Teh Pizza Lady

Minus all your items, however, so unless that's all you were carrying, uh... good luck.

The problem is that bloomeries still require calcinated flint to make the fireclay (unless you got lucky with an early deposit in a bauxite biome), so the initial cost is still up-front which still requires considerable resources to get those six flint to cook.

guys chill, I'm pretty sure he can't respond to you even if he wanted to.

A clock that chimes as a storm is approaching would be fun. Especially if it continued to chime during the storm like an alarm.

They sound like sniper rifles, too, lol. It would definitely give the Malefactor way more utility and not be quite so useless late game, especially if you can upgrade the sling with better materials to allow you to chuck those stones even further. Malefactor should also get the ability to craft a bola and other types of throwing weapons, in my opinion. Also the ability to craft lead glandes for extra damage.

I believe what you are making is a strawman argument, because you are arguing against something I never actually said. I never said they should fix things that are broken, even though they sometimes do. I said the game was intentionally designed to allow players to modify things to their own needs and preferences. The major difference is that mods fixing a broken game means the developer has a track record of leaving broken systems alone and never fixing them. Mods allowing customization to suit your needs or preferences is a sign that the game is actually balanced at its core, and the majority of players probably agree, but not everyone. Vintage Story, obviously, is the second one. The game isn't broken (aside from obvious bugs in the pre and rc downloads), but instead is full of deliberate design choices that allow the developers to give the players the freedom to customize the game without diluting their own vision for it. Mods WILL fix it but only because you think it's broken compared to what you actually need or want, not because it actually is. So the idea that "mods fixing it" is a sign of bad design just does not make sense to me in the context of a game that was built around modding from the start, especially since I don't think it is in particular need of fixing aside from a few bugs here and there.

This may be a triggered response, but alas, I have been triggered, so this is my soapbox and the hill I will absolutely die on. Your statement, in my opinion, is objectively wrong on several different levels. First, Vintage Story was designed around modding. From the very beginning, even the game itself is a collection of 3 different mods working together. The architecture of the game intentionally exposes itself to mod creators to tweak, modify, and enhance the features within. The modding API is extensive, well-documented and very stable compared to other game creators (cough cough bethesda cough). The developers not only expect the players to want to mod it, but also encourage it. It is far easier to create a Vintage Story mod than it is for other block games. So when someone says, "Mods will fix it", it means the base game provided the framework and the players can tailor it to their specific needs. That's a feature, not a failure. Second, Vintage Story cannot and should not satisfy everyone. The game sits in a weird position between sandbox and simulation. Some players want more realism and complexity. Others want less grind and faster progression. Some players want different crafting mechanics. Others want simple, uncomplicated recipes to bypass the established progression systems. If the developers tried to satisfy everyone in the base game, the design would be bloated and inconsistent. Modding solves this problem by allowing the different groups and communities within the playerbase to customize the game differently. Third, Vintage Story mod support reduces the need for "lowest common denominator" design. Games without official mod support have to dumb themselves down to satisfy everyone who plays them. The Vintage Story developers, instead, can afford to shape the game the way they see fit and experiment with deeper mechanics instead of keeping everything bland. If players think something doesn't work the way they want, they can adjust it without diluting the core design of the base game that someone else may enjoy. Finally, your statement undermines and dismisses a major strength of the game community itself. Because Vintage Story has such extensive modding support, the community can produce QOL improvements that eventually become part of the base game itself. They can produce total gameplay overhauls or even small tweaks. They can create new game mechanics. They can find performance improvements that get absorbed into the game code and added to the next release. TL;DR: Assuming that modding is a bandaid for bad design is a very close-minded view and misunderstands the entire philosophy behind Vintage Story's core design. Dismissing mod support ignores the flexibility, experimentation, and creativity the developers deliberately built into the game.

traders are bugged on this rc

Ah, I understand a bit better now. I'm no engineer (in fact my BS degree is in Computer Science, not Computer Engineering because I elected NOT to go to the engineering school in my state due to cost O_O ), but I can understand and appreciate the engineer's approach to subjects and methodologies in creating solutions to the problems. While the science is more about the theory, I can appreciate the execution of said theories. Anyway, I agree that many of the conversations had here about new game mechanics are definitely premature and a great source of disagreement as opinions and speculations are too often treated as facts rather than a subjective idea.

@williams_482 I fixed it. Stacks Cool Slower mod now on the Vintage Story ModDB: https://mods.vintagestory.at/scs

Neither one is wrong. You are allowed to enjoy what you enjoy. As the game changes (and it will) so must the tactics and motives for gameplay. There is nothing wrong with setting it aside for a while and returning to it later.

Welcome to the forums! Have you tried out Expanded Foods yet? It is a work-in-progress, but it definitely gives you the ability to use honey in recipes more than the base game. If you are wary of using a WIP mod, you can always just fill a barrel with honey and come back to it in a couple of weeks and it will have fermented into mead which can be distilled into Distilled Mead and again into Aqua Vitae, giving you access to soaked bandages which heal for about the same amount as honey-sulfur poultices without the sulfur requirement!

Welcome to the forums! This would definitely be an interesting change especially for users with lower-end computers.

They're just going to meet Dave in the big storm in the sky.

FWIW I found the code that determines the state of things in the firepits. Gonna make a mod real soon that patches it up so that the temperature declines at about the same rate. The major problem is that it uses the temperature of the firepit itself to determine how far to adjust the temperature of the item being cooked or smelted. If the firepit is at max temperature for the fuel source, the temperature of the items you are cooking/smelting will increase relative to that temperature, tapering off as it reaches the limit. So it starts off heating quickly and then the temperature increase appears to slow down. However, once it reaches the temperature it needs to be at in order to start processing it will continue to heat up at 1/11th of the previous rate. However cooling of an item is not relative to the stack size. I think this is probably a bug, but it makes sense for individual items... I think. I'm going to try to fix it.

good suggestion, but I think it's a bit overly complicated it would be great for a forging mod for enthusiasts. I don't think I would enjoy this as a part of the base game, but I could be wrong.

IMO, if you want anything beyond rawhide clothing and the shirt you were born in, you will need to be a tailor. They aren't necessary, but in a mulitiplayer setting I can see the base mom rolling tailor and everyone coming to them for clothes, resources, etc. while they go out gathering stuff and dumping it for them to sort later.

Throwing bricks? I've heard of uh.. pooping bricks. Throwing is probably best left to the monkeys at the zoo or... you know...

sorry I sniffed all the glue...

Came here to echo this, essentially. I'm halfway tempted to dive into the code and see where they determined how long it takes to heat up a stack and apply the same algorithm in reverse to the cooling down. More mass = more storage of heat... It's just basic thermodynamics. I appreciate what the dev team was going for here, but I think they missed on this one.

You have completely derailed the thread, now. If you want to discuss these things, start your own threads or use DMs instead. Stay on topic!

There is some merit in saying that using AI to draft responses is lazy. AI often tends to give bad responses so much so that ChatGPT has a disclaimer at the bottom of the page saying that it frequently makes mistakes and it is considered the gold standard. Nevertheless, I am trying to keep this thread a neutral ground without breaking any rules. The moderators, for now, have recently reminded me that if I find anyone on the forums to be particularly bothersome and they're not breaking any rules yet, to just block them and move on.

I want to be careful here since this thread is meant to be neutral ground. This example doesn't really demonstrate sophistry, but rather false equivalence. Surgery involves prior consent and medical purpose. Assault by nature does not and is a crime because of it. If a surgeon were to cut someone without their consent it would be a crime. So the question is not who is being disruptive, it becomes a question of whether or not the logic can stand on its own, which it clearly does not. The reply of "That is absurd" is the common sense response. It really needn't be said, but, such is the way things go sometimes. Now if the poster doubled down on their stance, then they could theoretically be labeled as disruptive, but that's a very wild swing at a wide curve ball. Any chance of getting a hit is second to none. This example isn't really sophistry either but a false shift of the burden of proof. Saying, "I panned sand for 10 hours straight and it was fun!" is a statement of personal experience. You never know what you're going to actually get when panning and the surprise of getting a lorebook or a gold nugget can be all a person needs to keep going. If someone then claims "no, it wasn't. panning isn't fun" the burden of proof doesn't lie with the person who had the experience, because experience is subjective. Any claim that contradicts someone's lived reality bears the burden of proof because it is making the first objective claim. That said, disagreement alone is not necessarily disruptive, but when someone continuously disagrees with folks on the forums when they're trying to discuss game mechanics or talk about their experiences or knowledge in real world activities that are emulated in the game, then that person is denying reality and refusing to engage in good faith discussion. That is the type of disruptive behavior we are talking about here in this thread and that is the kind that making people want to shy away from the forums and put others on the block list. I hope that clears it up for you and helps you understand why this thread exists.

Achievement get: This isn't golf, but... Mulligan?

10/10 went straight from wolf bait to bear snack.