LadyWYT

Oh they do. Typos and other grammatical errors can be reported on the Github, although they do seem to be a more rare report. I went ahead and reported this one though. Please see later comment: I don't disagree with making gen 3 animals a little easier to milk. However, I also don't think it's unrealistic or entirely unacceptable that animals that are still on the wilder side of domestication will be rather temperamental when it comes to milking time. Even tame livestock can decide to be a little unruly at milking time. Speaking from some experience. Hence why I suggested that the player could feed their dairy stock to make the animals a little more cooperative for a short time. Even the unruly livestock will be more inclined to remain calm and otherwise cooperate with the process if they have something tasty to munch on while being milked. Additionally, since some crops seem to be getting traits, I think it'd be interesting to see livestock have some potential traits as well. Then players could selectively breed their stock to increase meat yields or milk yields, or perhaps be more or less unruly, etc.

I dunno. I'd like to see them have limited flight, in some ways. There was an old game I played on N64 that let you chase chickens around. They'd remain mostly on the ground, but they would fly up briefly in a panic if you disturbed them too much, though they did attempt to remain in the same general spot.

Took me a moment to figure out what on earth this was referring to. I wouldn't worry too much about it. Charlemagne is tougher than he looks. Give him several days to recover and check back in. He should be fine. If he's not, you might want to submit a bug report on Github, since I doubt that Charlemagne is intended to stay dead if killed.

Echoing what @Lugh Crow-Slave said, the spear balance in 1.22 feels mostly fine to me. The base damage could possibly be increased a tiny bit, however, the quenching process shouldn't be underestimated. So far it doesn't seem terribly hard to quench an iron(or better) spear a couple of times for a 25% power boost, though I daresay it could be pushed farther, albeit at more risk. That should bring the iron+ spears up to what old bronze spears were with ease, if not grant them even more power. The most important balance factor, in my opinion, and the biggest change to get used to, is that rapidly firing spears is no longer possible and throwing a spear is a much more deliberate action. That makes the spear a solid general-purpose weapon, in that it has good melee damage with a longer poking distance and good ranged damage for softening up a target before it can engage in melee(if the target doesn't otherwise die). Basically, it's a jack-of-all-trades but master of none. For hunting, the health of smaller creatures has been adjusted to account for the new spear damage, so players shouldn't be going hungry in the early game. Larger animals will still take a few shots to kill, and hunting bears is a bit of a riskier prospect now, if one relies purely on spear throws. For combat in general, the spear isn't going to do as much damage as a falx in melee, but the reach means that you can poke at things from safety a little better(think poking at things in caves, or otherwise kiting certain creatures). In ranged combat it will still hit pretty hard, but the player is only going to get a couple of shots off, most likely, before a target can close the distance and engage in melee, so it's best to plan accordingly. Great for softening up tough enemies at a distance, but not necessarily the only weapon the player should be relying on. I do want to note that in pre5, the quenching is currently working for spear melee damage, but doesn't seem to be getting applied to ranged damage. So it's a little difficult to fully compare. There is a report up on the bug tracker so hopefully it's fixed in another pre or two. I think it also depends on who one asks, and what the player in question expects. Aside from what I said above, I think it's the kind of change that prompts an initial negative reaction since the player does need to adjust to the changes and reconsider a few strategies. The change to fire clay had similar reactions when it was introduced. Rather startling when first encountered, but a change that makes sense once one plays around with it a bit.

The biggest hurdle to get over, I think, is on the technical side. Birds do fly, yes, but they don't spend all their time in the air either. Likewise, even some birds that are predominantly ground birds(like turkeys and chickens) are capable of limited flight. Then you've got birds like penguins, who can't fly but can swim, and ducks, which can fly but can also swim, both above and below water. Some corners could be cut, of course, but the general behavior changes depending on the bird in question. For a game like Vintage Story, in where realism features more prominently when possible, it would be strange to have birds like ducks and geese restricted to only land and water, or birds like chickens, peafowl, and other ground-dwelling game birds be restricted to just the ground without the ability to fly short distances when startled. Though to be fair, flight would be pretty hard to balance for tameable livestock like chickens, since it's not ideal to force the player to seal them into a building but it's not really ideal to allow them to fly out of a pen easily either.

I wouldn't put it past them! Dastardly gnomes...

The only lore I'm really aware of in that regard: In any case, to state without spoilers, basically translocators are finicky things, and it seems very difficult to link them over long distances. Given how scrambled the world is, the broken translocators we're able to find and repair have perhaps lost their original links and thus need to search for whatever the most convenient link is. Thus it makes sense after a fashion that they might be more prone to connecting to other nearby translocators, rather than ones that are far away. This would be nice, but it's the kind of thing I'd rather see as a feature for a player-built translocator. That way it's a cool late game piece of tech that the player can set up however they want to make travel between specific points easier. The repairable translocators would still be useful in the early game, just more of a gamble in order to keep it balanced. It seems like a job that would be covered by Commoner, but on the other hand...having a proper Sailor option would be pretty cool, especially for more nautical playthroughs. That being said I'm not really sure what strengths/weaknesses the class could have that wouldn't overlap with the other existing classes, or that would keep Sailor a workable option for more land-based maps as well.

It's probably a factor of Wilderness Survival difficulty. On Standard, temporal storms occur every 10-20 days, increasing in strength/frequency by +10% each time up to a limit of 100%. In contrast, Wilderness Survial has temporal storms every 5-10 days, increasing in strength/frequency by +15% each time up to a limit of 150%. My experience on Standard is that the heavier storms don't really start to arrive until around the end of the first year(year 0) to around the beginning of the second year(year 1). Wilderness Survival, for the most part, seems to shorten the time the player has to prepare. Incidentally, if the player adjusts the storm frequency themselves to something other than what the defaults are, they'll get different results. Generally, increasing the interval means not only fewer storms to encounter, but that the storms will be much milder when they do occur. Shortening the interval means not only more storms, but much stronger ones as well. What's currently missing in those options, that would be a great addition, is an option for relatively few storms per year, but very strong when they do happen. Or the opposite: more storms per year, but quite mild rather than strong.

I forgot to mention this, but this is a strategy that really only works for attracting and befriending Blackguards. Gnomes are completely different, being mischievous little goobers that are difficult to predict.

Instructions unclear; made sandwich and got put in a hole. Speaking from my own experience, it does happen, but it doesn't happen often. It seems to depend rather heavily on how the player's building style and preferred aesthetic. A large interior will offer more space for stuff to potentially spawn than a small interior. Likewise, interiors that are heavily decorated with things like fur rugs, piles of items, and other general clutter(useful or not) don't have as much unoccupied space that stuff could spawn in, while interiors that are super clean and simple will have more space that qualifies as unoccupied. Now I'm not sure what the exact rules are regarding the spawns, nor am I saying that every interior space needs to be tiny and cluttered with stuff. But in prepping an interior "safe spot" for temporal storms, it does seem more ideal to have a smaller room, with a few rugs and whatnot on the floor . It's also a good idea to have more than one door leading in/out of the room, so that if something does end up in that room with you for some reason, you have an escape.

Fishing is pretty fun though, and it's nice to be able to preserve trophy catches and mount them as decorations. If the hunting is a little difficult in the area and there's good fishing spots nearby, it's also a pretty good way to feed yourself early in the game. As for bait, the player doesn't need to grow it. I haven't tried it yet, but there's supposed to be a grunting stick that the player can use to collect worms. Farming is really only necessary if the player wants to make stinkbaits, in which case they're going to need licorice or fennel. For multiplayer worlds created in 1.22, that should change. Breaking 1.22 bushes will destroy the bush; it's necessary to propagate new bushes via cuttings. That should mean that unless someone is a jerk and destroys all the wild bushes around spawn, new players should at least be able to forage the wild bushes or get cuttings from them to start their own berry patches, if not get cuttings from other players. To be fair, I still think that starting fresh on a larger established server is still going to be quite difficult. But the spawns might not be stripped as barren when 1.22 finally arrives.

I don't remember who started the joke, but there a while back someone was having charcoal pit issues and gnomes ended up getting the blame.

@Thorfinn I'm curious what stability drain you're referring to as well. I know the heavy storms can get pretty bad in that regard, but they do have limits to how long they last. In my experience, they can take a player at 100% down to around 40% over the course of the storm, if the player isn't out killing at least a few monsters. I think I mentioned it earlier, but it could be interesting to increase the stability drain for heavier storms. The early storms should be relatively mild so that the player has a fighting chance of survival, regardless of hiding or fighting, but by the time the heavier storms start rolling through the player should have at least acquired bronze gear and be able to fight a little bit. If they're still in the stone age at that point in the game, there are other issues present. Thinking on it a little more though, I wonder if some of the problems are self-inflicted. By that I mean that when we first start playing, we struggle a lot, because we don't have experience to handle what the game throws at us. Thus it makes more sense to hide from the storms than fight. However, one advantage of becoming more experienced at the game is the player is able to do things they weren't able to before. For example, most new players aren't going to be able to tackle a bear with only stone spears; they'll probably at least want to invest in a little armor and maybe some better weapons, or rely on a bit of sneaky strategy like bear pits. A more experienced player, on the other hand, won't really have qualms about bear-hunting with no armor and stone spears. In that case, I wonder if perhaps players are getting too used to hiding from the storms when learning to play, and falling into the trap of assuming they must hide from every storm unless they have iron+ equipment. I know I'm guilty of it. To be fair, hiding while underequipped or inexperienced is a good idea, but light storms can be handled with bronze gear in most cases, and veteran players are able to progress a lot faster than new players. It's something I'll have to play around with next time I start a fresh world, I think. It is good to be cautious, and using proven strategy is smart, but Vintage Story is also very much a game that requires some outside-the-box thinking when it comes to solving problems.

Ironically, raids are one feature I greatly dislike about Valheim. I tend to play singleplayer when I play, or with a friend in the event I play multiplayer. It's the kind of thing that I think would be really fun with a large group of friends, but for singleplayer or with just one friend or two not so much. I don't like that the raids tear up my stuff either, or that the monsters make a mess otherwise by exploding into items everywhere. The raids are also inconvenient when they happen, which isn't necessarily bad, but it doesn't feel like a very satisfying interruption when it happens most of the time. The most fun raid I experienced, I think, was getting mobbed by wolves in the mountains. Would I want that feature of Valheim to change? Not really. It makes sense for what the game is, lore included, and there are players that enjoy it I'm sure. I could turn off that feature when I play Valheim, but the game would feel lacking, thus I choose to leave it on and deal with it the rare times I do play.

Bumping this back up to the forefront for a moment since I encountered this bug the other day. I reported it on the tracker and managed to replicate it consistently on vanilla, version 1.22.0-pre5. The steps to produce the bug in question seem to be something like this: 1. Hold item in offhand(in this case, a small copper lantern) 2. Exit the world 3. Load the world 4. Open the inventory but NOT the character information panel 5. Remove the item from the offhand manually with the mouse rather than using the keyboard shortcut 6. Open a chest containing another item that can be put in the offhand slot(torch, in this case) 7. Shift-click the item from the chest into the inventory 8. Hold the item in the main hand, do not put in the offhand! 9. Open the character information window 10. The offhand penalty gets applied despite the offhand being empty

Welcome to the forums! To my knowledge, the fish population should recover after a while if a body of water is overfished. How long it takes though, I don't know. I will also note that overfishing a location doesn't mean no fish at all. It just means that catching a fish will take much longer in the overfished area than if the player had gone fishing elsewhere. The ideal fishing strategy, as far as I can tell, is just to find a handful of favorite fishing spots and visit a different one each time you go fishing, rather than relying on a single location.

I have no idea who came up with the idea, but I know it does get mentioned frequently: some sort of Jonas tech device that can create a safety bubble within a certain area. That way the early storms can stay dangerous and the player can struggle, but the player can also have solution to work towards to mitigate storm effects. Basically, the player earns safety. It's also a way to flesh out the late game Jonas tech options, which are rather lacking at the moment. Mostly I mean big changes, like making stuff spawn on the ground, or relegating storms to specific areas, etc. Changes like adjusting monster loot can already be done with available mods.

The full dive on where temporal storms are referenced, both in lore as well as advertising, for those interested: This presents a different problem: the player still needs to drop whatever they're doing in order to go interact with the storm, but now they have to travel. Which I will note, some players already complain about the traveling required to do the current story. Additionally, if an idea like this is to work, then it also begs the questions: How does the player know where to go for a temporal storm? How does the player know when a temporal storm is going to occur? Realistically, if the storm is only occurring in a specific area, the player would need to get the information from someone in that area, or have some sort of tracking device that alerts them to such anomalies. Does the storm only start once the player enters that area, or does it just occur regardless of whether or not the player is there? If the former, that seems a good way to get players to avoid certain areas entirely, or otherwise get frustrated about having to fight on ground not of their choosing(ie, no chance to make fortifications or traps). If the latter, that seems like it could lead to some performance issues with chunk loading, as well as the issue of the player missing out on the storm because they couldn't get there in time.

Given certain NPC dialogues, I would say that such an idea does conflict with the lore. However, I don't think the lore is necessarily the strongest argument against that particular idea and here's why: Letting the storms be static event locations that the player travels to in order to engage at a time of their choosing is certainly more convenient for the player. However, it also results in a world that feels static, where nothing ever happens without the player's involvement. The goal of VS seems to be not just to tell a good story, but to build a world that feels alive. That is, things will be happening regardless of player involvement. The seasons change, NPCs go about their day, animals will wander around and do various things, etc.

I don't think anyone's exactly opposed to discussing changes for the storms. The main problem, I think, is that the storms are a very divisive feature, and what would be a good change for one type of player would be a very bad change for another type of player. @Calmest_of_lakes did a pretty good outline of various commonly suggested changes, and what problems those changes can introduce. I'll also note that, while players might be open to discussing changes, this particular topic is one that no one really likes to discuss that much anymore, because the suggestions are often the same and player opinions are often quite polarized on what they would/wouldn't like to see change. Or to put it another way, whatever change happens to temporal storms is almost guaranteed to upset a decent portion of players. The only thing that really changes, I think, is which players love it versus which hate it. Precisely. I don't mind change that much, but change that clashes with the established setting and lore I decidedly do not like, because then the story feels unimmersive. That doesn't mean that every single game mechanic needs to track 100% with how things would realistically be in that setting(for example, I appreciate being able to kill large metal monsters with a sword, despite the fact that doing so is wildly unrealistic), but it does mean that the game ought to be taking its own setting seriously. To paraphrase what someone else said about realism in a different thread: gameplay needs to be realistic enough to be believable, but not so realistic that it's an exact copy of real life. Also you brought up a great point about there being some inconsistency in the lore regarding temporal storms strength, or at least I think you were the one that mentioned it earlier. In the lore, storms are stated to have been at their worst post-calamity, diminishing in strength as time goes on. In actual practice, however, the storms start as weaker and become stronger as the game progresses. To be fair, there could be a lore reason for this that has yet to be discovered in a later story chapter, but as it is currently, I think it's a decent example of making a needed exception for the sake of the player's enjoyment. Players aren't equipped to handle strong storms when they first start the game; likewise, the player would probably be disappointed to work their way up to steel equipment and then find out that now the storms are very weak, making their accomplishment feel less satisfying. It's an exception that works in this specific case, but doesn't necessarily hold true for every suggested temporal storm change.

Which is fine. Though I would argue that D&D is also a good example of why it's a bad idea to go messing too much with established lore and mechanics. As I understand it, modern editions of the game aren't doing as well as older editions due to changes that WotC made to both mechanics and established lore and settings. D&D and other tabletop games are also a bit of a special case given that the entire idea behind them is for the players to use the rulebooks and lorebooks as guides and tailor the actual game to their own tastes. It's a little harder to do that when it comes to books, videogames, TV, and movies. For videogames in particular, the closest it comes is whatever settings the developer decides to include, as well as mods, if mods are available for the game in question. I would say the original Transformers cartoon is also a pretty good example of why it's not a good idea to go making drastic changes to a story for reasons outside the story. As I understand it, the older toys weren't selling as well, so Hasbro opted to kill most of the main characters in the movie, or otherwise turn them into completely new characters. That's not to say that the movie was bad, or that the show that came after the movie was bad either. But a lot of people were very upset about beloved characters getting killed off, and lost interest in the show because they weren't interested in the new characters. The show also changed focus from robots fighting on Earth to adventures with robots in space and galactic diplomacy, which wasn't bad but it was a pretty drastic tone shift. Viewers who preferred more grounded(relatively) adventures on Earth rather than a space opera also lost interest, since the show content was no longer something they enjoyed. To my knowledge the most popular episodes of that show are the couple of episodes that feature Starscream(as ghost...which is never really explained), and Optimus Prime's return. Pretty much. I swear I saw a bit somewhere that described Tyron pitching the initial story idea to the lead writer, but I can't seem to find it at the moment. That being said, if the story and lore weren't important, I'd think they wouldn't be advertising the story as a prominent feature on the homepage, or putting so much effort into building cool locations, cool lorebooks and tapestries, and interesting characters to meet.

It could change by stable release. Does seem to be some conflicting information over whether the nutrient loss is intended to drop to 0, or whether it becomes basically negligible but will still need fertilizing once in a blue moon. Twenty years does seem like quite a long time, a bit too long in some ways, but at the same time, if there's going to be a lot of other stuff to do in the game as well as the main story events(which may or may not take a while to complete), I think it's maybe not that unreasonable. I would say it's the kind of thing that will probably feel a little steep now, but perhaps less so later in the game's life.

Right, but my reasoning was basically just...make sure temporal storms and related mechanics are very easy to mod. Then players can balance those things however they'd like. I'm not entirely sure why those areas are hard to mod. It seems like it's a portion of code that's not easy to access or something? I'm not really sure how accurate that impression is either, but it's the impression I've got and it seems a reasonable explanation as to why there aren't many mods that really alter temporal storms, despite there being plenty of suggestions on how storms could be altered. Pretty much. Lore is important because those are the established rules that stories and settings must follow. Changes can be made, but must be done with care, or else the story loses integrity because it doesn't follow its own rules. And a story that doesn't follow its own rules isn't worth investing in, because what's interesting one moment might not present at all the next, and major plot points like hero/villain deaths don't really mean anything if the same character is just going to turn up again later for arbitrary reasons. It's no different for videogames, movies, or other media. One reason the Hobbit movies didn't do so well is they weren't very faithful to the books, whereas the LotR movies remain popular because they did their best to remain faithful to the source material. Edit: It's also why studios have, or at least used to have, "lore bibles" for their various franchises. Keeping lore organized and consistent across multiple forms of media, products, and teams of people can be difficult, so it's a good idea to have some sort of in-house encyclopedia to keep everything in order. From a fandom standpoint, it's why wikis for things exist--it helps the fans keep a record of what's known about the setting and related characters, so they know who did what where, and when, and why it's important.

I don't know that I'd ever really want to see blights, at least not for fruit trees and berry bushes. Maybe if it was the result of poor care, and just resulted in no crop that year rather than killing the plant. But otherwise, while realistic, it seems like the kind of thing that easily tips into the "punishment" category. It'd feel pretty bad to put all that work into a nice orchard, only to have it ravaged by something outside your control due to getting unlucky. Oh for sure. Whoever gets the bushes will all the positive traits is going to make an absolute fortune selling cuttings. I think even cuttings that only have a couple of positives and no negatives will fetch high prices as well. It also looks like the bushes might properly go dormant, so yeah definitely agree here. Not that berry bushes didn't go dormant before...it just seems like it might be a little more of a factor now.

Oh for sure. To be fair, it's still very WIP, but it's a little easier to figure out where the devs are going with this and how things will play out on stable. The trait system looks incredibly interesting, and aside from perhaps being a glimpse at what a status effect system could hold, I think it's a system that will likely include fruit trees at some point in the future. Which, I think, would be a very good thing. It would mean the player might need to be more picky about which trees they take cuttings from, for one, and it might also make grafting cuttings onto existing trees more valuable than just a vanity feature. In that case, the player could potentially get rootstock established with good traits, and then graft cuttings from lesser trees onto said rootstock in order for those cuttings to take on the rootstock's traits rather than the traits of the tree the cutting initially came from.