Bruno Willis

Use the Sticky Dirt mod: https://mods.vintagestory.at/stickydirt It is fantastic, makes sideways soil instability make sense. It ties soil instability to vegetation cover. Plant roots make things more stable, essentially. You'll still have blocks slip out from under you if you're climbing steep cliffs, and dirt still caves in when you're digging it, but it stops whole hillsides collapsing because a rabbit walked by. I never play without it, and without enabling soil sideways instability. I wish sticky dirt was part of the vanilla game.

There's an excellent mod: https://mods.vintagestory.at/novelty which adds an additional nutrition bar which is gradually filled by maintaining a varied diet. It makes having a larger fruit patch with all sorts of berry bushes really rewarding i.e. "I'm sick of eating red current all the time, I wonder if I can find some ripe blueberries somewhere?" Actually filling that bar is pretty challenging, and actually requires you to have a well-stocked and varied garden, an interest in mushrooms, and a willingness to catch fish. The reward for filling it isn't quite as smooth as filling the vanilla nutrition bars. It feels like the game devs could take this idea and make it pop. I think something like this mod would really really help V.S. justify having a lot of different interesting foods. The world looks better when there is more variety, and exploration is more fun too, when you start seeing unusual fruits, animals, trees, etc. It's a lot more fun when those things have a mechanical impact.

Welcome to the forums, This is a really good, balanced contribution. I particularly like: I think this would really help players feel like they were making progress. Perhaps at gen 5 animals would have a 100% chance to run away, dropping by 20% each subsequent generation until it it 0% at gen. 10? That would go alongside Lasercar's above suggestion. It would be great if fed baby animals grew up either faster, or bulkier and healthier. I'd love it if petting an animal ticked up a secret stat for that animal which could also make that individual animal tamer. It'd have to be very gradual though, so that it wouldn't undermine actual domestication.

Yeah, looking at the above plan, I think you'd get a lot of flooded caves. I'd hope it would end up producing haff-full caves, running like rivers, but then cave generation is more vertical and wiggly than horizontal and underground-river-like. I think this sort of thing would really have to be part of a world gen re-design. If caves in soft stone generated like real limestone caves do, horizontal, with sink holes into lower horizontal river passages, it would end up working beautifully. Even the caves without water would feel realistic, and be fun to travers. I'd imagine you'd get underground streams, pooling occasionally, and occasionally making it down into big subterranean lakes. There are definitely some flaws though. The good parts are, I think: Water being restricted to streams, which don't spread infinitely, and don't compress down when other streams flow into them. I think that'd get us closer to tributaries, which gradually add up into rivers, and it would make working with water a bit nicer Water using the flood-fill command to flood basins. I think it would be very rewarding to give survival players limited access to that powerful tool, at the cost of having to build realistic water infrastructure. It would also make mucking around near pools when you don't have a bucket less aesthetically painful. I hate leaving random spots of forever disturbed water when I dig up some sand. Water coming from somewhere deliberate. I think world gen could get a bit more realistic if there were a way to assign the starting points of tributaries in some way. Perhaps aquifers are the wrong way to do it, but it would be good if the game could generate water sources high, in valley creases, and let the streams follow the land. It would good if game rules tended towards realistic rivers, not just world gen, so that player action doesn't gradually make the world less and less believable and pretty.

This may be way beyond what the V.S. game code could handle, but... I've been thinking about a different way to do water. Buckets would not be able to create water source blocks. Instead: Aquifers would form, in the same sort of way that iron veins form. They would be wide, 2 to 3 block think veins of "aquifer gravel", generating more in high rainfall areas, and generating more commonly in sedimentary rocks, which would cause them to be often close to the surface. If a single aquifer block is exposed to air, it would change to become a "spring" block, a water source which produces up to 2 water blocks, and all the other aquifer blocks would turn to "spring supply" blocks, which would "supply" the spring block with water. Remove too many supply blocks, and the spring dries up. Water would then work differently. Water blocks would flow, using the same flowing method as currently, but without the ability to spit. It would only ever make one stream from one water block, and that stream wouldn't merge with other streams. Each flowing block would check if it had solid blocks or water surrounding it on all sides. If it did, it would fill up, becoming a full block of water. The flowing water would repeat that process until it was all either flowing or full blocks, which would bring it to a standstill in a depression. When these streams meet depressions, they would be able to form pools or lakes. Essentially, when a water stream stopped, the game would check how many water streams connected at that stopping point, and then run a "flood fill" type command, with constraints based on how many streams were contributing. One stream could "flood fill" an area up to 6 blocks by 6 blocks, say, increase it to 10 by 10 for two, or 14 by 14 for three streams. The game would flood fill one layer, then count how many streams now entered the pool, and flood-fill the next layer, stopping when the area to be filled exceeded the flood fill limit (14 blocks by 14 blocks for three streams). It its turn, a pool would be able to support a number of streams equal to the number of streams feeding it, +1. Essentially, you'd be able to take 2 streams from an aquifer, lead them together in a depression, which would fill into a pool. You could then take 3 streams from that pool, lead them together to another depression, and make a larger pool, and so on and so on until you had rivers. The big issue I see is that the game would need to essentially retain a unique identity for each "stream," remembering that they don't mix or spit, except where they become pools. At the pool, a new "stream" would be added to the others. I feel like that'd be a lot of work for the game to keep track of? but I don't code. To take it to the next level, when a flowing block checked if it could become a full block, it could instead erode any soil or gravel block below it, and fill that space with water instead, making nice, indented river beds. The ocean would be considered slightly differently, having an essentially infinite flood-fill capacity. The ocean would be able to self-correct if you dug a block out of the coast, or if it were spilling into a cavern, it would fill that cavern up until the water level was level with the ocean. The flood-fill process might have to take a bit of time so that it wasn't overly taxing on gameplay. Tell me I'm crazy.

Yeah, I get that. But I would like it if "rapids" had something to do with the steepness of water's decent, rather than be a special, unique block. I understand why they're doing it like they are though. It's simple, and works to make water power localised, which is good.

I think the problem in V.S. is that we are able to move water. We can, if we want to, make an entire, wide river, by placing bucket loads of water and then causing them to flow endlessly from those sources. In that world, it makes sense that water rapids would be easy to make, just by placing a bucket of water above a steep slope. That'd make water power trivial, which is not good. But why does V.S. allow us to make water source blocks with buckets? It seems like a hold over from TOBG. and it is linked with how gardening works. At the moment, gardens need a source block of water right next to every farm block, which is so very very unrealistic, and looks bad. If water sources were non-movable, and if gardens had more believable moisture systems (I.e. rainfall on an average year is enough to keep a garden watered), and if large bodies of water naturally corrected themselves (If you remove a block on the shore, that block fills with a water source?) I think we'd get a more realistic game. In that scenario, I could see it being viable and reasonably balanced to be able to make rapids by steepening a water flow, or by moving water with an aqueduct before dropping it over a wheel.

This is an excellent run-down on the ideal, and I agree wholeheartedly. I would love to see automated pattern making done through Jonas tech. If I were a clockmaker with rare, eldritch mechanical knowledge, in a world reset by calamity, I would 100% prioritize automated weaving over night-vision goggles. I want that to see a Jonas tech spider-limbed loom working away under my windmill like a helpful cotage-core demon.

These suggestions are excellent. Let me add foolishness. I'd love to see even more ways to have mechanical contraptions go wrong. I want axles to explode into lethal splinters, I want to see fingers getting caught in cogs. I'd love it if high winds would cause mechanical breaks to fail. I want to be able to make a sketchy as hell first windmill, forget to improve it, and watch it tear itself apart in a storm. Basically, it's good for mechanical spaces felt dangerous, and it would be good if there were niche techniques to make them safer.

This is excellent advice, I've been using it to generate structures, using the import from block schematics tool and the magic wand. Weirdly though, it leaves purplish "block randomizer" blocks, and filler blocks (blocks with only air, which can't have anything placed in them). From what I can see, the game expects these blocks to do their work as they are placed with world edit, or when the world is first generated. Is there some way I can get them to do their thing, now that they're in the world? Could I take the world file and create a new copy of the world using it? Or is there some wonderful command which resets everything and makes those block randomizers turn into random blocks?

So true.

My first play through had more easy gold and silver than tin or bismuth, so I ended up attempting the first story location looking so good, in my black bronze plate armor. I left defeated, with my black bronze armor torn to shreds, vowing to return some day when I had steel.

It's a great mod. Should be base game.

Seems like it could be a very low-level Jonas tech: something which was hoped would stave of the rot, and does... at the cost of making the thing inedible and functionally useless. It could be cheap for Jonas tech, and basic to make, requiring mid-game rather than late game metallurgy. It'd be nice to have a few more uses for Jonas tech, and I feel like V.S. gains a lot from offering sub-optimal uses for the things you've gathered.

I think if a chiseled block has less than half a block of voxels, it can be waterlogged. You'd still end up with a square toilet that way though. Using coloured glass over a blue-ish stone might work? You could also put the water level quite low. I hear that in the U.S. toilet water levels are really high, but in my country the water level in the toilet is pretty low, so the water would be in shadow anyway.

I agree. I'm also a fan of giving the post-apocalyptic aspects more love, so I like the idea of finding broken glassware in ruins and knapping it into brittle knives. Probably not practical, but cool.

Fair, I'm not being very sympathetic. It is a real pain when you can't find clay, and not being able to progress sucks. I don't think this is an issue with clay though. I think having a few other progression routes would help a tone. Imagine if animal domestication were not tied behind copper saws? Especially if wolf taming were implemented, with all that entails. Or if weaving were implemented seriously, and was accessible without clay (but became much more do-able mid-late game). If weaving had a learning curve, you could get into that if clay was evading you. I think the best bet though would be to have some exploration and travel based tech that isn't locked behind clay, which you can get good at using, and which will probably help you explore and find clay (and other useful and interesting things too). Shoe making? Walking sticks? (there's a mod for them) Travois and wolves? Coracles on the water? They'd all help you anyway, but make finding clay more fun and easier. As is, I'll admit, there isn't that much to do to improve your situation except hunt for clay.

There is a progression tree which requires you to have clay, sure. But the game isn't about chugging through a progression tree, it's about setting up to survive winter, then getting ready and getting into the story. When I can't find clay, that means no cooking pot and no storage vessels through crafting. I think about my goals before winter: garden, house, food supply. I'll do hunting runs, looking for seeds (and clay), and I'll get my garden sorted. If I still don't have clay I'll improve my home base, keep looking for seeds (and clay), and get some bear armor and an improvised shield to start surviving fights. Then if I still don't have clay I'll go looking for caves (and clay) and run through the caves. You never know: you can find cooking pots, bowls, storage vessels, even little bits of clay in ruins. If you do manage to get set up from looting ruins, I guarantee you'll find a big deposit of clay right next to your base the following day. The point is not to obsess over tech progression to the detriment of game progression. There are other useful things to do. Think of it as a challenge run.

I feel like smaller birds shouldn't be interactable, but they should still mean something. Bigger birds, like chickens, mean something because they're interactable to get meat and feathers and eggs. Smaller birds / simulated high in the sky birds, could mean something because of what they signal. Smaller birds could gather in noisy bunches around berry bushes and fruit trees when they ripen. Gulls could wheel over the ocean in greater numbers when the fishing is good. I think it'd be really useful to use small simulated birds to signal useful things instead of being something 'useful' in themselves. Let's be honest, no-one's going out there hunting finches when there are fat, juicy pigs sleeping under the same trees.

The idea that a player might actually see a kiwi in game though... I don't know. They're extremely stealthy night birds. They make blood-curdling sounds though, so they'd fit right in with V.S.

My favorite world so far was one I didn't find clay in for many, many hours. I think 3 days of playing. I also had a total of 10 cat-tails on the land-mass I was on. I had to invest a huge amount of time exploring, gathering seeds, building, doing any other task, and at the end of it I really understood my area, and really knew where was the best spot for a long-term base. And it turned out a huge deposit of clay was 10 blocks away from my main garden the whole time. This game isn't about rushing progression. Take your time, if there's no clay, focus on something else. It'll be there, and you'll see it as soon as you stop looking.

For sure, but it needs to be done in a way which doesn't tax the game too heavily. What birds can be visual + audio simulations with no substance (no hitboxes, etc.) and which have to be actual models? This would add so much more to different locations. Is the sea even a sea if it's not filled with the hungry screams of seagulls?

Welcome to the forums! I agree with everything here so much. On birds specifically, I really like the idea of high up V formation birds that you never interact with, they're so high up. They could have close up versions: proper modeled geese, which would waddle round on the ground, and fly about occasionally in little, low V formations to suggest that they're the same creatures as the simple 2D sprites which are essentially set dressing. Those birds in the high sky would add so much to the game. V shaped birds in the sky could even be seasonally determined. The geese fly south overhead every autumn, and back again in spring. I've harped on before about small birds which are just simple 2D sprites, ideally linked with naturally generating nests (generating on cliff crags and in trees). The birds would just fly around in a bird-like way, like how bees work, but with fewer, bigger particles, and a wider, and especially higher, range. They'd also contribute that all important birdsong the game is missing. I'd love it if they reproduced, naturally and gradually, and if you could encourage wild birds to nest in places (maybe by leaving a nesting box unattended in a high location?)

I think the issue is that I don't associate bee keeping with mining, but sometimes I have to go dig up a bunch of clay to make new skeps. It feels a bit odd. I would also like alternative, longer term options for bee keeping, or even to use excess wax instead of clay as an alternative recipe for the existing skeps.

I love just gradually adding useful things to my base as I focus on progression. A path here, a berry patch there... maybe I should smooth this bit into a terrace with these useless bits of dirt clogging my inventory. Before I know it I've got a functionally and attractive home that I never want to leave, when all I wanted was a stopping off point to get going with the copper age.