CastIronFabric

I personally will not let a fictional temporal stability dictate where I can build in a fictional game I turn it off

I do not know why people are acting as if this is an idea that has never been done before and there is so many questions on how we could possibly do it. Yes, canteens, done. Maybe I am wrong, maybe my memory is faulty and old but I could have sworn that many survial games already have hydration mechanics and this is not some kind of mystery. I know Green Hell does, I know Rising World does. Maybe later I will have to research this some more to double check my memory but it just feels like this is extremely common

let me repeat then so that is clear and does not get missed. I am not aware of any survial game that does not have thrist mechanics in it, I am not sure how a survial game can be defined as a survial game without thrist mechanics or rather at least hunger mechanics. I am sure there exists a few survial games without thrist mechanics but its extremely common and I fail to understand why people think its a novel idea that should not exist in this survial game. Now is minecraft a survial game? I do not know

I have never played Minecraft but I assume that is what you are referring to. You think this game and its very Novel approach to not having hydration unlike most games of its type is because its tightly coupled to Minecraft ideology of no hydration of which itself is likely not rooted in anything specific other than just never getting around to it? I thought this game was supposed to be an upgrade to Minecraft, not a subservient to all things Minecraft Regardless, it appears the answer to 'why are some against hydration in VS unlike the vast majority of survival games?' the answer is 'because Minecraft does not have it. duly noted.

I struggle to know what the definition of a 'survival' game would be if not Call of Duty. The only parameters I can think of are food water and temperature. and Food is very much a major foundation of this game, its not in Call of Duty though to be fair

nearly every single 'survial'/'building' game I am aware of has a thirst bar and I would struggle to think of one that does not, its extremely common and I fail to understand why people are treating this 'idea' as if its a novel concept.

locational damage idea works in a game that is basically turn based when it comes to combat has been my personal experience, trying to have to much detail in a twitch based system is a trap that is easy to fall into

To reiterate my opinion I think having thirst mechanics in a game like this is obvious and does not need to be overcomplicated. I think this might be the only building/survial game I have ever played that does not have thirst mechanics in it. I am not exactly sure what parameters makes up a 'survival' game such that the use of the word has an actual meaning or not but I would think 'thirst mechanics' would be on that list as well. Now as far as overloading the players during early and mid game I agree, this game has a huge list of things to manage and take care of and adding thirst mechanics would add to that list of things to manage, kind of like.....combat overhaul would. So in my personal opinion I would rather see thirst over combat weapon management. I do understand that part is an opinion not something I am saying as a fact. Regardless however, I think some people are way over complicating the 'no' to the quesiton of having thirst mechanics in this game.

I think adding an option to the games option to remove surface drifters only and or adding the option to the existing Deed system to not allow hostiles to spawn in a Deeded area is really not unreasonable, is fair and completely understandable and I am sticking to that. I also understand that could be modded but from my perspective adding this as core options is obvious. I understand most (at least on the forums) do not agree and that is how it is but I am immutable on my view on those two suggestions.

regarding tower defense as far as I am concerned if I have to fight hostiles that spawn within my deed area its walking into the category of tower defense. I understand that I just my opinion and I am sticking to it.

regarding number 2 I agree. I am playing the game counter to the developer intentions and what I assumed was clear is that I do not agree with the developer intentions in this area at all. So with that in play, perhaps add a setting to turn off just surface drifters? It is literally the only aspect of this game I find silly and yet in my face all the time regardless of that with no setting to turn just that part off. So...lets add it!

I hear you on so much to juggle. I personally would balance it by removing surface drifters and rifts and add hydration instead. Effectively that is exactly what I do via the settings

I have made the same point regarding 'interruptions'. All my suggestion (on the forums anyway) has been summarily rejected which where 1. Use Deeds in the game to have rifts or hostiles not spawn within the Deed. Wurm Online has effectively been doing this for more than 20 years now and its solid and makes sense 2. A setting to turn on or off Surface Drifters specifically. 3. Start from a design foundation philosophy that this game is either a tower defense game (like nearly every single building game in the market today) or it is not a tower defense game. If it is not, then make threats something you go to instead of threats coming to your base. Dungeons, Caves, Story Quests. A place that you plan for, suit up for and maybe such a plan takes several months. Making the cart to carry your stuff, make your best armour, best potions etc and you go to it. Rather than as you say randomly hitting you while your brain is busy working out how you want to make your cellar. In short, either make 7 Days to Die or make a game focused more on building and crafting as it main structural pillar. For me personally, I have settings set to Passive but given I like lowish lighting, 100s of hours of me running around doing things in my base while trying to ignore the drifters that some times get in my way just feels like a bug in the game for my personal gaming experience. A bug that is easy to fix.

Here is my views overall: Is this objectively my favorite game ever covering 40+ years of gaming? Yes (with only one other maybe challenging that spot) Is it perfect? no Does it contain things I do not like? Yes What is my measurement of success? Call me a narcissist but for me success is a fun game to play. Given its my favorite game ever, its a success in my mind. I do not care how many people play it. I do not subscribe to the theory that more money from sales = better game. I think looking objectively at the market place that assertion does not hold water. Conclusion: in my mind it is a smashing success and really the only thing holding it back is me not making mods (now THAT sounds like narcissism but given I do not care what other people think its more like just flat out selfish and too much pride which I am ok with)

I turned off storms and stability pretty much the first day I ever played the game and have always kept it off. There is nothing about its concept or its implementation that I enjoy and frankly I burned out on 'monster threats' in games 10 years ago. I got a lifetime supply of that playing 7 Days to Die

I do not know if you are aware or not but every single one of those items is in mods that works really well other than 'wine casks with spouts' (which might actually exist I just am not aware of it)

I am now even more confused that I was before I asked the question, I thought you did not like the system Regardless, I am punting on this one and moving on.

ok I think I misunderstood. Its not that 'fuel for car' is different than other games its just the amount of fuel required is not to your liking. The mechanism is the same its just the amount is different. Ok that makes more sense.

long distance travel to get to redwoods and peanuts is my primary objective in my game play (for mods), so for me personally distance does matter and to repeat, I have known there is multiple equators for more than a year now. The thing is, why do you think travel does not matter to me but DOES matter to the person making the suggestion? Bottom line though, there is only two options for this suggestion 1. longer travel time or 2. smaller generated maps.

can you expand on that a bit, how is it different from other games exactly? I ask because 'fuel for car' sounds like 'yes that is how hunger works in every single game ever created' so clearly I am not understanding something and that is on me

On the food conversation I vote for looking at models that already exist in the market place and leveraging that. I know I mention this game all the time and its not intentional it just very simply has the best craftting/skill system I have ever seen although the gameplay itself is not as outstanding. Which game am I referring to when I when it comes to a cooking system? Wurm Online. Its cooking Buff system is excellent as well as its overall cooking approach.

people in these forums really need to calm down. Every game play I play I go from the North to the south to collect various things that grow that for the Cooking Mod. This is a core pillar of my gaming experience. All I am saying is that I do not approve of this game having longer travel time than it already does. I think the travel time to get to different biomes in this game is far enough if not arguably too far. That is my opinion. If you think the travel times to different biomes should be longer than that is fine, that is your opinion. Its just not an opinion I share, my view is the exact opposite. Considering I have been building a road to the South which currently sits at 10,000 blocks, yes it matters to me. More over, if it 'does not matter' then why even change it? If you think the vast majority of people do not travel including the person making the request then why make the request in the first place if one never travels anyway? and Yes I have known there was more than on equator for more than a year now.

Wurm Online does this. In fact, a lot of the ideas brewing up in this game exist in Wurm in high level of detail, its a good model to look at for ideas

I personally can not believe this is even a conversation. To me adding hydration to a game like this could not possibly be more obvious of an answer other than...yes of course.

here is how I see it If a person comes up to me and says 'I want to steal a car' I am not going to offer them the best solution on how to do that just because that is what they want. The solution is not to make the car theft less of a problem the solution is to not steal the car. 'not doing' something should always be an option on the table when considering solutions. It is not logical to remove 'do not do that thing that is not working' from the option of choices. The logic would create an endless cycle of bad decisions. That logic problem might not be self evident at first but if one takes a break and goes for a walk and thinks about it..yeah..its a bit of an issue removing that from the bucket of options.