LadyWYT

I don't know about firewood, but nine full stacks of peat underneath has proven sufficient to fire it, in my experience. Any less than that and you'll need to light a few extra bricks and wait. It's not really possible to exceed nine full stacks, as there isn't room and the kiln will be finished firing by the time the fuel runs out anyway.

Welcome to the forums(and the game)! I think it's way too early in development to tell. The best guess I can make on it is that the story/lore will be different, which is a decent enough reason on its own to give the game a try when it launches. I don't think that's a very good idea given that Project Glint and Vintage Story are different games with different gameplay expectations and different story/lore, not to mention all the backlash the idea got when Project Glint was originally announced as a potential separate gamemode for Vintage Story(despite the fact that it still had a separate team). If one game is balanced around realistic survival and steampunk horror, then it's hard to implement a gamemode focused on fantasy adventure and different lore without getting some wires crossed when it comes to balancing and story. To cite a better example from Vintage Story itself--there are technically already three different game versions. Standard, Wilderness Survival, and Exploration are the "story modes" and what the game is developed around; the difficulty of each one differs, but the core experience is the same. Homo Sapiens strips out all the lore, leaving a purely realistic survival experience; it's not what the game is developed around though, so as a result it tends to be lacking when it comes to challenge and things to do. Creative is a sandbox for the player to do whatever they want, and thus balance isn't required. In essence, Homo Sapiens mode exists since there was enough demand for pure realism, but it ends up a bit of an afterthought since it's not what Vintage Story itself is intended to be. It's still easy enough to develop in tandem with the main game though, since all that really needs to be done is stripping out the lore, and things added that work for Homo Sapiens also work for the main game. That's not really possible to achieve with a game mode that has a completely different setting, story, and lore, and a completely different gameplay focus--fantasy action and adventure instead of realistic survival and steampunk/eldritch horror. At best, it ends up in a similar boat as Homo Sapiens: feeling like an afterthought or otherwise limited by the design of the main game modes.

I actually disagree. Whirlwind style attacks are fine for fantasy, but realistically it's a very poor attack plan. The whirling motion is not only disorienting, but leaves too much opportunity for the opponent to run away, recover and reposition, or even counterattack. The current enemies in the game may not be highly intelligent to take full advantage of such mistakes, but given that the game as a whole is grounded in realism I think it's best to keep the combat fairly grounded as well. Now Project Glint, on the other hand...that would be a more fitting place for flashy moves like whirlwind.

Welcome to the forums! I agree with @Michaloid on this one--Vintage Story does have adventuring elements, but the focus is on realistic survival with an eldritch horror/steampunk backdrop. There's really not a lot of fantasy elements or dungeon crawling to be had, and that's perfectly okay! Project Glint, I'm guessing, will be much for suited for flashy combat, dungeon delving, boss fighting, magic, and all the usual fantasy tropes. Personally, I think Project Glint will fair pretty well against Hytale, as Hytale seems aimed at a younger audience. Project Glint, I'm guessing, will be more similar to Vintage Story in that regard--not a game aimed exclusively at adults, but a game that appeals a bit more to an older audience than a younger one. It's kind of similar to how both kids and adults can drink coffee, but kids don't usually enjoy the beverage given the stronger, bitter taste and the fact that they aren't old enough to really appreciate caffeine. The competition will also be good for both Hytale and Project Glint, as having solid competition helps keep both from becoming too complacent.

Yeah, I didn't explicitly say it, but I was angling towards having similar but separate animations for first-person and third-person. Third-person animations don't need to be as restrained as first-person animations since there's no concern about cluttering the screen, but they ought to remain at least somewhat similar so the two views feel connected. To me it feels a little strange when first-person animation is relatively grounded, and third-person is a moveset that obviously doesn't match those motions at all.

I'm not sure how many worlds I chewed through when learning to play, but I do know it was several since I found it easier to just start over whenever I had a major mishap. Once I had the basics down and was more comfortable with the game and its settings, the worlds started to actually last and I've had a good handful of 100+ hour worlds since. As for food, I can't really recall that ever being much of an issue, but that may be because I started VS life as a Blackguard. The concept of "food" becomes very thoroughly ingrained in your gameplay when playing that class. I do recall having several ragequits though. At least one of them was due to not putting a door on my dirt box and getting snuggled in the night by a bighorn ram. A few minutes later though I'm back in the game with a fresh start and avoiding prior mistakes.

Charlemagne. And yes, Charlemagne is very pettable.

It's generally only the males that fight back. The females will almost always run away. It does make the deer dangerous but it can be a very handy mechanic if you prefer melee fighting.

To be fair, most media gets knights and medieval times hilariously wrong. Armor doesn't protect, people don't wear helmets, everyone is dirty and no bright colors, etc. Granted, a few concessions are sometimes necessary for storytelling, but there's a lot of tropes that are really just...nope, lol.

I would equate it to building a Lego set. You buy the set, then follow along with the directions as needed to put together a cool toy that you can display, play with, or take apart and reassemble as you see fit. That's the essence of the handbook to Vintage Story. Watching a bunch of videos explaining exactly how to do everything beforehand is more like an adult relative building the Lego set for you while you watch, and then letting you play with the result. Sure, it's still fun, but you don't really get the pleasure of figuring out how to do it yourself, even if the set is taken apart for you to build again. You've already seen it done, you know exactly what's coming next, so the process of building it isn't quite the same. To use a different game as an example--one charm of playing Skyrim for the very first time is not knowing all the locations or characters or exactly how to acquire certain items or combat certain enemies. The Helgen tutorial teaches you the basics, and you can read through the skill trees and loading screen tips to figure out roughly what all you can do, but most of the learning comes from actually playing the game and interacting with the world. In contrast, if you watch someone else play through the game first, then you already know what kind of enemies are where, what to expect from certain quests, and where to look/what to do for specific goodies that might otherwise be missed. Basically, if you watch a set of videos to learn everything about the game before jumping in, the experience might be a lot smoother but it's going to be lacking in the discovery department since you're not actually interacting with the game to learn how to play. You can only be a new player once.

Well that is why Jonas built his machine, right? A vanity toggle would probably be the easiest workaround. Overheating penalty I'm inclined to be in favor of, as wearing full furs in summertime doesn't make a lot of sense outside of the arctic. Encumbrance though, eh, I'm inclined to pass. Inventory is already fairly limited and limiting it further is likely going to make building and exploration/looting a real hassle.

I think it's more a matter of how much hand-holding does a player wish to have when learning how to play a game, coupled with a trend for many modern multiplayer games to be very unfriendly to new players jumping in and figuring things out as they play. MMOs tend to be some of the worst offenders, where the established communities tend to tell newcomers to just go watch some videos and follow certain guides and then come back to actually play the game "properly". Sure, established players understandably get frustrated when new players don't understand the game, but...that's also part of the charm of playing a new game--figuring out how it works for yourself and using that knowledge to improve. In the case of Vintage Story, it doesn't do much hand-holding at all and leaves the player to figure out for themselves how best to play. For players who like to figure out everything themselves and don't like being just told exactly how to do everything, going in blind and using the handbook to figure things out is quite attractive. Players who prefer more detailed explanations or visual tutorials though will likely prefer watching some video guides before diving in. Neither option is bad, but which is best depends on the player in question. Pretty much. Part of the fun of Vintage Story is conquering that steep learning curve, and it's something a player really only does once. The game is still fun after one becomes a veteran, but it's a different kind of fun, as you can only be a new player once. Personally, I'd only recommend watching videos if one is unsure whether the game is something they will enjoy, or if one prefers more detailed tutorials. Immediately getting told to go watch a bunch of videos before even playing the game is going to be a distinct turn off for many new players, especially since it suggests it's either not possible to learn with in-game resources, or too complex to figure out on one's own.

It's a system that's rather tough when first jumping into the game, but after you've got enough experience to avoid most typical deaths it's pretty straightforward.

It's entirely up to the devs, but I'm guessing the answer is no, that will need to be added via mod. My reasoning for that is Tyron mentioned in an interview some time back that the player's ability to choose a spawnpoint is quite powerful, hence the design decision to limit that ability to temporal gears. A rare item with limited respawns per use--best to be careful about when one is used.

I don't know, other than after Riot bought the rights the scope of the game increased too much, development stalled, there was a complete rewrite of the base code, etc. Basically just a lot of things piling up that prevented the game from really going anywhere and eventually leading to the cancellation. Hytale's original creator managed to buy back the rights, assembled a team, and worked like mad to salvage what was there into something playable. It's still very rough and nowhere near finished, but the game seems to be doing much better under his supervision than it fared under Riot. Tyron used to be part of the Hytale team and cordially parted ways later when the game just wasn't quite what he wanted to be working on. After leaving, he created Vintage Story. When Hytale was cancelled, Tyron basically did some math and pulled a few strings and hired some of those devs to work on a Hytale-esque gamemode for Vintage Story, which has now turned into a new game project known as Project Glint. At the time of the announcement, it wasn't known if Hytale was going to be resurrected, so this thread was basically a welcome to whichever Hytale fans decided to check out Vintage Story. Just to make sure it's clear--the Project Glint team is separate from the Vintage Story team. Both games utilize the same engine, so things that work in one can be more easily ported into the other, but Vintage Story's development isn't going to be slowed by Project Glint's development, and vice versa.

Is this what you're looking for? https://mods.vintagestory.at/craftablecartography

This is one of the main reasons I don't play Valheim very much. The atmosphere is great and the combat is pretty fun, but quite a lot of the game is grind for the sake of grind. I wouldn't change it, exactly, but it does get pretty tedious pretty fast. I don't play Vintage Story every day, but what keeps me returning to the game regularly is the workout it gives my brain, the immersive worldbuilding, and just the amount of fun stuff to do in the game. In some ways it reminds me of what I enjoyed most about playing WoW back when I played--I create a character and then go run around in the world exploring and collecting various stuff. Sometimes that stuff is useful, and sometimes it's very much not, but still fun to collect. Lately, I've toyed with butterfly hunting and that's been quite an enjoyable way to relax at the end of a long day, when I don't otherwise feel like making actual progress in Vintage Story. It's also a fun game to play with a friend or two. I play Blackguard, my friend plays Hunter, and all sorts of hijinks tend to ensue when we both play at the same time.

No, I'm going to cut the brim off and put that over the coif, with the rest under the coif. Jokes aside, I do agree that some coats and other clothing articles(like cloaks) should render over the top of the armor. Perhaps not all, given that coats tend to be thick and putting thick cloth over armor that already covers thick padding is not just overkill on insulation, but hindering movement as well. Granted, that much realism probably doesn't matter for a videogame, but still... In any case, I think it would require a more sophisticated rendering/animation system than what currently exists, given that most armor models are already bulky. Coats might look weird getting covered by armor, but they'll look even weirder if they wind up floating around the player's body. I'm not gonna say they never did, but...if you're already planning to wear a helmet, then you're going to want to pick one with a metal brim. Not only will that brim shade your eyes from the sun and rain, but it will also be more protective from incoming attacks. A typical brimmed hat is likely going to be uncomfortable under the helmet since there's already going to be extra padding, and the fact that said hat is easily damaged means that it can easily obscure your vision in combat. Removing the hat from under the helmet prior to combat isn't always an option either.

Short videos like this are probably easier to post on social media like YouTube and Twitter, or post in the Discord. Likewise, stuff that gets posted in the Discord is very much work-in-progress and may see several alterations before it actually makes it to the game itself. Typically when a new news thread gets posted, there is more information about a variety of things, and what you read about is pretty much what you can expect to see added to the game, with few changes. Essentially, news threads don't appear very often, but when they do appear they're generally more informative and concrete than what you'd see elsewhere.

I can confirm this is true for the Standard game mode, and since Wilderness Survival is harder it's going to keep the no-sleep rule in effect. Exploration doesn't have temporal stability or temporal storms enabled by default, so there's no need to worry about sleeping through them here. Sorry, I don't really know how to explain it other than it's definitely a bit of a paradox preference, and the current implementation just hits the right notes for me. The main reason I say it would increase anxiety, is that there's too much guesswork involved in figuring out how stable an area actually is. While yes, it would probably be more realistic for stability to fluctuate wildly instead of being static zones, I don't think it would be very fun to have no safety at all or otherwise have to devote a lot of time to mapping fluctuations to determine which areas are safe and which aren't. If I enter an area that is only slightly stable, is it actually stable most/all of the time, or did I just happen to pay a lucky visit and the chunk itself is unstable most of the time(and thus a bad spot to settle)? Same case with slightly unstable chunks--is it an unstable chunk, or is it actually stable most of the time? The really bad areas would likely still be immediately noticeable, same as the really good areas, but overall I think it would make picking a good spot a real hassle. With static zones, I can enter an area and figure out very quickly whether it's stable, neutral, or unstable, and then plan accordingly since I know what to expect. I'm not really gonna try given that I just don't really think changing the stability zones from static to dynamic is a good idea. The best implementation that really comes to mind for me there is merging rift activity and temporal instability into one mechanic and having static zones of rift weather instead. That is, Calm zones don't spawn monsters, while Medium zones will spawn a moderate of monsters. Apocalyptic zones, of course, are very rare and obviously not nice places to visit. The underground could range between High-Low, with the rare Calm haven and the deepest depths being somewhere between High-Apocalyptic on average. However, I'm not really sold on the idea, as it feels too clunky to really implement very well, and doesn't leave as many options for customization as the options that are currently available. Maybe if it was strictly temporary, or there was a setting to turn off those changes, permanent or temporary. Corrupted spots in the rare specific locations are neat to find, but I'm not really a fan of things that alter the world like that. It's the main reason I started turning off lightning fires after playing with the mechanic enabled for a while; I don't like finding bald spots in the grass or charred forests. The damage adds up after a while and there's not really a way to fix it outside of creative. If it's just a temporary cosmetic change, it's a bit more tolerable. But even so, it's not really something I'd want hanging around very long at all, and it seems a little over the top(to me).

I think the tough part about animations is that a proper third person camera probably needs to be developed first, given that third person and immersive first person will likely share the same animations. For the typical first person view though, the animations have to be more limited, as otherwise the animations can clutter up the screen or otherwise be too confusing to be enjoyable. As far as how many people would actually play in third person...I'm not sure, but typically things like animation are more easily enjoyed from the third person perspective. Skyrim, I think, is a decent example to use here; the animations are quite flashy in third person but more simplified in first person. I used to have a mod that made the player's body visible in first person and used the third person animations as well...and it had some pretty bad side effects. Fun to use overall, but it's not so fun when most melee attacks swing your camera wildly to the side(to the point you lose sight of your target, briefly).

Not currently. The best you can really do is pick a dark block, like basalt or slate, and chisel that in as a border. It's not the same, but it will have a similar look. You can't combine slabs, but you can combine material type via chiseling and have two different "slabs" stacked that way instead.

You probably could, but it would be very expensive and difficult with very little return. Flax is more easily farmed, rusty gears are easier to trade for or loot in ruins, and temporal gears are more easily acquired from temporal storms or treasure hunters. Monster spawns also depend somewhat on the current rift activity, so unless the current activity is very high and there happens to be a rift near the spawn box, it's not likely to produce many monsters. Monsters are also fairly decent at pathfinding, so unless the player is close enough to notice, they're probably not going to fall in the trap. For the player to be noticeable, I think the player would need to be fairly close, so the monsters aren't likely to suffer much damage from falling. Not that you'd want to kill them with fall damage; crushed targets yield less loot. It's also worth considering that monsters aren't intended to be farmed for loot, so a functional grinder would likely be patched rather quickly.

Given how the phantom turned out for Minecraft, I'll pass on the flying enemies. If they were a rare enemy contained to specific locations, they'd probably be fine, but I really doubt they'd be popular if they were a normal encounter. I think for a normal encounter, the enemy in question would need a very limited flight capacity. That is, they can fly a short distance quickly, which allows them to ambush unsuspecting players, easily catch players who try to flee, or escape a fight that isn't going well. It'd have to have a decent cooldown though, so that the player can still have a chance to run away from the monster or otherwise shoot it/catch it if it tries to flee.

Welcome to the forums! Fishing is already on the menu for 1.22. Pretty much. Wooden arrows could do slightly less damage to balance, sure, but if the damage difference is negligible then players are just going skip crude arrows and stick to wooden ones, or skip wood and crude and just stick to flint arrows. Or the player just skips all three options, because at this stage of the game the spear easily outclasses each one. You don't really need a sharp wooden stick if you can just stick a sharp rock on the end of a stick and have a better weapon. There is already a "stick" weapon in the game, in the form of the club, and no one uses it due to the spear being much better. Now these I do expect to see sooner or later.