LadyWYT

The case could be made for less durability since tailors, thanks to their clothing knowledge, would be able to make better repairs and know when to make those repairs sooner. Which more durable clothes makes more sense for Tailor than more durable armor, in many ways... This is the issue the tuning spear runs into. With class-exclusive recipes turned off, anyone can craft it, but it's still an item only useful for Clockmaker since the locust-taming function is still tied to the Clockmaker class, despite needing the item as well. I presume it's that way to prevent Clockmakers from making tuning spears for everyone else and thus having locusts for everyone.

Agincourt was where the English beat up the French in the Hundred Years' War. It's where a lot of people get the misconception, I think, that the long bow beats armor with ease. The longbow is by no means a weak weapon, but part of what aided the English victory here was the fact that the weather had turned the battlefield into a muddy mess, so the typical cavalry charge wasn't nearly as effective as usual. You're probably thinking of the battle of Crécy, with the Genoese mercenaries...which ironically, lost in part due to mismanagement by the French nobility that hired them. That's probably still too strong, even for a very late-game item. Killing lower tier enemies in a single shot is one thing, but I do think the higher tiers should remain relatively dangerous throughout the game. Pretty much, though I wouldn't mind a version of the Basilica cannon. Granted, that particular cannon came a bit late for the time period the game is set in, but...a huge cannon that does a lot of damage to whatever it hits(who said it was accurate), is difficult to move, very slow to fire, and expensive to make and use... I dunno, it probably wouldn't be added, but it would be a fun toy if it was. Ineffective for most gameplay, but probably a beast for intimidation in PvP circumstances, and interesting to play with when trying to set up a monster kill box or something.

It's not the tier 1/2 enemies I'm worried about, as much as it is tier 3+. In my current world, one of the translocators I repaired is safe to access, but teleports to a cave at bedrock several thousand blocks away.

Have fun! This will also help you get used to the new berry bushes and other new mechanics that were added; berry bushes especially, since they've received brand new visuals and cultivation mechanics(which didn't exist before).

As far as I know that's how it works.

While the current iteration of 1.22 is still technically unstable, in my experience most of the major changes have been implemented and the major bugs fixed, so it's essentially on the final stages of polishing and not much is likely to change between now and a stable release. It should be stable enough to go ahead and start a new game in 1.22, without needing to create a new world when stable arrives and without encountering any particularly nasty bugs(although you never know).

First off, welcome to the forums and the game! For what it's worth, you can always customize settings and turn on certain features that are otherwise turned off by default for certain difficulties. Many settings, like chiseling and the minimap, can be toggled on/off after world creation via console commands. I've not played Wilderness Survival, but from what I know about it, the player needs to use the map item to check how close they are to the desired location, rather than use the map item once to mark the location on their minimap. It's basically just playing a version of "hot or cold". If you're new to the game though, I would personally recommend playing the Standard difficulty for a little while to get the hang of the game's basics before jumping into Wilderness Survival. Wilderness Survival is rather unforgiving and while it's certainly possible to learn to play on this difficulty, it may be a little more difficult than what many new players find fun given how steep Vintage Story's learning curve is.

Like @williams_482 said, it's a new feature in 1.22. In hindsight, I probably should have specified that.

1. I don't really bother with fixing up the place; I just loot what I want, repair the translocator, and break clutter that's in the way. I may also fortify the area to keep monsters from creeping in, if the area is particularly dangerous. 2. I don't bother with connecting translocators. The most I do is dig a shaft to the surface, if necessary, to make access easier, and otherwise mark translocator pairs with different colors and pin the destinations so that I can easily tell what goes where. 3. I voted "Yes, I have access to other resources", because generally that is technically true, but this question is where it really depends on what the player is hoping to get from the translocator. Sometimes they can save you some travel time for a story location, sometimes they can yield critical resources, and sometimes they really aren't that useful at all. For me, I like having a variety of stones to work with, so translocators help me acquire stone types and ores that are hard to find or otherwise don't exist near my base. They're also handy for acquiring fruit tree cuttings, since I like to leave the wild ones near my base alone.

I would also throw a few recently ruined watchtowers into the mix, especially around trade routes, should those be added, or perhaps as part of a new procedural dungeon like a mining camp. Imagine seeing one of those on the horizon, deciding to check it out, and finding an abandoned mine with some ore deposits still inside. Of course, there's a reason the outpost has long been abandoned, so the player will need to clear the nasties out of said mine before they can use it, but that would be a great way to give players not only something to do, but a way to retrieve some ores without necessarily prospecting. As for why you'd need watchtowers at outposts like this, there would have been at least a handful of people there at one time, and a tower is useful for spotting threats from a distance and providing shelter from threats that get close. Towers are also relatively cheap and easier to build than a full fortress.

The problem with it being an option is that someone still has to write the code, create the visual/audio assets, and then maintain those things. Given what Redram has said in the past on the matter, it's not so much a concern about squeamish players, as much as it is some of the devs having issues with depictions of gore and stuff.

Luckily there is at least one mod for this kind of thing: https://mods.vintagestory.at/vsvillage Overall though, I think it's a cool idea but not likely to be added to the vanilla game. The vanilla game is focused more heavily on the player's solitude, and what they can do themselves, rather than building an actual settlement and letting NPCs do all the work for them. The devs also seemed to indicate in a recent interview that they're not keen on having the player capture NPCs and create "trading halls", like what tends to happen in Minecraft.

Might try setting the polar-equator distance to around 50k, rather than the 100k default? That should result in a world that's big enough to feel relatively realistic, but small enough that you should be able to travel from temperate to tropics in a couple of days or so. You could try shortening the distance further, but that might make the world feel a little too small. There's also the patchwork world generation option, which will generate terrain in Minecraft-style biomes. Obviously, this won't be immersive at all, and might trivialize some challenges from seasonal changes, but it could make for an interesting playthrough if you want to find oddities like jungles next to polar glaciers.

This is the best way to discover new rock layers, in my experience. While it's not unusual for there to be a handful of rock types within a day's travel of spawn, it's also not unusual to sometimes have nothing but igneous rock for miles either. Translocators can be a little tricky to find, and a little expensive to repair, but will let the player travel miles and miles in a mere instant. That being said, if one is playing without lore content enabled, this isn't going to be an option, in which case the player is going to need to walk(or ride, if they're fortunate enough to have acquired a mount).

One mod I would love to see be vanilla though: Freedom Units. I do like using Celsius for most things in the game, but when it comes to outside temperature I prefer Fahrenheit, since I mean...that just gives me more detailed information about exactly how hot or how cold it is outside.

I know bowls will stack when empty, but I don't think they stack when filled with something that counts as a meal item. I'm not entirely sure why, other than it has something to do with how meals are coded to work in the game. Each "meal" is basically its own thing, and if they stacked then it would be difficult to account for partial servings.

Welcome to the forums! Well, for starters...pies are not foods that are stored in crocks in general. Crocks are for soups and stews, and while crocks can be filled from two different sources, the ingredients of the soup/stew will need to be in the exact same order for the meal to fill the crock. Most likely that's due to code limitations, and may or may not be further refined in the future. As for dumping bowls of food into crocks...to my knowledge this isn't currently a feature, though I could be wrong. Though I'm guessing the idea is that if the player went to the effort of filling the bowl(which is a deliberate action), then it can be safely assumed they're intending to eat the meal within. Cured meats and pickled vegetables...no idea. Probably the devs just haven't gotten around to balancing that area and writing the code to support it. As it stands now, salt curing is a great way to preserve food for a really long time, but meals require fresh ingredients in order to get their benefit. Ultimately, you're on the right track when it comes to preserving food. A properly built cellar will extend the shelf life of food items by quite a lot. Putting soups and stews into crocks can help extend the shelf life a little more, but you'll want to seal the crock with beeswax or fat in order to greatly extend it.

Welcome to the forums! This actually is a thing in the game, though there's currently no stretching frame for it. The player can lay out soaked hides on the ground and then scrape them with the knife, rather than use the crafting grid(which the grid recipe may or may not be removed in the future). As for a stretching frame, that may or may not get added. I wouldn't mind seeing one, since that makes more sense than laying hides on the ground, but in the meantime the Ancient Tools mod implements such a thing, along with other fun little toys.

One other benefit of simpler ruins that I will note, is that it makes them very easy to demolish if one is so inclined(without feeling like you're messing up a landmark), or otherwise rebuild without feeling pressured into following a strict template. I think the ruined village would be a good variant of procedural dungeon, in that it could be a rare find that the player stumbles across every once in a while, although if we want to get technical there is a rare variant of trader outpost that will spawn with multiple traders. In any case, when it comes to loot, I think a ruined village might give some nice starter tools, or provide an interesting base for the player to refurbish, but not much else otherwise since surface ruins have probably been picked over pretty well by surviving adventurers and whatnot. Right, clothing and other worn items take damage, but the seraph themselves is essentially reset to a healthier status. Time itself doesn't actually rewind, just certain effects, although given what happens in story chapters I suppose it could rewind just for the seraphs and not anyone else. In any case, even in the short story, it just makes more sense to me that if the seraph is walking around alive, there's not going to be a body to find. How long it takes a seraph to "return" after suffering fatal death though, I'm not sure. The Ghosts story suggests it can take a couple of days for them to reconstitute, in which case it makes sense that there'd be a body for others to find and interact with in the meantime. From a gameplay standpoint though, losing a few days like that may be a concept that's either yet unimplemented, or too harsh of consequence for what the devs want for balance(there is a mod for this though), thus the player respawns immediately after death. The other reason I'm partial to the "seraphs don't leave a lingering corpse" idea, is that in the event a seraph suffers multiple deaths in a row...that would logically lead to a pile of bodies that would obstruct dungeon passages and things. Obviously, the body could simply disappear once stuff is retrieved, but that feels contrived at best and a plot hole at worst; just overall not satisfying, in my opinion. Probably, but keeping inventory makes things a little too easy. Granted, turning that rule off is a bit of a plot hole in itself, but it seems a more tolerable one to me than the above. I've always chalked it up to the clothing items perhaps being more "attuned" to the player, and thus remaining on the player after death, since clothing items are pretty much the closest thing to the player at all times. Though in fairness, in terms of plot holes, it could just be similar to the Hulk's shorts. Logically, Bruce Banner shouldn't keep his pants when transforming into the Hulk, but the alternative is a naked Hulk/Bruce running around every time, which isn't ideal for obvious reasons. Letting the players keep their worn items also gives the player the freedom to wear the rare clothing items without worrying about losing said items if they have an accident. Also a big YES to these two. Temporal Symphony is one of the few mods I play with consistently, and also about the only thing anyone seems to actually agree on when it comes to how to change temporal storms for the better. As for Equus, I just like horses. The elk is nice and all, but it's just not the same.

Also known as the moon...at least, I'm pretty sure that's what that is.

https://www.vintagestory.at/stories/storyexcerpt-ghosts.html/ There's a short story on the forums that illustrates the process, as well as other hints you'll find just by playing the story. Granted, it's a bit vague on the details though. To me it just seems that when a seraph "dies", they don't really die/reincarnate as much as reconstitute themselves at a specified point. They're still the same person they were before, and it seems like the old body would just disappear when the reconstitution takes place. While ledge-jumping would be neat, I would say the opposite and stick with the simpler movement system, and perhaps add a grappling hook or some other tool to allow the player to more easily climb around, while still being something that could perhaps be more reasonably limited in certain locations. Reworking entire story locations is a pretty big ask, and isn't necessarily as simple as just adjusting a few walls and things. I'd rather see the time and resources put in to fleshing out other areas of the game. It does look awesome, yes, but the performance is...not great, and the ruins are not procedural(to my knowledge). In fairness, it's been a while since I used it, and my hardware was a bit weaker then, but while the ruins were fun to look at, the game tended to lag a bit with that mod installed, and that was with mid-tier hardware. When it comes to performance, graphics can always be turned down, but it's not really possible to adjust the complexity of ruins in the vanilla game, so lower end machines would likely end up struggling to run something like this. Honestly, the complexity is also why I've shifted away from Better Ruins over time. The ruins look nice by themselves, but seem too grandiose otherwise, in some cases outclassing the vanilla story structures. As a result, the world ends up feeling rather unsatisfying. Additionally, not every player is a great builder, so it's not ideal to have everything be so grandiose that the average player feels they can't build anything themselves that fits the world. Right, but keep in mind that Tyron and Saraty have their own vision they wish to implement, which may not track with what Better Ruins does. And while more content is nice to have, quantity isn't the same thing as quality. Like I said, this kind of thing is better suited for the procedural dungeons. Those should be complex enough to be more interesting than the typical ruin crumbled away to time, while reserving the truly epic stuff for the story chapters where it be able to leave the most dramatic impression upon the player. In fairness, I do want to clarify that I'm not saying I don't want to see improvements to the current ruins, just that I don't think it should be anything as grandiose as Better Ruins, as that brings with it performance issues and can discourage players in their building abilities.

Given that mods are really more of a personal taste thing, I'm just going to note that I agree with most of this list, but there are a few exceptions. Speaking on mods in general though, there are several that I think could easily fit into the vanilla game, but shouldn't necessarily be added, since parts of the mod don't really fit or the mod might be more than what most players really want to deal with. I actually don't think this should be vanilla. While it is a convenient mod, the information is already listed in the Character Info window in vanilla, and screen space is valuable. Having too much stuff on the screen at once can easily make things look cramped or cluttered. Plus most of the information the player can also figure out easily enough just by paying attention to what's going on in the world. A strong wind will sound and look different than a gentle breeze, and the exact time doesn't matter so much as the position of the sun in the sky. Given that player respawns are actual canon lore, I'm not sure that leaving a corpse behind is very immersive either. I think the better option here would probably be to figure out a way to have bags and tools get automatically put into the nearest available ground storage if the player dies. That way the player isn't losing their most valuable stuff, but will still need to work to get it(if said player died from a fall, better hope nothing landed on a ledge), and avoids the need to explain why there are corpses of a near-immortal being everywhere. I like Golden Combs, and would love to see some more in-depth beekeeping options, but honestly I think this mod goes too far for what vanilla should be. I have to say no here. It's not that I don't like the idea, but it would require a rework of two major story locations since it would completely break the set design and allow the player to essentially skip all the puzzles. Just telling the player "no you can't do that here" is also an option, but not a very good one. Negative. Better Ruins adds extraneous lore, and also tends to be rather demanding on performance due to the size, complexity, and I think items added. It's great that the mod exists as an option, and I wouldn't mind seeing some more complex ruins, but I think that is probably better left to story locations and procedural dungeons, where there is more things for the player to do and more reason to add complex details for story telling. Overall though, the game needs to be able to run on a variety of hardware, as well as not outclass the average player's building ability so much that they don't feel they can build anything cool that fits in the world. Plus if every ruin in the world is huge and detailed, then the story locations lose a lot of their wow factor since, well, there's epic stuff everywhere.

Welcome to the game and the forums! Multiplayer can be tricky sometimes, and issues can arise either on the player's end or the server end. Hard to know for sure without more information. You might try posting a more detailed write-up about the problem and relevant computer specs in the Questions section, as there are usually at least a handful of other users lurking around to help troubleshoot. However, if the game isn't to your liking right now, that's okay too. The devs have a pretty generous refund policy, that you can read here: https://www.vintagestory.at/refund.html/

Only on the range; the damage will still be unchanged. They're similar to Clockmaker in that regard, in that they can't throw things as far but will still do full damage. Which I've been wondering if the range debuff on Frail shouldn't be swapped with the Near-sighted debuff on Blackguard, or the Near-sighted debuff reworked to reduce accuracy rather than damage. I can understand why Near-sighted is the way it is, but it doesn't make a lot of logical sense given that it takes a lot of strength to draw and fire a bow, and being near-sighted just means that it will be harder to hit targets at a distance. The shot itself isn't going to do less damage if it hits the target just because it was fired by a near-sighted individual, but being near-sighted does mean that it will be much harder to aim accurately, especially at a distance. To be fair, it would be more annoying to miss more shots rather than deal less damage but hit shots more consistently. That being said, I do think it would make more sense, and tweaking the debuff in that fashion would still be a damage loss for ranged weapons since a missed shot does no damage. While I'm rambling, Frail could be reworked to penalize range and ranged damage, since if the character doesn't have enough strength to fire the shot as far, there's obviously not going to be as much power behind the shot so it should probably do less damage. In that case, perhaps the Tailor should be the Frail one, and thus be worse in combat than the class is now, with Malefactor and Clockmaker being switched to Weak instead. Both classes keep the health penalty in that case, and neither one seems especially suited to mining either.

Ironically, it's the other way around regarding the lore. The player character is able to read older written language, while most of the NPCs are not. The spoken language is similar enough that the player character can talk to NPCs just fine, but will also speak with a "funny accent" from the NPC point of view. It'd probably be the equivalent of a modern-day English speaker trying to have a conversation with an English speaker from the 1600s/1700s or so--the languages are still similar enough that conversations can be had, but both parties are definitely going to notice that something is a little off with the other.