it's the vast majority. Most of the massive base builders I’ve ever watched on youtube turn off the storms because it interrupts their base building time. 

 

I think its safer to say most players either turn off storms completely, sleep thru them or wait them out. I personally do not think those players are really intrested in the mechanics improving as much as not interested in it at all. There are plenty of tower defense focused games on the market.