Jump to content

PhotriusPyrelus

Vintarian
  • Posts

    36
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

PhotriusPyrelus last won the day on September 19

PhotriusPyrelus had the most liked content!

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

PhotriusPyrelus's Achievements

Stone Age Settler

Stone Age Settler (3/8)

34

Reputation

  1. I went looking for it, and couldn't find it in any of the guides. It's on the item page for Copper Nuggets at the very bottom: "Your first copper nuggets will probably be found lying on the surface as you explore. When you find these nuggets, mark the location on your map; there is more copper ore in the stone below!" That line should probably be included in the progression guide for early copper age. :shrug: EDIT: I should mention that I didn't notice it at first, either. I posted a question on this very forum asking if surface stones indicated deposits in the stone below.
  2. PhotriusPyrelus

    Class survey

    Yup. Well aware of that story. I had typed up an explanation of how to turn the health penalties into bonuses for other classes, but I ended up deleting it because it seemed too much. EDIT: I also realized that would require giving a bonus to the commoner (or reducing his health to be equal to the lowest HP class), and the developers might really, really want to keep him without bonuses, but also not reduce his HP so much. :shrug:
  3. You know, if you don't force players to do something, most of them will do it anyway if it's fun. Why do people sleep through Temporal Storms? Because they're not fun. As I've said several other times throughout the thread, there are other - and in the future will be even more - non-tool uses for metals. You don't need tool durability to coax players out into the depths of the world. If they want gold/silver-lined lanterns, they're going to need to go get those metals. And who knows what other cool decorations may be implemented in the future to incentivize players to dig deeper. Tool durability is not as necessary to get players mining as most of the responses here seem to think. Does it add incentive? Obviously. Is it required? Not in the least. I've never felt like I had "enough" metal in Terraria (which has no durability system). I might not always mine every deposit I find when I find it, but I've never not-mined it because "I have enough". "Tool durability doesn't leave you that choice." A) because we wouldn't want players to have choice in a game, right? =P 2) what exactly is "on the line"? The biggest death penalty is having to walk back to where you died; the only thing you really lose is your nutrition. III) "steep labour costs"? Stone is *EVERYWHERE*, you can't walk 5 blocks in a new area without tripping over some. If you're going to call out napping for "steep labour cost", be sure to factor in prospecting and mining time into metal tools. When you do that, the labour cost of stone drops to almost nothing by comparison. And let's not forget opportunity cost. Every unit of metal I spend on something dumb like an axe (for which stone works just fine) is a unit of metal not spent on something that only metal can do (picks, saws, etc). But... if you're liberated from the durability system, suddenly metal axes might actually get crafted because they don't need to be replaced and offer increased efficiency over stone. They might be the *last* tool you make, but they will get made. At present, I'd be quite surprised if the number of people who regularly make bronze axes is more than a single-digit percentage. I will concede that is one major drawback of infini-durability: being able to just mine randomly until you find stuff. I still think the benefits are worth that cost, but I do concede that's a draw back. Though players who learn how to find ores properly (note: I am not one of them; I have no idea how to use the prospecting pick @_@) are still going to have a huge advantage in ore/time. As for "resource management", if the goal is to reduce the amount of resources available to the player, then the same effect is accomplished by just reducing the amount they can find. Why all the extra song and dance? Oof. That's me you're talking about right there. XD
  4. There's at least one really interesting biome (unfortunately I deleted the seed I found it, so I can't get pictures; it was kind of like a 'maze' with these small plateaus about 10ish blocks above the lower level). Biome variety could be improved and I'm doubtless it will, but there are /some/ interesting things to see even now. I would also very much like to see horses added. Though I imagine their upkeep might be pretty high. Or it could be really low. Dry Grass makes hay bales at 8:1. Even if they ate 1 bale per day (which would be way too much, IMHO), that wouldn't be *that* bad. One chert knife's worth of hay (50) would hold you for almost week. Trees are easy, to farm, you just have to break the leaves by hand instead of letting them auto-break. Takes more time, but you'll get LOTS of seeds, and a tonne of sticks. I'm not sure if this is a bug or what. I thought I read something on the axe or the guide that said there was no difference in breaking leaves with any tool, but there is most certainly a difference between breaking them manually and breaking them automatically with the trunk of the tree. As I mentioned in the thread you linked: I've not made it to steel, but I really don't mind things being hard to make... that said, I have absolutely no interest in doing it regularly as my tools break. If I *want* to upgrade to steel tools? If I *want* to make a cool decorative block in steel? Sure x2. If I *have* to replace my tools? Bleh. The silent attacker thing happens with wolves far more often for me. Just walkin' through the forest and "RAWR!" half my health is gone, and I have to hope I can recover from the shock and sprint away before the follow up kills me. But I don't spend a lot of time running around in the dark (either at night or underground). The useless ores don't necessarily take up space other ores could occupy, perhaps all the useful metals are generated before the ancillary ores, and can't overwrite other deposits. But I dunno.
  5. Just so you know, when you find a copper nugget on the ground, it means there's at least a little bit of copper ore under the ground, straight down. The manual mentions it, but it's easy to overlook. Unless you just like sifting blocks.
  6. I could go in game and take one stack of stone and do nothing but hack down trees with it and then I'd never need wood again for the rest of my time playing. One chert/granite/andesite/peridotite axe has 50 durability, so one stack (64) of one of those kinds of stones gives you 3150 (=50*63 because you can't nap the 64th stone in a stack; you have nothing to nap it with) durability worth of stone. In one inventory slot (well, two counting the axe itself). Since when you're timbering, you'll naturally get plenty of sticks. That's good for just under 197 stacks of logs (or 12 wooden chests full of logs, with 5 stacks left over) and who-knows how many stacks of sticks and tree seeds (especially if you break most of the leaves with your fist). Do people do that? If no, why do you think they would with metal? Even if a you wanted to do what you suppose an unbreakable tool would allow you to, you're still very limited by inventory space. You need probably two crocks, a bowl, two slots for torches (one slot in off-hand or tool bar, one slot in the inventory in case the held one gets doused), a weapon, probably some poultice - that's seven slots right there. You'll pick up several different kinds of each ore (especially if you have to mine in different stone types) which will take up their own inventory slots, unless you bring a hammer to crush them which is an 8th inventory slot. You'll also get a bunch of stone because why wouldn't you pick it up, unless you never plan to ever build with stone, and probably a fair bit of at least one kind of dirt, maybe two or three. Does a tool with unlimited durability let you go for longer? On average, probably so (especially if you have a mining sack or two), but you're still going to have to balance supplies; take too many and you can't bring back as much ore, bring too few and you'll have to head back before your inventory is full. Not having to take two or three picks doesn't completely eliminate that calculation, just makes it slightly simpler. Which I will concede is a drawback, but I think the benefits outweigh it. Maybe it could be (or already has been) considered that Tier 2 should only break Sedimentary, Tier 3 can break up to Metamorphic, and Tier 4 is required to break Igneous? :shrug: That said, that there are plenty of metals already in-game which cannot be mined with copper. You're not breaking quartz or iron (or anthracite, or borax, or black coal, or some other presently-lacking-a-function metals) with a copper pick. The metals which require iron aren't really useful for anything yet (except meteoric iron), but they are in the creative inventory, so we'll probably get a purpose to them eventually. And why would anyone upgrade to steel when steel is apparently such a pain to process and the tool is just going to break? Speaking only for myself, if I only have to do it *once* for each of my tools, I'm much more likely to invest the time and effort to upgrade it. If I have to do it every time a tool breaks, why bother? Just slum with the lowest quality I can easily mass-produce (I suspect this is why stone picks don't exist). A steel pick has 2.5x the durability of iron. If it's too much more than 2.5x the bother to make, it's irrational to make it (unless you need titanium). And as I mentioned in my OP, when replacing tools isn't a foregone conclusion, mistakes which force you to replace them become much more significant (and punishing). You think most people would bother with getting netherite tools in MineCraft if not for the mending enchant? I sincerely doubt it. The relatively marginal improvement over diamond (~33% increase in durability [iron to diamond is a 524.4% increase]) isn't worth the effort. Yes. They're better. Yes. People would want them. But the cost/benefit analysis doesn't add up. You'd be better off just mining diamonds for twice as long than spending half (or all) of that time looking for netherite. Heck, I didn't even use diamond for tools and armour until after mending; diamonds were too valuable as currency, and I had orders of magnitude more iron. For picks, 3 diamonds ~= 18 iron ingots or 2 blocks of iron. You think anyone - even before Iron farms - would have paid 3 diamonds for a measly 2 blocks of iron? Lolno. But with mending - so you only have to upgrade each of tool once - that upgrade to netherite is very enticing. That 33% increased durability goes from "as if" to "heck yeah!" ...and losing it goes from "well, that sucks" to "<voice = Darth Vader> NoOOoOOOOooOOoOooooo! </voice>" You are right, though, marginal increases to speed and damage aren't strong enough impetuses ...on temporary tools. I maintain that they are on permanent tools. And apparently, if "most players do not bother with making most tools out of steel", neither is increased durability. Again, if I spend all my time planting and harvesting trees, I will outstrip the whole server's demand for wood pretty quickly. Markets in games with a consistent population have points of saturation. ...unless people keep building. In which case they will always need metal and clay (and wood and stone) products for decoration (and structure). Especially as the number of those decorations increase, which I can't imagine they won't. And isn't that kind of the whole point of these kinds of sandbox games: to build sandcastles (not literally sandcastles)?
  7. It depresses me that people who think like this actually exist.
  8. I don't think forcing players to interact with the mechanic (no sleeping, building to reach sky bases, breaking to reach vaults) is necessarily the right approach. Make the mechanic interesting (and rewarding), and players will *want* to interact with it.
  9. I appreciate the considered responses. I would like to address some of them. Regarding durability as a progression prod I cannot disagree that increased durability is an impetus to upgrade, but I don't think it's necessary. First, people naturally want 'the best'. The delta between the best and what they have doesn't even need to be that big (1% might be a little too low, but 5%? 10%? That's plenty), they're going to want the better thing. Second, I think breaking speed is being drastically underrated and underappreciated. To borrow fro MineCraft (only because I have so much more experience with it) there's a HUGE difference in time-saved when using a diamond pick over a stone pick. ...I would know, I dug out an obnoxiously large hole with stone tools (because they were cheap, and mending didn't exist; it would've cost hundreds of diamonds). It took *FOREVER*. Then I did it again (years later) with fully enchanted diamond or netherite tools and a beacon. The difference is night and day. I don't quite know how much different higher tier tools offer, but I do know using even just a lame stone shovel instead of punching clay/dirt is about a 50% reduction in time per block. Lastly, an alternate way to push players into upgrades is like Terrarria (where tools don't break) does: require you to have higher tier tools to break different materials. I'm not sure if Vintage Story does this (even if it doesn't now, it could in the future). I know you need higher tier tools for higher tier metals, I just don't know about deeper stones; I found a cave that led much deeper underground than I was ready to go, so the drifters kept me from inspecting my surroundings too closely. The magma looked beautiful, though. Regarding Multiplayer Roles I don't have much experience with multiplayer servers in this game. While I can appreciate wanting that kind of specialization fantasy... I'm not sure this game is meant to be the place for it (also not sure it's not; just don't know). But as it's built right now, it really doesn't seem to lend itself well to it; that could certainly change in the future, and the seeds of that are here with the Tailor and the Hunter, but they could easily decide to go another way. As it stands right now, any player can get a hunk of clay and make a bowl (or any other clay product). You don't even need any special tools for it like a smythe does with his forge and anvil. I don't understand why - if I was on a multiplayer server - I would wait around for 'the potter' to get online to make me a thing I want instead of just finding some clay and doing it myself. That fantasy you're describing is something the game itself may allow you to choose to do, but it isn't anywhere near enforced and would have to be a sort of gentleman's agreement between the players on the server. Contrast with ECO, where the game itself pretty much forces players to specialize and work with others because one player just can't get the SP to learn everything himself. Even accepting the fantasy argument, there hopefully will be a number of other things a smythe can make. Even now there's torch-holders and lanterns. As long as people are building, they're going to need more lanterns to light up stuff. Hopefully we get all kinds of other neat decorative blocks, like metal fencing, chains, bars. Tools that break obviously increase the work load, but I don't think they are necessary to give the smythe things to do. Pretty much every other fantasy (except maybe farmer?) is going to hit a point of saturation of his good or service (Lumberjack, for example, could produce wood much faster than it could be consumed) unless people are building. Strongly disagree. You'd have to come back regularly for food or to drop off your haul; inventory space is limited, and whatever food you bring (and mining is hungry business) is either going to spoil with haste or in a crock that takes up space even after it's empty, limiting how much "Rock and stone!" you can bring home. You're also ignoring the copious amount of scouting you'd need to do before hand to know where all that metal is, and if you know generally how much metal you've scouted (or even just how much you want) you can just, like, I dunno, bring more picks? A) That's an interesting compromise. I like it. I had thought of something similar, but thought including it would be a little too suggestion-y. 2) Stone tools are probably the ones I have the least problem with breaking; they are by their nature, slap-dash and shoddy, and the material they're made of is relatively brittle and more given to shearing and fracturing.
  10. First, this is in discussions and not suggestions for a reason (of course, if the moderators feel differently, that's their prerogative). I'm not saying anything should change, I may prefer it, but that's not my intent in making the thread. While I would personally like to see durability as an 'industry standard' mechanic die a fiery death in the magma chambers of Kīlauea (along with RNG Critical Hits), I realize that's a pipe-dream, and the developers here have deliberate reasons to include it; at least I hope they do and they're not just doing it because that's what MineCraft did. So... what are those reasons? I'm genuinely curious, because I don't understand it, and I would like to. And let's nip the 'realism' argument in the bud right here; I'm not terribly interested in it, but if you were going to say that consider this: real tools last for years (decades, even) - even with consistent use - if you're not leaving them out in the elements to rust and rot. What I am interested in are game-design arguments. What does it add to the game? On my view, it's just an additional resource tax on...anything the tool is used to do. If I take a copper pick and hammer and I mine 300 regular nuggets of copper, I didn't actually make 1500 units of copper, I made 1340, because the pick cost 100 mining them, and the hammer lost 60% of its durability crushing the raw ore - that's an 10.6r% loss! So why not just reduce the amount of copper gained, since that's the ultimate effect? (and for the record, I have the same issue with durability in MMOs; it's just a tax, so reduce gold drops and avoid the tedium of visiting the repair NPC; and if you need a 'death penalty', deduct gold straight from the character's wallet or bank, like Diablo 2 did) I'm very interested to hear from people who like the system on why exactly it is they like it, what it adds to their experience. I completely understand the dopamine we get from crafting that very first tool. It's such a satisfying experience to get that last nugget of copper go to your crucible, smelt, cast, wait (not so fun but meh), and then stick it on the end of a...well...stick. I can see finally making that first bronze, then iron, then steel one being similarly rewarding. What I don't understand is how it is rewarding to have to regularly craft replacements. When tools are liberated from a durability system, it makes losing them to a bad death that much more painful. Instead of "Meh, it was half-destroyed anyway" it's "Aw man, that was my lucky prospecting pick, now I gotta make another one." It opens the door for more meaningful modifications or enhancements in the future, too, like MineCraft's enchanting. I was extremely selective with enchanting before Mending was added because what was the point? It was going to break and I'd have to do it all over again. I want to be clear that I'm only talking about tools (and weapons), not armour. Armour's whole purpose is to protect the wearer from injury by absorbing the punishment itself... though, I'd still rather see something a little more interesting than a magical durability bar that completely destroys the item when it's exhausted, but that's straying dangerously close to suggestion talk. Now that I think about it, I'm not 100% sure how clothes lose condition in the game. If they only get damaged when you're attacked, that's reasonable, but if they wear out in a matter of weeks of normal wear, well that's just silly, too. As I write this, I'm wearing a t-shirt I've had for...probably 25 years. ...I feel so old. ;_;
  11. One of my waking-up ideas today was how neat it would be to have a map type - kind of like Don't Starve: Shipwrecked - where there mostly water and you used a ship to travel between the islands. Large islands would be common (and you'd have to start on one to get the resources to build the ship). And when I say ship, I mean ship, not dinky little boat like MineCraft has. Best if there would be wind vectors and cool sailing mechanics, but not totally necessary and might be too complicated for the engine, who knows. EDIT: This would work best with a class ("Sea Dog" would be my suggestion for name) who couldn't actually do agriculture (farming and animal-husbandry), so you'd have an impetus to keep moving from island to island for food. If seasons are based on latitude, you could avoid winter by going the other hemisphere.
  12. Why's that? I don't follow the logic?
  13. I'm pretty new; I have not messed with Pumpkin's yet. I do agree that the choice between seeds and food is nonsensical from an IRL perspective, but it is at least understandable from a gameplay perspective; it's offering the player a choice (whether or not it's a meaningful choice is debatable) on how to use his resources. Like the "choice" of how to use your first 40 copper: do you get a pick and a hammer, so you can get more metal? Or do you get a pick and a prospecting pick - like my dumb-butt did my first game that got to smelting - so you can find more ore, but you can't crush it into a smeltable form? Also, as far as seed scarcity goes, do you know how many seeds an actual tree drops? HUNDREDS! But it's such a complete pain to get seeds from trees. And why the crap does punching leaves give more seeds/sticks than just chopping down the tree? Ugh. But that's a topic for another thread... You touch on a very important part of game design, something that totally drove me away from Chore-Simulator 2017 (a.k.a. ARK: Survival Evolved) a few years ago. Most people want fun from games, not chores. I realized I was logging in every day, not to enjoy the game, but to do chores just to maintain stuff. That's not fun, that's a job. I hope Vintage Story can strike a much better balance; a little bit of maintenance can be fun. Too much isn't just not-fun, it's anti-fun. I'm not sure how you do that, though: make food an omni-present concern without making it so tedious or time-consuming that you can't do anything else but subsist. If food is too easy, like MineCraft, why even have it at all? If it's as simple to solve as: "punch some trees, make some hoes, break some grass to get seeds, plant seeds to get wheat, live on bread forever" (or "find village, live on potatos/beets/carrots/wheat forever"), why even have it in the game?! The other end of the spectrum isn't really fun either, though; never having enough food if you don't dedicate so much time to it, you don't get to enjoy other parts of the game. One approach might be to make the point less about subsistence, and more about thriving. That is, eating to live would be relatively easy, but *thriving* would be more difficult, probably most easily accomplished with a more developed cooking system where good dishes/meals which are more involved to create gives not just satiation, but desirable buffs. But something like an advanced nutrition system where it builds over time so you have to maintain it, not just turning food into effectively potions like Stardew Valley does. I have not played on a multiplayer server for this game, but I did play on an ECO server for a while where time marches on even if no one's online. Though crops required (at least when I played, which was some time ago) little attention and tending. I can't imagine an outdoor (I have not messed with Greenhouses yet, not sure how they work) farming being successful on a multiplayer server where rabbits come eat your crops, or the crops dry out while you're offline. I've enjoyed farming in video games since the first Harvest Moon I played. The question should always be: what's fun about farming? And I think the Harvest Moon style gets it mostly bang on: once you get everything tilled (and if not for tool durability, I'd confidently say tilling should need to be done more than once) and fenced and planted, you want to wake up, tend your crops, then forget about them, at least until you go to bed, but probably until the next morning. As I mentioned in my last post, I really enjoyed Sakuna, but my rice farm always felt just a little too oppressive. It felt like it needed *constant* attention, if I went off to do a level, I'd come back to something needing to have been solved sooner (usually weeds, sometimes water). But it is very important, I think, to have some kind of crop-tending, otherwise you end up with MineCraft's "Oh, I'm out of food, better go harvest my MEGA FARM, that I ignore until just this situation!".
  14. While I tend to agree, bear in mind, that 1 "seed" isn't really a single actual seed. It's seeds enough to sow approximately one square meter of farmland. See, video games - or games in general really - do a *lot* of abstraction. what you see as a representation isn't necessarily exactly what is represented. One square meter of, say, rice, is well more than a handful of grains. The average yield of a hectare is 3-6 tonnes. A hectare is 10,000 m^2, a tonne is 1,000 kg. That means in one m^2, you get 0.3 kg of dried rice. So 0.3 kg is about 1.68 cups of rice, which, when rehydrated would approximately double to 3.36 cups. So we actually end up getting more or less the right amount, don't we? Two game-units of rice cook up to one serving, so as long as you're getting an average of about 4 game-units of rice, that's pretty accurate. I can't be bothered to go through this for every kind of produce, but rice at least seems to be pretty "realistic". Except for the fact that we don't have to dry it. Or hull it. Or cook it with water. Or sort the seeds. Or grow the seeds into seedlings. Or till the ground. Then plant the seedlings. Then submerge them in just enough water. Then drain the water for a time. Then add the water back. Why yes, I did enjoy Sakuna: of Rice and Ruin, how could you tell? @_@ If there's something to look at, perhaps it's the satiation you gain from one game-unit of the different foods. :shrug:
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.