What holds us back - A discussion on the biggest problems with Vintage Story and potential solutions

[CastIronFabric]

6 hours ago, A_Guy_in_Orange said:

I mean I have plenty of experience in that other game that it seems we dont name here(?) and punishing mob spawns for having the audacity of happening around you is far from hard, Im sure once I get to that point I'll make a farm to juice it to its fullest but thats neither here nor there. Having stuff spawn directly ontop of you does sound like some BS, but I've dealt with Lycanites I'm sure its manageable, especially since by now im sure an experienced player would have more gear and more of a base than my current dirt box so by the time they get bad I doubt there will be much excuse for being unprepared but like the revolutionary new glass coffins it remains to be seen

storms do not really get harder over time, its not like 7 Days to Die. There is Light, medium and heavy storms. I am not sure if they are 100% random or start with light and then move up to heavy but I do know they cycle thru and again I think randomly

[CastIronFabric]

5 hours ago, Broccoli Clock said:

Maybe I'm picking it up wrongly here, but a lot of people seem to equate the player's ability to the strength of the Rust World. In my mind, which will be subjective, the whole point is you are rag-dolled by the storms, they are not meant to be fun, they are not meant to be background noise you work around, they should (and do, regularly) place a wrench into whatever you are doing, and altering your day's itinerary. The surface portals add to that. "Why is it half inside my house, that's stupid", is a common claim, but that's the point, the Rust World does not care for your comfort, the normalities of your day-to-day life are both irrelevant and inconsequential when faced with an entire dimension of malign intent. The whole point of the world being empty and full of ruins, apart from the traders, is that people could not contend with what they had manifested and that the horrors were so great they took to living underground.

I do not know if that is the purpose of storms or not, however, intent or not it is in my opinion its bad design. Yes I know a lot of game developers do it but it breaks focus and there have been plenty of studies on how breaking focus is bad, causes problems with stress and frankly not fun. I read one study a long time ago that showed one phone call lasting only 30 seconds can break 30 mins of productivity. When you are building something, crafting something, researching something and your brain is about 10 steps into a plan and then BAM have it all interrupted by 10 mins of something you do not want to do I think its time for developers to consider the fact that this MIGHT not actually be good design.

I really think more game developers need to consider the concept of 'I go TO the danger, instead of the danger coming to me' as a game design. Just because its not done, does not mean its not better

Edited January 30 by CastIronFabric

[LadyWYT]

7 hours ago, Broccoli Clock said:

In my mind, which will be subjective, the whole point is you are rag-dolled by the storms, they are not meant to be fun, they are not meant to be background noise you work around, they should (and do, regularly) place a wrench into whatever you are doing, and altering your day's itinerary. The surface portals add to that. "Why is it half inside my house, that's stupid", is a common claim, but that's the point, the Rust World does not care for your comfort, the normalities of your day-to-day life are both irrelevant and inconsequential when faced with an entire dimension of malign intent.

That's pretty accurate given what's been laid out in the story and lore so far. Without spoiling too much, essentially some stuff happened in the past that brought about things like temporal storms and rifts, which is why it's probably not a good idea to go repeating those same actions from the past. 

Personally, I can appreciate that the "big bad thing" is actually allowed to be a threat, rather than something that's supposed to be a threat but clearly tailored for the utmost player convenience. 

2 hours ago, CastIronFabric said:

There is Light, medium and heavy storms. I am not sure if they are 100% random or start with light and then move up to heavy but I do know they cycle thru and again I think randomly

It's not random. The storms start off weaker and get stronger as the game continues. On default settings the first storms will almost always be light storms, with the occasional medium storm if the player gets unlucky with the RNG. Towards the end of the first year, the average storm strength is medium, with a few heavy storms sprinkled in and few light storms. About midway into the second year is when the storms become predominantly heavy storms with a handful of medium storms mixed in--no more light storms.

 

2 hours ago, CastIronFabric said:

storms do not really get harder over time

They do get harder over time though. Light storms don't have much visual distortion and tend to spawn fewer and weaker monsters. Heavy storms have a lot of visual distortion, making it hard to aim properly or navigate, and spawn mostly corrupt/nightmare level monsters as well as having more frequent monster spawns than lighter storms. Medium storms are a middle ground between light and heavy.

With a light storm the player can probably get away with tier 1-2 equipment, but for heavier storms they will need tier 3+ in most cases.

[CastIronFabric]

13 minutes ago, LadyWYT said:

 

It's not random. The storms start off weaker and get stronger as the game continues. On default settings the first storms will almost always be light storms, with the occasional medium storm if the player gets unlucky with the RNG. Towards the end of the first year, the average storm strength is medium, with a few heavy storms sprinkled in and few light storms. About midway into the second year is when the storms become predominantly heavy storms with a handful of medium storms mixed in--no more light storms.

 

even more reason to turn it off for me.

I am glad that they make it possible to experience the vast majority of the game without having storms. So for example, in 7 days to die you could turn off blood moon but a lot of the things you make would be useless, I am glad its not that way here I hope that does not change.

[Calmest_of_lakes]

Another question to ask could be: How would we make temporal storms more fun and engaging?

[pokebro2000]

20 hours ago, Broccoli Clock said:

Maybe I'm picking it up wrongly here, but a lot of people seem to equate the player's ability to the strength of the Rust World. In my mind, which will be subjective, the whole point is you are rag-dolled by the storms, they are not meant to be fun, they are not meant to be background noise you work around, they should (and do, regularly) place a wrench into whatever you are doing, and altering your day's itinerary. The surface portals add to that. "Why is it half inside my house, that's stupid", is a common claim, but that's the point, the Rust World does not care for your comfort, the normalities of your day-to-day life are both irrelevant and inconsequential when faced with an entire dimension of malign intent. The whole point of the world being empty and full of ruins, apart from the traders, is that people could not contend with what they had manifested and that the horrors were so great they took to living underground.

While it's really cool from a lore perspective, it's not engaging in the way everything else is. It's less like a feature of an apocalyptic world you have to adapt to and more like an angry GM punishing you for playing. The difference between storms and every other challenge in the game is, for lack of a better word, counter-play. Bears and wolves? You can see/hear them coming, they spawn in semi-predictable locations you can avoid (forests), and can be scared off with enough damage or rocks thrown. Darkness? You can wait until daytime or craft some form of light to carry or place. Winter? Farming and food preservation, fire pits, warm clothes, or head to the equator. Even regular nasties can be managed by avoiding rifts and dark places, or bringing armour when you venture underground, or even just running away. 

With temporal storms though? There's no option to disengage or hide if you can't fight it. Can't avoid it by going elsewhere because it's everywhere, can't stay indoors and wait it out (besides a 1x1 closet) because they spawn indoors, and fighting is largely just a drain of resources that gives you a handful of flax as compensation, but that's assuming you don't die and now have to deal with swarms of enemies now guarding your stuff. The majority of this game's difficulty is "firm, but fair", but temporal storms fly in the face of that in their current iteration. It's a recurring natural disaster that only stops short of destroying our homes (and even that's likely because the devs know it would be going too far, considering the weirdness you can find in the rest of the game). You can take steps to secure yourself against every other threat, but with storms the best you can do is go into an open field so you don't get cornered while fighting.

While I'm not expecting us to ever have a way to "solve" the storms or "defeat" the rust or anything like that, there needs to be more ways to deal with it, even if it's just "don't spawn enemies in a lit room the player is currently inside", or giving us an item from jonas parts that consumes fuel in exchange for some safety. Actually, if people escaped underground to avoid them, why can't we do the same? Why is it WORSE to be underground and have your stability constantly drain while still dealing with enemies if it worked well enough for past people? (obviously assuming story reasons for why not, but it's an example of something to do, move underground while the storm passes for those that can't/don't want to fight). 

And I know we can always "turn it off", but just because we can choose not to engage with something doesn't make it immune to criticism, especially if we want it to improve.

20 hours ago, Broccoli Clock said:

they are not meant to be fun,

Then why are we playing a video game? If the goal was to not be fun, we could just have them pause the game and play drifter ASMR for 10 minutes before you're allowed to play again. It already functions like that for people who hop into a cupboard and wait it out by roleplaying as a sack of flour. There's some nice spectacle put in the storms, so they're clearly MEANT to be engaging, they just need some more options when dealing with them IMO. 

[ifoz]

44 minutes ago, pokebro2000 said:

Actually, if people escaped underground to avoid them, why can't we do the same?

While I agree that storms need some kind of rework to either make them more manageable (don't spawn enemies right on top of the player) or more engaging, this one part isn't actually the case.

Spoiler

In the lore, storms only started happening after the activation of the Grand Machine. People went underground to hide from the Rot, rather than anything temporal, since things like rifts, monsters and storms didn't exist back then.

I've mentioned it in other threads, but personally I think it'd be fun if storms would spawn enemies a decent ways away from the player and then have them try and path toward them. This would allow players who don't want to fight to stay inside in relative safety, while also preventing them from going outside unless they were prepared or wanted to fight. That way storms also engage more with the mechanics of building a shelter and encourage players to at least make a rudimentary base.

[Broccoli Clock]

17 hours ago, CastIronFabric said:

...it is in my opinion its bad design. 

That's very much your opinion, and you are entitled to it of course, but It's certainly not one I would agree with. 

17 hours ago, CastIronFabric said:

I really think more game developers need to consider the concept of 'I go TO the danger, instead of the danger coming to me' as a game design. Just because its not done, does not mean its not better

Your comparison was with 7 Days, which I can understand and I'm someone who has played that game since the pre-alpha release (that was when the terrain was still blocky), but your logic is that in VS because the danger 'comes to you' rather than 'you going to it' it's "bad game design" yet in 7DtD the horde literally 'comes to you' but that's OK? What's more that horde is destructive where in VS a temporal storm is not. It seems, just from the way you've worded it, you are not applying the same standard to both games. Surely the logic must run true for both? Albeit the character progression, emphasis on the storm/horde elements, and the interaction with the world are different.

On a side note have you ever fought a 7 Days horde on the ground, baseless? I'm guessing you probably have, if only out of necessity. It's totally possible (just make sure you don't enter a vehicle!) and the reason I ask is I wonder if you have fought a temporal storm in the same way. It's surprisingly easier than many expect, if you have the space to run about in that is.

9 hours ago, Calmest_of_lakes said:

Another question to ask could be: How would we make temporal storms more fun and engaging?

The storms are engaging, literally, as you cannot avoid their existence, you can place yourself out of harms way (mostly) but you can't non engage. I am not sure if English is your native language, don't worry that isn't a criticism, just that engaging can be a bit nebulous as many will use it as a synonym for "enjoyable". Are they enjoyable? I don't want to sound a contrarian but I do find them fun, at times, at least I do not consider them a definite negative. I'm certainly not against amending them, although I think it would be a shame for them to be watered down, as they are central to the lore.

There have been multiple threads already discussing this issue, but the OP decided not to bump any number of threads and instead start their own. This is not shade to the OP, but if you genuinely wanted everyone's opinion, then why start a new thread devoid of everything people have already said? If I was a moderator, I'd be tempted to merge a lot of these similar threads, rather than having many smaller ones all having related comments.

2 hours ago, pokebro2000 said:

With temporal storms though? There's no option to disengage or hide if you can't fight it. Can't avoid it by going elsewhere because it's everywhere, can't stay indoors and wait it out (besides a 1x1 closet) because they spawn indoors, and fighting is largely just a drain of resources that gives you a handful of flax as compensation, but that's assuming you don't die and now have to deal with swarms of enemies now guarding your stuff. .

I do need to push back on this, as several have made this assumption and for me it's massively over playing the situation. You absolutely can mitigate the storms, you absolutely can wait it out, and you absolutely can fight them off. Now, the caveat is that depending on your character progression some of those tactics will work better than others. I'm certainly not suggesting you jump into your first temporal storm armed only with a flint spear, and no armour, and try and fight it out toe-to-toe, but storms can be easily mitigated. Far too many people lean into the, "I will die if a storm happens, no matter what I do" meta. This is purely anecdotal, but I've got probably 1000+ hours in the game (I can't tell as there is no official hours played like in Steam, and it's something I would like to see added, it would be fairly simple to do) and throughout all that time, there have been two instances I can think of where I have had an enemy spawn upon me without me being able to respond. I don't cheese the storms, there are obvious ways to do that, but I do have a set up that minimises the risk. I don't count myself as being such a good gamer that I alone am capable of this. 

Have I died in storms? Oh, hell, yes, but of those deaths only a tiny slither were due to what most would consider "a dick move" by the game. The vast majority have been done to my own stupidity. 

2 hours ago, pokebro2000 said:

Then why are we playing a video game? If the goal was to not be fun, we could just have them pause the game and play drifter ASMR for 10 minutes before you're allowed to play again. It already functions like that for people who hop into a cupboard and wait it out by roleplaying as a sack of flour. There's some nice spectacle put in the storms, so they're clearly MEANT to be engaging, they just need some more options when dealing with them IMO. 

This is a deeper question than you think, why struggle at anything in life? If you are only fed honey, then any other food will seem bland. It's called a reward. You "suffer" the storms to value the times in their absence. If you extend on your logic, and while I appreciate I'm being a little obtuse here, you could ask, "why should I bother waiting for crops to grow", or, "why do bears and wolves attack me". If you remove everything negative in the game you end up with creative mode.

I am of a generation that grew up with brutally hard games, primarily because of the limitations those had to gatekeep behind difficulty, but in my mind I welcome things that are not easy or quick to deal with, things you need to put effort into. I'm not saying you are not similar, just explaining why storms aren't the huge negative for me, it's all opinions of course.

I should say that while I've only quoted a tiny part of your much larger comment, to be clear I do agree with a fair bit of that larger comment.

--

Unconnected to my replies above, I actually went looking to see if there was a command line relating to storms. Primarily to see if you could turn them off. In the wiki there is one explicit storm related command, /nexttempstorm, which will tell you the time the next storm will hit, while adding "now" at the end will trigger that storm immediately. Interestingly no actual "stop" option, although that might happen implicitly using a different command such as controlling the time/weather which will affect them.

[Broccoli Clock]

Not that I know the direction the lore storyline is to go in, but would those who dislike the storms be more amenable towards them if the game's progression led to a way to remove them?

This is just a hypothetical, apropos of nothing, but what if the storyline was leading you towards banishing the Rust World in some way, or at least returning a level of temporal stability to the land? I get that people dislike storms, and while they are part of the lore they are not actually core to the story progression (at least not that I am aware of). If we were to keep the storms as is, but gave the player the opportunity to affect their presence/timing/strength/etc if you completed the storyline, would that minimise the annoyance at their existence?

[CastIronFabric]

5 hours ago, Broccoli Clock said:

That's very much your opinion, and you are entitled to it of course, but It's certainly not one I would agree with. 

Your comparison was with 7 Days, which I can understand and I'm someone who has played that game since the pre-alpha release (that was when the terrain was still blocky), but your logic is that in VS because the danger 'comes to you' rather than 'you going to it' it's "bad game design" yet in 7DtD the horde literally 'comes to you' but that's OK? What's more that horde is destructive where in VS a temporal storm is not. It seems, just from the way you've worded it, you are not applying the same standard to both games. Surely the logic must run true for both? Albeit the character progression, emphasis on the storm/horde elements, and the interaction with the world are different.

 

Yes that is exactly what I am saying.

What I am trying to convey how something can be fun and engaging and bad design at the same time is really hard to explain but let me try.

Lets says somehow you managed to live outside of society 100% and you have never seen a car. Then a replica of a Model T drives up. Well, you are going to think that is the best thing ever, amazing! However, if you have never seen a modern car you are going to be unaware that it can be a LOT better.

If (hypothetically) ALL your block building games have a threat that comes to you, how do you know the game design would be better with a 'I go to the threat' instead? I doubt this makes sense, its a hard concept for me to explain

[CastIronFabric]

5 hours ago, Broccoli Clock said:

Not that I know the direction the lore storyline is to go in, but would those who dislike the storms be more amenable towards them if the game's progression led to a way to remove them?

This is just a hypothetical, apropos of nothing, but what if the storyline was leading you towards banishing the Rust World in some way, or at least returning a level of temporal stability to the land? I get that people dislike storms, and while they are part of the lore they are not actually core to the story progression (at least not that I am aware of). If we were to keep the storms as is, but gave the player the opportunity to affect their presence/timing/strength/etc if you completed the storyline, would that minimise the annoyance at their existence?

not in my opinion, I still think it would be better to just have storms be something you go to instead of it interrupting your work. Its not logical that one would find that feature actually enjoyable to be honest and I am not saying that to be hyperbolic, if one thinks about it objectively it actually does not make sense that it would be fun and engaging 

Edited January 31 by CastIronFabric

[The Lerf]

I've discussed a fair bit in other threads on ways to improve Temporal Storms, but I don't think I've yet talked about any ideas concerning mitigation or straight avoidance of storms. Personally, I like that they are unavoidable, predictable, and challenging. Though, I recognize why other don't like them for those same reasons. 

But has anyone brought up before the idea of merging of your personal temporal stability (i.e. the spinning gear on you UI) and the world stability (Temporal Storms, area instability)? At the moment, the game treats them as separate things, where your personal temporal stability is only affected by areas of instability, and storms have no effect on your personal stability.

So, the game treats Temporal Storms fundamentally differently from reaching zero stability. But, these things could be merged together, unifying the mechanics and even provide an immersive warning layer to storms. In this hypothetical, storms would mechanically change to a decrease of area stability globally, keeping their unavoidable nature, but linking it to your personal stability. Now when you would see the stability gear spin down, you would have to ask yourself, "Am I in a bad area, or is this a storm?" Because it's a global decrease, Temporal Storms still happen on a schedule, but now it decreases your stability down until Rust effects start to happen.

What does a change such as this do for the player? Well, now that Temporal Storms are 'entered' based on your personal stability, it means they can be mitigated by the 'slicing your arm and inserting a Temporal Gear' mechanic. Hypothetically, you could turn a heavy storm to a light storm, or avoid a storm altogether if you had enough Temporal Gears to sacrifice. I think spawn rates for Temporal Gears should be increased during storms, so if a player doesn't have enough (such as if they are very early game, or are storm avoidant), they could gain Temporal Gears with minor work. (Personally, the first time I played VS it took me so long to get a Temporal Gear to set my spawn point in my base, it was frustrating). I'd like to see more uses for Temporal Gears too, so it becomes a choice between avoiding a storm or whatever other use a TG could have.

 

----

We're in early access though, so I think we need refocus on the development of implemented features, and not their removal. In regards to the discussion of allowing the player to 'choose when and where danger happens', I hope that never happens. The simple answer is that VS isn't that kind of game. Vintage Story is an "uncompromising wilderness survival sandbox game" and clearly the devs have a vision where the danger 'comes to you'. This isn't about player choice, and 'being accommodating to other play styles'. This is a fundamental part of the game. And part of it is that the world is dangerous, there will be struggle. Turning the world to Peaceful Mode with PvE zones is not a solution. A solution is already provided by the dev for those who do not want enemies. Use it, or a mod. Suggesting that a fundamental aspect of the game changes so that you can be inconvenienced less is not constructive. This is a game where you are inconvenienced by hunger, weather, wildlife, geography, time, and everything else. I would suggest you start seeing Temporal Storms as the same thing, and you may understand the dev's vision better.

[CastIronFabric]

11 minutes ago, The Lerf said:

I've discussed a fair bit in other threads on ways to improve Temporal Storms, but I don't think I've yet talked about any ideas concerning mitigation or straight avoidance of storms. Personally, I like that they are unavoidable, predictable, and challenging.

Lets break this down a bit.

Option 1: you have traveled far from your home and you are deep in a mine getting materials, you see a message that says 'Temporal Storm is imminent'. Now you have to stop doing what you are doing and either A. fight or B. make a small hidy hole and go get some more coffee and wait it out while at the same time cementation furnace has run out of coal.

Option 2: Same as above but you decide not go out on that mining trip because you saw the message that it is coming, so basically you are just hanging out doing odds and ends near your base but not really what you want to do.

Option 3: you get a message and if you want to you go to the storm, you can get all your fancy gear and go do it. If that is not your jam at the moment then you can not.

I know I keep harping on this but I think people are not looking at this objectively. I think they have only tried one kind of beer and they assume its the best not really thinking about the other options seriously. I do not know about you guys but I do not find being interrupted and diverted from what I was doing to be 'fun' 

[The Lerf]

3 minutes ago, CastIronFabric said:

Lets break this down a bit.

Option 1: you have traveled far from your home and you are deep in a mine getting materials, you see a message that says 'Temporal Storm is imminent'. Now you have to stop doing what you are doing and either A. fight or B. make a small hidy hole and go get some more coffee and wait it out while at the same time cementation furnace has run out of coal.

Option 2: Same as above but you decide not go out on that mining trip because you saw the message that it is coming, so basically you are just hanging out doing odds and ends near your base but not really what you want to do.

Option 3: you get a message and if you want to you go to the storm, you can get all your fancy gear and go do it. If that is not your jam at the moment then you can not.

I know I keep harping on this but I think people are not looking at this objectively. I think they have only tried one kind of beer and they assume its the best not really thinking about the other options seriously. I do not know about you guys but I do not find being interrupted and diverted from what I was doing to be 'fun' 

Uh, yeah. That's the nature of the game. It's a fact about the world. When I go to explore a new area but I forgot to keep food in my inventory, I have to walk all the way back to my cellar. When I want to build, but don't have a reserve of clay, I have to dig some. If I don't track the time between storms, I get interrupted. It sounds like you're not accounting for Temporal Storms in the slightest, and getting upset because that's not what you want to do. That's not the game's fault, and it isn't a design flaw. You're not looking at it objectively, because if you were, you'd realize that it's a consistent, repeatable, predictable event. You're looking at it the most subjectively, because you are being inconvenienced by it. You're asking for it's removal, and asserting it's an improvement because it's different. If the devs wanted you to never be inconvenienced or interrupted or uncomfortable, they'd have made a different game. And some people enjoy that. You are not in control of this world, and it will continue without you. You are simply surviving in it. 

[CastIronFabric]

9 minutes ago, The Lerf said:

Uh, yeah. That's the nature of the game. It's a fact about the world. When I go to explore a new area but I forgot to keep food in my inventory, I have to walk all the way back to my cellar. When I want to build, but don't have a reserve of clay, I have to dig some. If I don't track the time between storms, I get interrupted. It sounds like you're not accounting for Temporal Storms in the slightest, and getting upset because that's not what you want to do. That's not the game's fault, and it isn't a design flaw. You're not looking at it objectively, because if you were, you'd realize that it's a consistent, repeatable, predictable event. You're looking at it the most subjectively, because you are being inconvenienced by it. You're asking for it's removal, and asserting it's an improvement because it's different. If the devs wanted you to never be inconvenienced or interrupted or uncomfortable, they'd have made a different game. And some people enjoy that. You are not in control of this world, and it will continue without you. You are simply surviving in it. 

1. I do not agree that its a fact about the world. Yes the lore mentions storms but it does not require those storms to be local to your character.

2. 'because its a fact about the world' is not really good argument for 'its good design and I like it like that because it was created as such'. its a logic fallacy I forget which one but basically arguing that 'its good because it was created'. Sure it was created but maybe its not a great creation, maybe it could be better.

In short you are making an argument that its good because its been made and its the only thing you have experience thus its awesome. (that is not exactly what I am trying to say but close)

ADDED: 'not the fault of the game' is not really relevant to my point. My point is objectively can you say that interruption is FUN..enjoyable. Not 'it must be' but 'is it actually enjoyable'. If its not enjoyable why are we doing it?

Edited January 31 by CastIronFabric

[LadyWYT]

7 hours ago, Broccoli Clock said:

Unconnected to my replies above, I actually went looking to see if there was a command line relating to storms. Primarily to see if you could turn them off. In the wiki there is one explicit storm related command, /nexttempstorm, which will tell you the time the next storm will hit, while adding "now" at the end will trigger that storm immediately. Interestingly no actual "stop" option, although that might happen implicitly using a different command such as controlling the time/weather which will affect them.

/worldconfig temporalStorms off will turn them off. Or /worldconfig temporalStormSleeping 1 to enable sleeping through temporal storms. Either one should work to take the threat out of the storm.

 

52 minutes ago, The Lerf said:

But has anyone brought up before the idea of merging of your personal temporal stability (i.e. the spinning gear on you UI) and the world stability (Temporal Storms, area instability)? At the moment, the game treats them as separate things, where your personal temporal stability is only affected by areas of instability, and storms have no effect on your personal stability.

It seems like it has, though to be quite honest I've read so many various complaints and suggestions about temporal storms and temporal stability that everything has started blending together into one big mess.

In any case, for this idea specifically, I don't think it works given the nature of temporal stability/storms and how they affect the world. Seraphs seem to be uniquely sensitive to it since their own foothold in the present is...tenuous, at best. Normal creatures and humans don't seem to be affected by temporal stability at all, although they can witness certain side effects like the underground becoming more dangerous the deeper one delves, etc. Temporal storms are a bit different--these are essentially a supernatural disaster that affects the entire world for a brief time, and is easily noticed by humans and seraphs alike. One important thing to note about the storms:

Spoiler

A temporal storm results when the Rust World tries to merge with the present reality. Likewise, when a seraph runs too low on temporal stability, they lose their hold on the present and become stuck between dimensions.

Basically, temporal storms will affect both humans and seraphs(animals don't seem to be affected since monsters only target humanoids), while temporal stability itself is mostly just a concern for seraphs given their unique biology.

 

1 hour ago, The Lerf said:

We're in early access though, so I think we need refocus on the development of implemented features, and not their removal. In regards to the discussion of allowing the player to 'choose when and where danger happens', I hope that never happens. The simple answer is that VS isn't that kind of game. Vintage Story is an "uncompromising wilderness survival sandbox game" and clearly the devs have a vision where the danger 'comes to you'. This isn't about player choice, and 'being accommodating to other play styles'. This is a fundamental part of the game. And part of it is that the world is dangerous, there will be struggle. Turning the world to Peaceful Mode with PvE zones is not a solution. A solution is already provided by the dev for those who do not want enemies. Use it, or a mod. Suggesting that a fundamental aspect of the game changes so that you can be inconvenienced less is not constructive. This is a game where you are inconvenienced by hunger, weather, wildlife, geography, time, and everything else. I would suggest you start seeing Temporal Storms as the same thing, and you may understand the dev's vision better.

I do agree with most of this, but as for the thought there at the end...I think perhaps several players do see the intent behind the design--they just really hate it. Temporal stability and related mechanics are quite a divisive feature, and I'm pretty sure that they're a feature that players will either like or dislike, with no in-between. Most changes I see suggested I really doubt would change that divisive quality; they would just change which players like it and which hate it. The best decision here is for the devs to just make the game they wish to make, and include options when feasible for players to tweak their experience. As I understand it, temporal storms and stability are also one portion of the game that's quite difficult to mod, so making that area of the code more mod-friendly is probably a good solution as well.

Personally, I like the mechanic as it is and highly dislike most changes that I've seen proposed. The only things I would be inclined to change about it, aside from making the warnings something more immersive than text messages, is correlate monster strength to storm strength a little more(ie, light storms only spawn tier 0-2 monsters, with the occasional special monster) so that they're more approachable in the early game, as well as what @ifoz suggested: make the monsters spawn at a distance from the player. With the latter, players can more reliably hide, escape from monsters, or otherwise have a smoother combat experience.

[The Lerf]

5 hours ago, CastIronFabric said:

1. I do not agree that its a fact about the world. Yes the lore mentions storms but it does not require those storms to be local to your character.

2. 'because its a fact about the world' is not really good argument for 'its good design and I like it like that because it was created as such'. its a logic fallacy I forget which one but basically arguing that 'its good because it was created'. Sure it was created but maybe its not a great creation, maybe it could be better.

In short you are making an argument that its good because its been made and its the only thing you have experience thus its awesome. (that is not exactly what I am trying to say but close)

ADDED: 'not the fault of the game' is not really relevant to my point. My point is objectively can you say that interruption is FUN..enjoyable. Not 'it must be' but 'is it actually enjoyable'. If its not enjoyable why are we doing it?

You can choose not to agree, and interpret the game however you want, but the developer intent and literal programming remains the same. 

Don't put words in my mouth. I don't think that storms are well designed, but there's nothing wrong with making them a global event. You just don't like it. It being a fact about the world is the literal programming of the game, Temporal Storms happen and you can't avoid it. And until the developer recants on that, it's part of the game. The solution to the problem, as a player, should be to deal with in in whatever way. You want a way to avoid it, there isn't one. Plan for it then. Or get a mod.

There's no logical fallacy, it's the developer's vision for the game to have storms. I'd like them to be better and more fun, but you want them functionally off by default so you don't have to be inconvenienced. The dev has provided you with a solution, turn them off or sleep through them. But you're complaining because your 'ideal' solution of never wanting to consider them isn't the default option. It's derailing threads about constructive solutions and a discussion dead-end. 

 

5 hours ago, LadyWYT said:

It seems like it has, though to be quite honest I've read so many various complaints and suggestions about temporal storms and temporal stability that everything has started blending together into one big mess.

In any case, for this idea specifically, I don't think it works given the nature of temporal stability/storms and how they affect the world. Seraphs seem to be uniquely sensitive to it since their own foothold in the present is...tenuous, at best. Normal creatures and humans don't seem to be affected by temporal stability at all, although they can witness certain side effects like the underground becoming more dangerous the deeper one delves, etc. Temporal storms are a bit different--these are essentially a supernatural disaster that affects the entire world for a brief time, and is easily noticed by humans and seraphs alike. One important thing to note about the storms:

  Hide contents

A temporal storm results when the Rust World tries to merge with the present reality. Likewise, when a seraph runs too low on temporal stability, they lose their hold on the present and become stuck between dimensions.

Basically, temporal storms will affect both humans and seraphs(animals don't seem to be affected since monsters only target humanoids), while temporal stability itself is mostly just a concern for seraphs given their unique biology.

Yes, but what I'm suggesting is that the two don't have to be different and separate systems, when having zero stability is a functional equivalency to being in a storm. Merge the two systems, so that when a Temporal Storm hits, global area stability drops, your personal stability drops to zero and the storm proceeds as usual. 

[CoffeeCupMassacre]

It's good to know that these storms aren't as pointless as they seem early on; they certainly do throw wrenches in things. But the thing is, if this were my game, I'd be bothered that the best tactic I've found to handle these storms is to bury myself in a hole until they go away.

Is that really the experience they want to convey? So I turned them off on my single player save. They're still on for a dedi I'm running for some friends.

But I don't think they should go away. I totally went out running around the first time I was in one. I saw Dave, as I've been introduced, and it was very cool. After that though? What's the point?

I really like the idea of moving spawns away from players. Or, at the very least, throw in a particle effect with a short timer so that if you're paying attention, you can avoid them. Then give them more of a point. I'd love a reason to go out in them, risk the danger, but at just hitting bronze now, that's just not feasible. So we bury ourselves //media.invisioncic.com/r268468/emoticons/smile.png

Finally, as I mentioned in a previous post, I can actually say that temporal stability and storms are immersion-breaking. How, you ask? Because how the heck do I know these things? I just appeared in this world, but I somehow know all this? It would be so much cooler if portals formed and we had ways to investigate the phenomenon a bit before that first storm comes in. Ways to gather information and build tools to help predict and survive them. Otherwise, it really just seems like some favorite feature of a developer that's laid on top of a very good survival game at this stage.

[Broccoli Clock]

15 hours ago, LadyWYT said:

/worldconfig temporalStorms off will turn them off. Or /worldconfig temporalStormSleeping 1 to enable sleeping through temporal storms. Either one should work to take the threat out of the storm.

Thanks, not that I'd use it, just thought it was odd it was "missing". It wasn't missing, instead the wiki has two pages relating to command line stuff - https://wiki.vintagestory.at/List_of_server_commands and https://wiki.vintagestory.at/World_Configuration I was only looking at the former. It's not the first time I've done that when looking for something specific, so thanks for the reminder!

--

In a general question to others, do people not use horde bases once they get some character progression? Just the simplest 5x5 room, with one entrance, that entrance is guarded by a pit kiln, and using some half blocks to stop the (now on fire) mobs from getting at you. A pit kiln will last longer than a fire pit but both will work. Once on fire  let them burn out as the fire will happily deal with even the strongest of enemy. Design it well and you mitigate any bowtown ranged attacks (they will not use range if they are close) and the most dangerous of the stabby ones, can be speared or arrowed from safety.

I will use one of these to farm for Jonas parts and temporal gears. Many people seem to look upon storms as a nuisance, whereas to me, they are an opportunity. Perhaps if people felt they had something to gain, while minimising the risk, they would be more amenable to the storm mechanic. 

@CastIronFabric mentioned 7 Days a few posts back, and this is similar in a way to the horde bases you construct in that game, albeit the Rust World residents respect structural integrity, whereas 7 Days mobs will chew through concrete if given the chance.

Edited February 1 by Broccoli Clock

[Callorn]

Following  this post  I believe i was onto something  that combat is the weakest part of vintage story. I see that most of the posts since mine where about surface stability and temporal storms. 
The way I interpret this discussion so far :  Stability and temporal storms are the main thing that force combat on the players  since combat is objectively* not fun, engaging or worthwhile. most of the discussion are about how to tweak them to make their mechanic so they force combat less on the player.

Personally, since my first post i set creature hostility to passive and i was finally able to get past copper into iron before the combat made be stop playing since i found about vintage story 3 years ago. In the future i might try to enable combat again if there is a overhaul.
*edit out of spite( my interpretations are subjective.) 

Edited February 1 by Callorn

[Broccoli Clock]

9 minutes ago, Callorn said:

Since combat is not fun, engaging or worthwhile.

You really need a, "in my opinion", caveat to that claim. In isolation, I agree that it could be amended, as could the AI that you are fighting, but in comparison to its peers I would wager its combat is the equivalent of the other block game, and considerably better than what I've seen in Hytale.

Combat in general is difficult for any FPS, especially melee.

 

 

 

[CastIronFabric]

15 hours ago, The Lerf said:

You can choose not to agree, and interpret the game however you want, but the developer intent and literal programming remains the same. 

Don't put words in my mouth. I don't think that storms are well designed, but there's nothing wrong with making them a global event. You just don't like it. It being a fact about the world is the literal programming of the game, Temporal Storms happen and you can't avoid it. And until the developer recants on that, it's part of the game. The solution to the problem, as a player, should be to deal with in in whatever way. You want a way to avoid it, there isn't one. Plan for it then. Or get a mod.

There's no logical fallacy, it's the developer's vision for the game to have storms. I'd like them to be better and more fun, but you want them functionally off by default so you don't have to be inconvenienced. The dev has provided you with a solution, turn them off or sleep through them. But you're complaining because your 'ideal' solution of never wanting to consider them isn't the default option. It's derailing threads about constructive solutions and a discussion dead-end. 

 

unfortunately you are objectively wrong.

PART 1

1. Does the lore mention storms? YES

2. Does the lore mention the storms are GLOBAL? NO

3. Does that make it 'wrong' to make the storms global? NO

4. Does it mean that the lore REQUIRES the storms to be GLOBAL? NO

Its fine to suggest its lore breaking to not have storms, it is NOT find to suggest it would be lore breaking to have those storms be GLOBAL.

PART 2:

The only reason I have read that you have given to explain why storms global are a good thing is because they are required by the lore (which you are wrong on that part) and because the developers made them so.

meaning, you are NOT making the argument that global storms are actually fun, you avoided making that point completely, which is why we should all pause and think about that for awhile and a bit deeper

CONCLUSION: 

So in short, you are open to the idea of changing storms but you are absolutely against not making them global because the developers made them global. See the logic contraction here? Because the logic of 'it should be becasue the developers want it to be' would mean EVERYTHING. You could not be selective in what you want to change unless you can read the minds of the developers becasue storms being global IS NOT IN THE LORE

 

 

Edited February 1 by CastIronFabric

[Broccoli Clock]

3 hours ago, Callorn said:

*edit out of spite( my interpretations are subjective.) 

.. get over yourself. You are entitled to your opinion but you have to expect pushback when you claim combat is not fun, not engaging, or not worthwhile.

 

[LadyWYT]

7 hours ago, Broccoli Clock said:

Perhaps if people felt they had something to gain, while minimising the risk, they would be more amenable to the storm mechanic. 

I'm not really sure how that gets accomplished, given that, as you've already noted, there are ways to counter the storms with minimal risks, that aren't just sitting in a hole doing nothing, and aren't just pure cheese either. The problem, I think, is that some(not all) players making the complaints want monster drops to be lucrative, or otherwise be able to charge out into the middle of the storm with basic equipment and dominate everything(which seems to be a somewhat common occurrence in other games).

Regarding lucrative monster drops...there are mods that change the loot tables, but otherwise monsters are intended to be an environmental hazard for the player to overcome, and not something the player farms for loot like the other block game. As for being able to just dominate every enemy with ease, that's already possible to do but requires tuning one's own settings to achieve that kind of balance(turn player health up, turn monster damage down). However, it's not the default balance because the monsters are intended to be somewhat serious threats; they may be simple but getting complacent around them is an easy way to get paddled.

3 hours ago, Callorn said:

since combat is objectively* not fun, engaging or worthwhile.

Yeah, I agree with Broccoli here--that's just subjective opinion, and the answer will change depending on who you ask. I like VS combat, and leaving a trail of monster corpses in my wake tends to be one of my more favorite things to do in this game. The controls are simple enough to pick up and start having fun immediately, without the need to memorize a slew of different combos, strengths/weaknesses, etc, but they're also just complex enough that it does take some time to truly master them. As a Blackguard, I outshoot my hunter friend frequently due to having more practice, and he's plenty of game experience himself. 

Contrary to some popular belief, VS combat does not require cheese in order to do well. Sticking bears in holes or blocking monsters with fences or cheap blocks like dirt and hay bales may make those enemies trivial to deal with, but it's also just as easy to kill them at range or otherwise soften them up, or build your base with plenty of cover and doorways for maximum realistic protection while fighting(like how real life fortifications are designed). I'll also note that creature behavior is a little more variable than one might think. Bowtorn don't check for a clear field of vision before they try to shoot the player--they only have to notice the player in order to begin attacking. Drifters will usually try to attack once they notice a player, but in daylight it's not unusual for them to dither around and/or run away without actually attacking. Shivers are typically quite aggressive but will sometimes disengage and run off to parts unknown, day or night. Bears will usually attack players that get too close, but I've also seen bears ignore me or otherwise run away after displaying aggression.

[Callorn]

My Final post and thought in the topic. I LOVE Vintage story i and want the game so succeed.
I don't know how to say it but maybe the game give not enough back for what i put in it, the reward does not match the efforts i put in?

Heck i was able to have a relatively small 1 room  house in Hytale in a hour that took me  10ish hour to build.(Yet I had more fun in vintage story).