LadyWYT

I do like the concept of a pottery wheel, but I agree with @Rudometkin here--it shouldn't be a way to automate pottery. What a pottery wheel should do, is allow the player to rotate the project without needing to physically move around the project--similar to rotating forged items on an anvil. There might be a few exceptions, such as roof tiles, but otherwise most clayworks should fit on the wheel(technically, it's more of a turntable in this case, but still). I would say that some pottery could be locked behind the making of a pottery wheel in order to smooth out the early game a bit more. However, I think that kind of change would introduce unnecessary frustration for players, not to mention the fact that you don't need a pottery wheel in order to make pottery. A pottery wheel expedites the process and results in a prettier product in general, to be sure(been there done that), but it's not absolutely critical to have in order to make something functional.

This Simon you refer to is the original creator of the Hytale project, I would assume. I never really followed Hytale's development that closely, especially since it seems to essentially disappear shortly after the release of the initial teaser trailer. In any case, if the guy wants to invest his own resources into the project, and manages to actually release a product, more power to him. The main hurdle I see to overcome in that regard is all the negative news and sentiments regarding the difficulties of Hytale's development and recent cancellation. Not that it can't be overcome, mind you, but I daresay many people will be skeptical until a playable product is actually delivered.

Welcome to the forums! The dialogue you're looking for should be "Know of any interesting places around here?". Selecting it should prompt the treasure hunter to ask for a tin bronze pick in return for giving you a map to the location. If you don't see that dialogue option at all(or any similar option, though I don't think that dialogue has been modified), it sounds like you've encountered a bug and you'll want to consider reporting it over on the bug tracker.

Wait...really? Now I've got to try this... Also I thought that door style was just...barn doors. Did not know it had a proper name. TIL!

I wouldn't say that I play at a snail's pace, but I do like to take my time and put some effort into the aesthetics of my base instead of just building purely for function. I also enjoy collecting various things in the game and displaying them...seashells has been the latest obsession. Overall, I'd say that I don't usually start the main story until spring of year 1; by this time I have plenty of iron to work with, if not steel itself. A typical game from start to finish(completing current story content) runs about 100 hours of playtime, for me. Bear in mind that I do sleep through most nights--partly for immersion and partly because I don't like working in the dark. The next time you have a fire going, try sitting next to it. There's a special tune that plays for just such an occasion! I'm not sure of the exact conditions it needs to trigger, but you do have to be sitting by a lit firepit, and I think it may need to be nighttime. The cooking part is optional I believe, but if you've got the fire going anyway why not cook something tasty?

Vintage Story is a slow burn regarding gameplay and story pacing, however, I don't think it's a good idea to force players to wait until the second or third in-game year to be well-established enough to even think of pursuing story content. The great thing about the current structure is that it's flexible enough to allow players to take things as fast or as slow as they like--and that's on the default settings. As for traveling very long distances, yes, players will usually need to supplement supplies with foraging and hunting, but that doesn't mean that they should always have to be coming back to ruined food stores and decrepit infrastructure after every long outing. Again, if you're simply going to wipe player progress at random, despite the fact that they put in the work to do everything right...that's going to frustrate the player more likely than not. As a mod, sure, it would be fine, and add an optional challenge for those that want it. You contradict yourself here, somewhat. Death by lightning is kind of one of those "bad luck" deaths, in that it's extremely unlikely to occur, but the player also has an opportunity to prevent deaths like that by simply taking shelter during thunderstorms. The lightning death scenario doesn't really work as an equal comparison here though, since again...death to lightning is extremely unlikely(and also requires a very specific set of circumstances to occur) and also preventable by the player. Pest-destroying crops and disease don't have nearly as strict of parameters, so they're much more likely to occur. Perhaps not with the extreme side effect of death, but again...if you're just destroying crops at random to simulate pests/disease, you're still wiping player progress without giving them opportunity to salvage the situation(and also telling them to just "deal with it"!). Now perhaps you could give them opportunity to deal with the issues before they lose their crops, but keep in mind that the methods need to match medieval technology. Also keep in mind too that the more resources from the player a gameplay loop demands, the less resources they'll have to devote elsewhere to gameplay they may enjoy more. Not every animal lives on just grass, and most food will rot in troughs. Water will freeze in the winter, if it gets cold enough in that climate. Quality soil like terra preta takes a long time to produce in quantity, and if you're sealing off farms to stop weeds you're essentially just farming exclusively in greenhouses. That's not to say players couldn't find solutions to those issues, however...the reason things are set up the way they are now is to allow players flexibility. Most players know that animals need to be tended, but I daresay that most players also appreciate that they can run off on adventures when they wish and return home to an intact base, instead of needing to constantly babysit their animals and farms. If you change that balance too much, you're narrowing the range of gameplay options that players have. The average player should find at least most gameplay loops worth completing. Farming is already a little more intensive than it is in other games, as you need to manage soil quality, moisture, and temperature parameters to ensure you get a harvest. However, it's also a simple enough system that most players can manage it and have some fun, even if they don't enjoy farming that much, while still leaving players plenty of time to work on other gameplay loops. Torches burn out in order to encourage the player to seek better lighting solutions. The advantage of torches is that they're very cheap and easily made while offering a decent light radius; if you simply made them permanent light without needing a torch holder, then there's no reason to invest in things like lanterns aside from aesthetics. I will also note that the burnout timer on a torch is quite generous--48 in-game hours. Likewise, you can reset that timer just by breaking and replacing a torch, so it's possible to keep your starting home lit with just a single torch until you have a better option. There's also this phenomenon where people hate the extremely punishing aspects of the game and come on to the forums to demand change(sometimes they ask nicely though). In my experience, it's more common to have a bunch of complaint threads arise when default gameplay is tweaked to be more challenging, than it is for threads complaining about the game being too easy. Generally, I would guess that players who find certain gameplay loops not quite challenging enough will be tweaking things to their liking with mods. One good example I can think of here is the recent change to fire clay and the quern crafting recipe--there were quite a few players that complained about the changes. It was, however, a change for the better since it smoothed out the early portions of the game and gave more value to all the flint one inevitably collects. What the change did not do, however, was require players to spend a significantly larger portion of their time in a specific gameplay loop at the expense of others. Actually, I would argue objections like that are a great reason not to add certain features to a game, provided that a strong supporting case is made for said objections. A steep learning curve is fine, but one that is too steep will discourage more players from sticking with the game(or trying it in the first place) than it will draw in new players. Gameplay that becomes a chore rather than fun also isn't going to retain players, as the main reason for playing a videogame to begin with is getting a fun escape from reality for a while. I mean, if you're going to use that argument, they can always just...not play the game too. Generally, it's not good for a game's long term health to frustrate players to the point of quitting(especially newer players). There will always be a handful that do, of course, and that's natural, but if it becomes a common occurrence that's not good. Currently, you can plant your farms, go off on an adventure, and return to harvest, provided you timed things appropriately. A player may or may not need the food, but they'll most likely want a flax harvest to come back to, given how useful flax is. They may want food as well, depending on their game settings and the time of year that they return. In any case, they're not going to need to worry about having to start over from scratch or missing out on too many resources vital to other gameplay loops(such as flax). It's great that we have a lot of settings and toggle to adjust various things. However, I'm personally not a fan of "just make it a toggle" as an answer to most arguments, as coding often isn't as simple as it seems. Likewise, a toggle for something that is supposed to be part of the core game experience feels...cheap, though that's just my opinion. I should also note that when it comes to suggestions for the game, I tend to look through the lens of what fits the overall vision that's been presented for the Standard gameplay mode, as that is what I would consider the default mode for the average player. I'm curious about the answer here as well. As I recall, the entirety of the planned story was supposed to take a hundred hours of gameplay to complete or so, once the full story is fully implemented. Of an eight planned chapters, we have two implemented so far, and judging based on @Thorfinn's gameplay style it's possible to complete the current two in about 50 hours of playtime...although as I understand it that's also pushing the absolute bleeding edge of how fast one can progress in the game. For my own experience, I'm somewhat laid back and usually end up finishing the story content about 75-100 hours into the world. Not to spoil too much regarding chapter 2, but it's very intense regarding the amount of time the average player will need to spend away from home in order to complete it. On default settings, I'm usually gone for about one and a half in-game months, and that's with really pushing the progress instead of taking my time traveling, assuming no delays due to death. Since the answer posted before I finished typing all this...I wouldn't say it's irrelevant at all. It's not really fair to say your proposed changes would be "no big deal to long player outings" and that players can just "deal with it", if you yourself haven't completed the main story(which is one of the core reasons to play the game). It's also not fair to push for a change that may drastically affect the story content already implemented, and just expect the story content to be reworked to support said change. I'm not trying to put you down for not having played through the story either. However, it's unfortunately not an uncommon occurrence for inexperienced players to hop on the forums and start asking for things that already exist in the game or proposing changes that haven't been fully thought out regarding the game as a whole. It's also why you tend to see veteran players react with "not for the vanilla game, but it would make a great mod" regarding a lot of suggestions. Vintage Story was built to be highly moddable, and the beauty of mods is that they allow players to season the game exactly to their liking, without altering the overall core experience for everyone else.

Welcome to the forums! Unfortunately, if there is no crafting recipe in the handbook, it's not a craftable item(generally--there are bugs or oversights on occasion). Until a proper recipe is added to the game, you'll need to either get those blocks from creative(you can substitute a recipe from a similar block and just sacrifice necessary materials if you wish), or check the mod database for a mod that adds a proper recipe.

Welcome to the forums! You guys might consider checking out this mod: https://mods.vintagestory.at/craftablecartography I don't know that it works in the latest stable version, but you might keep an eye on it.

Animals do already run away when damaged, and if they're close enough and inclined to aggression they will absolutely try to attack you. Domesticated animals will still alert their herdmates if they feel there is a threat nearby, and can be notoriously uncooperative if they don't want to do something. This is why some farm chores are multi-man tasks. I would also say that the behavior already exists for in-game livestock, to an extent. Domestication simply causes them to stop automatically trying to run away or attack if you get too close, however, it won't stop them from reacting to being smacked. I'm inclined to agree, however...I'm not sure it would be a good addition in terms of fun gameplay. Currently, it takes at least a handful of shots to kill most game, likely for balance reasons since being able to kill most animals with a single shot would make hunting too easy and strong compared to acquiring livestock. If you can scare an animal away or provoke attack simply by missing, that's going to lead to a lot of frustration on the player's part.

As I said before, it works if it's something you do every once in a while, and not daily. Keep in mind that you need to spend a decent chunk of time away from your base when completing the main story, which means no farming for an extended time if you travel during warm weather, in addition to all the other tasks you're going to fall behind on. Currently, you can simply plant a field of crops, leave, and have it ready to harvest(or close to it) by the time you return, which keeps players from feeling like they're sacrificing too much progress and needed resources to pursue story content. I would also say that we have a decent weed mechanic in the current game. If you leave farmland fallow, it can grow grass and horsetails, which you will need to remove before planting. Immersive, but doesn't hurt anything, and isn't a hassle to remove when you're ready to use your farm again. Mulching would pair nicely with a weeding mechanic, however, it's not the solution for allowing players to pursue story content without feeling like they're being punished, if you make the weeding mechanic too time intensive. I would also note that the more time the player has to sink into a specific gameplay loop to get a desirable outcome, the less time they'll have to devote to other gameplay that they may enjoy more. With all due respect, this is a terrible idea. Imagine your farm animals just dying due to complications from disease or pregnancy. Realistically, it happens, and sometimes there's nothing you can do except put the poor creature out of its misery. Does that make for fun gameplay? No, absolutely not, because the player had no opportunity to prevent that loss. Likewise, imagine having to feed and water your animals daily to avoid having them starve/thirst to death--it's realistic, but you'd essentially have no time to do any kind of exploring lest you lose your livestock. Farming crops may not take as much time and resources as animal husbandry, but if you take rewards away from the player arbitrarily after they put in the work, then it's not a fun challenge to overcome but a frustrating mechanic that makes the game feel like a punishing chore. And like I said before, to complete the main story, the player needs to be able to confidently leave their base for extended periods of time, without having an absolute mess to recover from when they get back. The current implementation of farming accomplishes that, although I will note that if the player plants their farm without irrigation or the wrong crops at the current time of year, their crops could die from drought or temperature stress by the time the player returns home. It is an uncompromising survival game, yes, however that does not mean that everything has to 100% realistic. Realism does not always equal fun in a videogame, and to paraphrase @Thorfinn, if the game itself insists on adding every tedious chore with 100% realism...why play the game? I can go outside and tend my own garden, and lose all my crops anyway because of bugs or bad weather; it happens, but that's life. Most people play videogames to escape that kind of drudgery. It doesn't mean that players need to be handed everything on a silver platter, but they do at least need to have clear rewards for the effort they put in, as well as be able to complete the main story the game wishes to tell without getting so frustrated that they quit. Vintage Story is a tough game and doesn't pull its punches, but one major reason it's so satisfying to play is that it gets a lot easier once you learn how to tackle those challenges. And yes, you are right in that if someone wants to skip certain parts of the game, they'll miss out on certain benefits(such as players skipping steel and sticking to iron). However, the reason the systems currently work is that they're balanced well. The gameplay loops have clear reasons and rewards for putting in the time to complete them, and they complement each other well without any overshadowing the other. They're also balanced in such a way that while they'll cover the majority of a player's time in Vintage Story, they aren't so intensive that a player can't set them to the wayside from a bit to go explore or work on the main story. Honestly, if Vintage Story was going to double down on being brutally realistic...players aren't going to be going on some grand world-spanning adventure at all, not if they want to actually have a base of operations. Running a homestead is a lot of work, even moreso in a medieval setting. In a brutally realistic scenario, one simply won't have time to leave for an extended period without losing most, if not all, they've worked for.

Ah yeah, I somehow missed that detail when I first read the post. Oops!

And I'm stealing that technique next time I do stained glass in the game, as I've not thought of layering like that to get different colors. I love it!

I would assume the shell sizes would be on par with the seashells we currently have in game. However, those are still very small and difficult to spot unless you're deliberately keeping an eye out for them, even if the shell is brightly colored. If one was a living creature capable of quickly killing a player if stepped on, that's likely going to be frustrating to deal with for most players. Not that most players really spend much time in the water, but when players do wade/swim around I doubt most of them are going to pay that much attention to where they're going. It's also why I think that if it were added, it needs to either be nonlethal damage, or give enough of a grace period that the player can treat the injury somehow and avoid death. If it were an almost immediately lethal injury, one could argue that players could just learn to be more careful about where they step...however, small creatures like that can easily hide in the aquatic plants and rocks, and I don't really expect most players to be that careful.

I think OP meant making the music box clutter items play a different version of the tuning cylinder tunes--a simpler music as opposed to the more complex music the resonator can produce. It's a neat idea, and would make intact music boxes a more exciting treasure item since they have some interaction and aren't just decoration.

Welcome to the forums! If you haven't already, you might consider checking out From Golden Combs to scratch that beekeeping itch. As for whether or not we'll see more complex beekeeping than we already have in the vanilla game...I'm not sure. It's possible that a bit more complexity could be added, but keep in mind that the setting is the late Middle Ages(with a general focus on Europe and the nearby regions), so implemented technology and agricultural techniques should fit that particular time frame. As for proper fishing and wolf taming, both of those are on the roadmap.

Abandoned villages and failed farmsteads already exist in the game, as well as ruined forts, monasteries, cathedrals, markets, and other various relics of civilization. Some of those ruin types are more rare than others; remains of villages are semi-common, while cathedrals, castles, or other large buildings are much more rare. You can also install a mod like Better Ruins that adds much larger, more detailed ruins, but keep in mind that such mods tend to be performance heavy. Do note though that if you are playing the Homo Sapiens game mode, all lore content is disabled, so you won't be finding anything related to any kind of civilization aside from what you build yourself.

Honestly, I forgot Hytale was even trying to exist until I saw the news about the shutdown. I think a handful of people may be trying to salvage it, but I couldn't say for certain. In any case, I'm not sure that I would call all the hype about the news "a bit much". A lot of influencers are jumping on that news bandwagon right now for clicks since it's the hot new thing, sure, but a lot of people were also really excited about the potential that Hytale was trying to offer. It's rather understandable that when the game is canceled seemingly out of nowhere, that those who were looking forward to it will be incredibly disappointed, especially those who contributed to the development. As for Vintage Story getting offered as a "free game engine"...I have no idea where that notion came, and agree with what @FlareUKCS said on that matter. Someone ambitious could probably make a mod or modlist for Vintage Story that closely mimics what Hytale was supposed to be, but I really doubt Tyron would just give away his own creation. Hytale may never be a game, but I wouldn't write off the idea as "dead". Ideas are difficult to kill, and I'm sure someone will take inspiration from what Hytale was trying to do and try to bring their version of it to life, though likely not under the name "Hytale".

Welcome to the forums! It depends on how much content is slated to be added, what kind of content it is, and how much trouble there is in implementing it. I would say that generally it's only a few weeks from a pre-release to a stable release, but the mileage varies depending on many issues the devs have to sort out. The current pre-release for 1.21 is still unstable, as far as I'm aware. It is playable, but updating old worlds or creating new permanent worlds isn't recommended, as it's very likely you will encounter major bugs and that some major changes may occur that may not translate well to a newer version. I would say no, what you see teased in the 1.21 pre-release news is the content that is slated for that update. Aside from bug fixes and particularly troublesome content being potentially pushed back to a later update, there shouldn't be any changes to what's planned for the release.

Make sure you're baiting the traps with grain. Otherwise, I don't think the chickens will be tempted to mess with the trap. If you're baiting the traps and they're still not biting, then it sounds like there may be a bug.

I would somewhat disagree. I don't know that Homo Sapiens players don't want to see things like villages; at least a few of them do or this thread wouldn't exist. However, Homo Sapiens was created so those who don't like the supernatural stuff at all can still have fun with the game's natural world and survival loops. Outside of mods, I don't expect to see villages or any NPC content for Homo Sapiens, as there is quite a lot of lore behind those things in Vintage Story, and adding them to HS to the same standards as the default game modes would essentially be developing an entirely new game. Not that it couldn't be done, but that's a LOT of extra work for something with not nearly as high of demand, that can just as easily be accomplished via a modlist.

Leafcutter ants would be a neat addition for tropical areas...as would fire ants as a hazard, heh heh. Little lines of ants here and there elsewhere in appropriate climates would be nice ambience, however, I think they should be cosmetic only if added. Players are already penalized if they store food in the open, since the food won't last nearly as long, and it's also practically impossible to keep ants completely out of a space if they insist on entering. Keep in mind that the setting is the late Middle Ages, so pesticides and bug sprays aren't really an option, to my knowledge. The other reason letting ants destroy stored food is that completing the main story requires the player to leave home for extended periods of time. That means long periods of time where animal husbandry or farming will fall to the wayside, though currently it's not enough to feel like you can never travel. If you're allowing the stored food to be potentially wiped out though, then what you're doing is putting more pressure on the player to stay home and avoid long trips lest they have too much of their progress wiped out when they return. Not really ideal in a game where long trips are sometimes required. Agreed. I'm not sure about adding venomous ones though; yes it would be realistic, but unless the creature is easy to spot or has a chance for an antidote to be applied in time, then it's going to feel like an unfair death. Deaths in Vintage Story can be frustrating, but rarely do they feel unfair as the player almost always had at least one chance to prevent their demise. Octopi would be a great addition for sea life though, and adding other mollusks could result in clam/mussel beds as decoration and a food source. Agreed. If you're not already playing with this mod, I recommend checking out Salty's Bark Beetles. You can't collect them, but it adds great ambience and an immersive way to spot the resin trees. He's already taken. But I do think it's adorable that he added things like butterflies for his wife. If I'm recalling correctly, I think she is also the one that designed Vintage Story's logo, as well as did other artwork for the game.

First off, welcome to the forums! A village was added in 1.20 as part of the second chapter of the story. Whether or not more settlements are added, and how many, remains to be seen. I would expect at least another settlement or two, however, according to the lore most of humanity was wiped out, and the settlements that remain are very few and far between. There are vendors that offer various goods and services in the village, though the village itself is self-sufficient and has no dependence upon the player. Aside from that, there are trader carts scattered across the world that also buy and sell various things. As for stealing from NPCs/NPCs stealing from you...NPC stuff is protected from player tampering, and I get the general impression that the devs are angling for a cooperative existence with NPCs. So I don't expect NPCs to be able to steal from you, although you could probably get that kind of experience in multiplayer depending on the server. Here is the crux of the issue though. Homo Sapiens--the human only game mode--removes all of the lore and reduces the game to a pure realistic survival simulator. It's there as a nice addition for those seeking that kind of experience, but not what the game itself is developed around. You'll miss out on a major chunk of the game if you only play this mode.

Welcome to the forums! That doesn't sound like intended behavior. I recommend checking the bug tracker and reporting it, if it hasn't been reported already.

I mean there kind of was. It was so bad the whole timeline is messed up now!

My general understanding is that it's his wife that has the butterfly fascination, though I'm sure Tyron likes them as well.