Well, I learned something new...

[Teh Pizza Lady]

1 minute ago, CastIronFabric said:

regarding number 2 I agree. I am playing the game counter to the developer intentions and what I assumed was clear is that I do not agree with the developer intentions in this area at all. So with that in play, perhaps add a setting to turn off just surface drifters? It is literally the only aspect of this game I find silly and yet in my face all the time regardless of that with no setting to turn just that part off. So...lets add it!

 

YAY we agree on something finally!  I'll add this to my list of mod ideas.

[CastIronFabric]

Just now, Teh Pizza Lady said:

YAY we agree on something finally!  I'll add this to my list of mod ideas.

regarding tower defense as far as I am concerned if I have to fight hostiles that spawn within my deed area its walking into the category of tower defense. I understand that I just my opinion and I am sticking to it.

[MKMoose]

4 minutes ago, CastIronFabric said:

regarding tower defense as far as I am concerned if I have to fight hostiles that spawn within my deed area its walking into the category of tower defense. I understand that I just my opinion and I am sticking to it.

Don't expect that ignoring well-established genre definitions will contribute positively to what you're arguing for.

Base defense? Maybe? That still doesn't describe "nearly every single building game"... whatever "building game" is supposed to mean.

 

3 hours ago, CastIronFabric said:

Use Deeds in the game to have rifts or hostiles not spawn within the Deed. Wurm Online has effectively been doing this for more than 20 years now and its solid and makes sense

We already have a feature similar to Wurm's Settlements in the form of land claims, utilized extensively on servers. Not unlike in Wurm, their primary purpose is multiplayer management and utility.

Adding an option to have claims block spawns certainly wouldn't be unreasonable, but I feel like a large part of this community would dislike how gamified it is. And you'd also need some way to create those claims naturally in survival, preferably.

The primary method for blocking spawns which is already in the game is light. Alternatives for blocking spawns or keeping monsters away have been discussed, including fire and various ideas for changes to temporal stability, rifts and related systems.

 

3 hours ago, CastIronFabric said:

All my suggestion (on the forums anyway) has been summarily rejected

Given that a lot of people including myself have historically discussed at least the second and third of your suggestions as presented here fairly extensively, with no single dominant opinion on either that I could pick out, and with your personal participation in some of these discussions no less, I find this framing somewhat hilarious.

The closest thing to a consensus that I'm aware of is that:

• Adding an option to specifically disable monsters would be quite fine, alongside an option for making animals passive while retaining hostile monsters - there are a couple design considerations here and improving the base game could be better than just waving issues away with an option, but ultimately it's just an option.
• Saraty and Tyron themselves have said that temporal storms are due for improvements, mainly to give players to go out into the storms instead of just hiding. You might also recall this from when I told you directly that Saraty and Tyron themselves have said that temporal storms are due for improvements.

 

On 10/1/2026 at 4:37 PM, LadyWYT said:

To be fair, I also don't recommend doing this unless you really know what you're doing, but if you're good at blind navigation and timing the bear's attacks, it's relatively easy to do thanks to the ability to sprint backwards.

Maybe that's just because I know what I'm doing, but I find polar bears quite trivial to kill in direct melee combat, without even sprinting - you just need to be mindful to keep moving away from it nearly at all times, and it will be just incapable of attacking properly. This may or may not be a consequence of the changes made in 1.22.

[CastIronFabric]

30 minutes ago, MKMoose said:

Don't expect that ignoring well-established genre definitions will contribute positively to what you're arguing for.

Base defense? Maybe? That still doesn't describe "nearly every single building game"... whatever "building game" is supposed to mean.

 

We already have a feature similar to Wurm's Settlements in the form of land claims, utilized extensively on servers. Not unlike in Wurm, their primary purpose is multiplayer management and utility.

Adding an option to have claims block spawns certainly wouldn't be unreasonable, but I feel like a large part of this community would dislike how gamified it is. And you'd also need some way to create those claims naturally in survival, preferably.

The primary method for blocking spawns which is already in the game is light. Alternatives for blocking spawns or keeping monsters away have been discussed, including fire and various ideas for changes to temporal stability, rifts and related systems.

 

Given that a lot of people including myself have historically discussed at least the second and third of your suggestions as presented here fairly extensively, with no single dominant opinion on either that I could pick out, and with your personal participation in some of these discussions no less, I find this framing somewhat hilarious.

The closest thing to a consensus that I'm aware of is that:

• Adding an option to specifically disable monsters would be quite fine, alongside an option for making animals passive while retaining hostile monsters - there are a couple design considerations here and improving the base game could be better than just waving issues away with an option, but ultimately it's just an option.
• Saraty and Tyron themselves have said that temporal storms are due for improvements, mainly to give players to go out into the storms instead of just hiding. You might also recall this from when I told you directly that Saraty and Tyron themselves have said that temporal storms are due for improvements.

 

Maybe that's just because I know what I'm doing, but I find polar bears quite trivial to kill in direct melee combat, without even sprinting - you just need to be mindful to keep moving away from it nearly at all times, and it will be just incapable of attacking properly. This may or may not be a consequence of the changes made in 1.22.

I think adding an option to the games option to remove surface drifters only and or adding the option to the existing Deed system to not allow hostiles to spawn in a Deeded area is really not unreasonable, is fair and completely understandable and I am sticking to that. I also understand that could be modded but from my perspective adding this as core options is obvious. I understand most (at least on the forums) do not agree and that is how it is but I am immutable on my view on those two suggestions.

 

Edited Friday at 05:53 PM by CastIronFabric

[Zaph42nd]

30 minutes ago, CastIronFabric said:

I think adding an option to the games option to remove surface drifters only and or adding the option to the existing Deed system to not allow hostiles to spawn in a Deeded area is really not unreasonable, is fair and completely understandable and I am sticking to that.

Agree for sure, just adding toggles for drifter spawns would be nice, I'd maybe go a step further and add optional server commands to change light-level spawn rates/spawn chances, that way you could disable spawns entirely or tune up spawns (or down) to player/server owner preference. Maybe a world-generation option (as part of difficulty selection) or just a server operator command (/ commands). Deeds/land claim could also integrate additional flags to the claimed land-plots, claimants maybe could have limited access to some server-commands specific to their claim, although I suspect that'd be difficult to implement