[VS 1.12.14] Vies Storage v0.1.0

[Vies]

Vies Storage

Current Version : v0.1.0 (VS-1.12.14)
The Vies Storage mod adds more chest options to Vintage Story, without breaking the challenge we all know and love.

Currently the mod contains :
- Copper Chests (18 slots)
- Tin Bronze Chests (20 slots)
- Iron Chests (22 slots)

To make these chests, you will need to forge "Chest Support" items using an anvil and the metal type. For the full recipes, refer to the in-game handbook!


 

Planned:

- I want to make various chests for all of the metal options in the game. They will have their storage capacities based on their Tier.

Tier 1 = 18 slots   |   Tier 2 = 22 slots   |   Tier 3 = 26 slots
- I want to add labeled versions of all chests.

- I would like to add secret paintings that can hold a few hidden items too.

 

viesstorage-1.12.14-0.1.0.zip

Edited April 21, 2020 by Vies

[Kuddel]

hey, your mod is really nice but when i install it, i cant use the first row in my backpacks, you cant put items in it or remove them, maybee you can check this?

[Vies]

2 hours ago, Kuddel said:

hey, your mod is really nice but when i install it, i cant use the first row in my backpacks, you cant put items in it or remove them, maybee you can check this?

Yeah, sure thing! Is this for single player or multiplayer?

[Vies]

I just fired up my game and I was able to move things around using both the Hunter Backpack and the Leather Backpack.

I did notice something weird with the game itself (no mods) that could help. I have been remoting into my gaming laptop to play and the game seems to loose track of the mouse if the window is sized too small. If my cursor is hovering over and item slot (my hotbar), it seems to confuse the game. I have to hit escape (pull up the menu) and move the mouse into the middle of the screen and it plays like normal. Again, with no mods. 

[Belcas]

works fine on my server/client. it's a bummer but your chests aren't working with the carrycapacity mod... definitely not hoping for more chest-backpack storage  

[Vies]

20 minutes ago, Belcas said:

works fine on my server/client. it's a bummer but your chests aren't working with the carrycapacity mod... definitely not hoping for more chest-backpack storage  

I am firing up a public server, going to test it. My blocks use the default Generic Container class, not sure what could be preventing my mod from working, but I will find out in the next 15 minutes or so.

[Vies]

Got my server going and I see what you mean. Just to clear the air, my mod is working, those chests can store things! Haha For whatever reason, I though my chests were not working at all. I can look into carryCapacity integration after I add my other chests and blocks I had in mind.

[Kuddel]

hmmz ok maybee its just my game^^ because i installed your mod and it doesnt work, i deinstall it, it works  but np i try to fix it myself

[Belcas]

7 hours ago, Vies said:

Got my server going and I see what you mean. Just to clear the air, my mod is working, those chests can store things! Haha For whatever reason, I though my chests were not working at all. I can look into carryCapacity integration after I add my other chests and blocks I had in mind.

Sry, i thought if i just mention carrycapacity it would be clear, that i meant, that picking up chests would not work... my failure 

Edited April 18, 2020 by Belcas

[Streetwind]

Hello Vies, I like the idea of these chests a lot, but I'm not sure that two extra slots per metal tier are worth it.

Consider that 16 storage slots cost 8 planks - that's half of a single wood log, and half a single tick of durability damage to a saw. Meanwhile, the 2/4/6 bonus slots the metal chests offer cost four to five metal ingots - that is, four to forge the supports, and a fifth for the hammer that is most likely going to be used up in forging those four items. Nevermind the procuring and processing cost of that metal (pickaxe durability, smelting fuel, player effort, etc). It seems that, if I wanted more storage, just making more chests would be the far better idea. Space is only rarely a limitation, which leaves these chests to be mostly a luxury statement: see how much metal I have, that I can afford to spend it on this!

Now obviously, adding enough slots to make a chest that costs wood and metal more cost effective than a chest that costs just wood is not going to happen. They're never going to be cost effective, nor should they be meant to be. Still, I think that the payoff could be a little more attractive than just two slots per tier.

You could consider maybe three or four slots per tier. Or maybe even something irregular, like a 2/6/8 setup, where bronze adds +4 and the other two tiers add +2, since copper is easy and iron is plentiful, but bronze is usually a major hump to cross. Or +3/+4/+3.  Or the like.

If each tier was bigger, then you could also have variation within that tier. The game already does this all across the board with bronze, which is an example you could follow.

It could result in the following example lineup, or something similar to it:

• Tier 0, Wood: 16 slots
•  
• Tier 1, Copper: 20 (+4 over wood)
• Tier 1, Bismuth: 20 (+4 over wood)
•  
• Tier 2, Molybdochalkos: 22 (+2 over copper)
• Tier 2, Brass: 22 (+2 over copper)
•  
• Tier 3, Bismuth bronze: 24 (+2 over brass)
• Tier 3, Tin bronze: 25 (+3 over brass)
• Tier 3, Black bronze: 26 (+4 over brass)
•  
• Tier 4, Iron: 28 (+3 over tin bronze)

Not sure if it's worth having other metals like straight zinc, tin, lead, etc in there, as you're always better off alloying them. They would simply never be used. Bismuth is an exception for its interesting color. Silver and gold could probably also be added in there for their appearance, though I'm not sure if you'd want to balance them according to their rarity (high) or according to their suitability as a metal (low). Tools made from them choose the latter route in stock VS.

Edited April 18, 2020 by Streetwind

[Vies]

2 hours ago, Streetwind said:

Hello Vies, I like the idea of these chests a lot, but I'm not sure that two extra slots per metal tier are worth it.

Consider that 16 storage slots cost 8 planks - that's half of a single wood log, and half a single tick of durability damage to a saw. Meanwhile, the 2/4/6 bonus slots the metal chests offer cost four to five metal ingots - that is, four to forge the supports, and a fifth for the hammer that is most likely going to be used up in forging those four items. Nevermind the procuring and processing cost of that metal (pickaxe durability, smelting fuel, player effort, etc). It seems that, if I wanted more storage, just making more chests would be the far better idea. Space is only rarely a limitation, which leaves these chests to be mostly a luxury statement: see how much metal I have, that I can afford to spend it on this!

Now obviously, adding enough slots to make a chest that costs wood and metal more cost effective than a chest that costs just wood is not going to happen. They're never going to be cost effective, nor should they be meant to be. Still, I think that the payoff could be a little more attractive than just two slots per tier.

You could consider maybe three or four slots per tier. Or maybe even something irregular, like a 2/6/8 setup, where bronze adds +4 and the other two tiers add +2, since copper is easy and iron is plentiful, but bronze is usually a major hump to cross. Or +3/+4/+3.  Or the like.

If each tier was bigger, then you could also have variation within that tier. The game already does this all across the board with bronze, which is an example you could follow.

It could result in the following example lineup, or something similar to it:

• Tier 0, Wood: 16 slots
•  
• Tier 1, Copper: 20 (+4 over wood)
• Tier 1, Bismuth: 20 (+4 over wood)
•  
• Tier 2, Molybdochalkos: 22 (+2 over copper)
• Tier 2, Brass: 22 (+2 over copper)
•  
• Tier 3, Bismuth bronze: 24 (+2 over brass)
• Tier 3, Tin bronze: 25 (+3 over brass)
• Tier 3, Black bronze: 26 (+4 over brass)
•  
• Tier 4, Iron: 28 (+3 over tin bronze)

Not sure if it's worth having other metals like straight zinc, tin, lead, etc in there, as you're always better off alloying them. They would simply never be used. Bismuth is an exception for its interesting color. Silver and gold could probably also be added in there for their appearance, though I'm not sure if you'd want to balance them according to their rarity (high) or according to their suitability as a metal (low). Tools made from them choose the latter route in stock VS.

I definitely appreciate this explanation! I must admit, I am still new at the game, making my clay pots and what not, but originally, I had about 4 slots per tier. I looked at the code and according to the devs at vintage story metal Tiers are set up like this :

Tier 0 = Lead, Molybdochalkos

Tier 1 = Copper, Silver, Gold, Bismuth, Zinc

Tier 2 = Tin Bronze, Bismuth Bronze, Black Bronze, Brass

Tier 3 = Iron

Tier 4 = Tin, Steel

Tier 5 = Chromium, Stainless Steel

Tier 6 = Titanium, Platinum

Tier 7 = Rhodium

Tier 8 = Uranium

My initial though was to make chests up to Tier 3 since I wasn't sure if anything higher was even really used yet. My next update will be including chest variants of Tier 0 - Tier 3 metals. I will also be increasing the space for each Tier as well. Originally, I was going to go with the following :

Tier 0 = 18 slots   |   Tier 1 = 20 slots   |   Tier 2 = 24 slots   |   Tier 3 = 28 slots
But with how abundant some other metals are, I may adjust this a bit. Thanks for the explanation, it truly does help.
         
        

[Streetwind]

Well, I'm sure the developers of Vintage Story have their reasons for tiering metals like this. That doesn't mean you have to follow it, though, or that the reasons the devs have work out for you. Allow me to explain my reasoning:

In the list you gave, molybdochalkos is on a lower tier than copper. But if a player ingame must decide what they can afford, that's a different story. It's not enough to have lead; it's not enough to have copper. You must have both to make the alloy. As a result, for actual gameplay purposes, molybdochalkos is harder to get than either copper or lead on its own.

Additionally, consider that molybdochalkos only has one single use right now - it makes lanterns, and that's it. As such, allowing it to make metal chest gives a heavily underutilized alloy something new to do. Brass is in a similar boat; right now, all it makes is torch holders and lanterns. Might as well also allow chests to be made out of it. Both molybdochalkos and brass are two-component alloys of copper and a relatively common secondary ingredient, so they are extremely similar in that regard as well. It makes perfect sense, game design wise, to have them together in a capability tier. And since they are harder to get than straight copper, they should be in a tier above copper.

But since I inserted the two-component alloys in between copper and bronze, I made that a "half-tier", only adding two slots instead of four.

Tin bronze is also a two-component alloy of copper. However, cassiterite is very rare - much more so than galena and sphalerite. Also, bronze's material properties make it a proper tool metal, in contrast to brass and molybdochalkos. So it makes sense, for both of these reasons, to have it a tier higher than those two. The other two bronzes are three-component alloys, and are therefore harder to get by default than the two-component alloys. But the ingredients for bismuth bronze are common, so it can stand side by side with tin bronze easily - maybe even a step below it, as it does in tools and armors. Black bronze, in turn, has better stats than tin bronze in every application we see in stock VS, because it is so hard to make. So keeping them in their own tier, but with a three-way capability split, both makes sense game design wise, and matches the behavior of the base game that players learn to expect.

 

You can, of course, stick directly to the metal tiers as defined by the base game. I just wanted to point out that you don't have to - that you can look at how players in the game obtain metal and progress, and design your own tiers according to that.

Also be aware of future-proofing your approach. Should steel ever get implemented in the base game, players of your mod will clamor for steel chests. So you'll enter tier 4 that way. But tier 4 as defined by base VS also has tin. So what are you going to do - implement a tin chest, and allow players to jump to chests equivalent to steel before they have even made bronze? Or decide that tin chests shouldn't exist, or should exist but on a different tier, and therefore deliberately break with the base VS tiering as you do so? And then comes stainless steel, and gives you the same problem. Stainless steel is tier 5, and it is made with chrome, and chrome is also tier 5. So why should people ever use stainless steel, if they can use straight chrome and get the same result - unless you, again, deliberately break with the base VS tiering?

Might as well think things through now, so you don't run into that awkward situation later!

 

Edited April 18, 2020 by Streetwind

[Vies]

On 4/18/2020 at 10:29 AM, Streetwind said:

Well, I'm sure the developers of Vintage Story have their reasons for tiering metals like this. That doesn't mean you have to follow it, though, or that the reasons the devs have work out for you. Allow me to explain my reasoning:

In the list you gave, molybdochalkos is on a lower tier than copper. But if a player ingame must decide what they can afford, that's a different story. It's not enough to have lead; it's not enough to have copper. You must have both to make the alloy. As a result, for actual gameplay purposes, molybdochalkos is harder to get than either copper or lead on its own.

Additionally, consider that molybdochalkos only has one single use right now - it makes lanterns, and that's it. As such, allowing it to make metal chest gives a heavily underutilized alloy something new to do. Brass is in a similar boat; right now, all it makes is torch holders and lanterns. Might as well also allow chests to be made out of it. Both molybdochalkos and brass are two-component alloys of copper and a relatively common secondary ingredient, so they are extremely similar in that regard as well. It makes perfect sense, game design wise, to have them together in a capability tier. And since they are harder to get than straight copper, they should be in a tier above copper.

But since I inserted the two-component alloys in between copper and bronze, I made that a "half-tier", only adding two slots instead of four.

Tin bronze is also a two-component alloy of copper. However, cassiterite is very rare - much more so than galena and sphalerite. Also, bronze's material properties make it a proper tool metal, in contrast to brass and molybdochalkos. So it makes sense, for both of these reasons, to have it a tier higher than those two. The other two bronzes are three-component alloys, and are therefore harder to get by default than the two-component alloys. But the ingredients for bismuth bronze are common, so it can stand side by side with tin bronze easily - maybe even a step below it, as it does in tools and armors. Black bronze, in turn, has better stats than tin bronze in every application we see in stock VS, because it is so hard to make. So keeping them in their own tier, but with a three-way capability split, both makes sense game design wise, and matches the behavior of the base game that players learn to expect.

 

You can, of course, stick directly to the metal tiers as defined by the base game. I just wanted to point out that you don't have to - that you can look at how players in the game obtain metal and progress, and design your own tiers according to that.

Also be aware of future-proofing your approach. Should steel ever get implemented in the base game, players of your mod will clamor for steel chests. So you'll enter tier 4 that way. But tier 4 as defined by base VS also has tin. So what are you going to do - implement a tin chest, and allow players to jump to chests equivalent to steel before they have even made bronze? Or decide that tin chests shouldn't exist, or should exist but on a different tier, and therefore deliberately break with the base VS tiering as you do so? And then comes stainless steel, and gives you the same problem. Stainless steel is tier 5, and it is made with chrome, and chrome is also tier 5. So why should people ever use stainless steel, if they can use straight chrome and get the same result - unless you, again, deliberately break with the base VS tiering?

Might as well think things through now, so you don't run into that awkward situation later!

 

I would love to pick your brain about this. Mind talking to me on discord when you can? Vies#0643

[Julius van Vern]

For the Germans  

 

 

[Hrapenkoff]

21.04.2020 в 04:14, Вис сказал:

Я бы с удовольствием проконсультировал вас об этом. Не против поговорить со мной о разладе, когда сможешь? Vies # 0643

Здравствуйте. Будет ли обновление под новую версию 1.13.1?