williams_482

I definitely don't object to "slow" cooling of metal workpieces happening faster, and tempering/case hardening/etc are all contexts where we should be leaving stuff to cool even in a maximally realistic metalworking setup. Quite like the idea of cooling rates varying by container, if they don't already. It seemed to me in earlier versions that crucibles held in heat better than cooked food, for example. But perhaps I was wrong about that? Crucibles seem to be every bit as rapid-cooling as anything else in this update.

In 1.22 the firepit was changed so that when cooking a stack of items, it would no longer reduce the temperature of the entire stack to zero and start over after each individual item cooked. That's a good change; the old way didn't make a lot of sense and could be gamed manually (remove the hot stack right before something cooks, feed hot items in one at a time). Personally I had installed a mod to "fix" it which had some accidentally beneficial side effects. To balance that change, stack heating time is now proportional to stack size. That makes sense, but in practice it feels far, far too punishing. I have just spent an entire day heating 64 flint to it's calcination temperature, burning through roughly three stacks of peat and 16 brown coal in the process, and now I'm facing the prospect of this all being to waste if my limited supply of charcoal runs out while pieces are still cooking. Needless to say, this feels harsh. To add insult to injury, things in the firepit seem to be cooling down substantially faster in 1.22-rc2 than they did in 1.21.6 and before. If stuff is going to take a literal day to heat up, it really shouldn't cool by a few hundred degrees in under a minute. My suggestion would be to make the heating cost of a stack non-linear in a way that makes heating larger stacks meaningfully quicker and more efficient than heating two half sized stacks. I don't have any physics based argument for this, only complaints that babying a fire for as long as I have is really not fun.

I'm not sure where I got that two week estimate, but it clearly isn't correct. Glad someone actually did their research!

There is no official estimate. Based on how things have gone in the past the official release will probably, but not definitely, happen in the next couple weeks. You can always download an unstable version and start a new world just to get a feel for the new mechanics, and potentially keep that world on the final release if nothing really major changes with world generation. That's what I and many others are doing.

I'm a relatively recent member, and I found this forum to be quite welcoming. Certainly relative to many other online spaces in the year 2026. Unfortunately as a community expands, a downturn in quality of discourse is almost inevitable. More total people means more nice and reasonable people, and also more rude, aggressive, immature, or otherwise disruptive persons. Calmer folks are less likely to weigh in if they think someone else has already said their piece so their numbers growing isn't all that visible, while the handful of folks inclined towards disruptive behavior make themselves very visible. That visible disruptive behavior itself has a chilling effect on other users, chasing away the kinds of people who just want a friendly chat and not a flame war. This isn't a comment on the current state of this forum so much as how online communities generally go. The only real way to stop this is active moderation. Moderators have to be willing and able to quickly and firmly establish what behavior is or is not acceptable, giving violators the opportunity to correct their behavior and removing them if they refuse. Regular users can have some influence here by modeling good behavior and gently nudging troublemakers to behave better, but some users only respond to consequences which regular users are powerless to dispense. Unfortunately, content moderation here appears somewhat lacking. I understand why: moderating a forum is a crappy, thankless job where you have to put up with being called a nazi for telling people they should be nicer. You have power, but if that sort of power is inherently rewarding to you then you are probably not a person who should be trusted with it. I should know; I experienced the mixed blessing of moderating a modestly large online community for almost a decade. This forum has the added bonus of every user being a paying customer, and telling paying customers that they need to change their behavior or be removed can have an immediate negative impact on the company's bottom line. Not doing this can be much worse in the long run, but the effects aren't so immediately obvious so quickly. There's also the aspect where the worst users we get here start by being very aggressive about how bad some part of the game is. The devs probably feel like they can take that criticism and don't want to look thin skinned, but being really mean to the devs encourages bad behavior from other users who want to defend the developers, and the whole situation turns toxic very quickly. I'm actually impressed by how resilient this community has been to those sorts of things: we've had some relatively hostile threads started by someone wildly overreacting to the recent update, and although they weren't good by any means, I expected much worse. The core users here (especially, but far from only, LadyWYT) being calm and reasonable is the reason things didn't spiral more than they did. I get the sense that this board used to be moderated more stringently, because there is at least one user (I think a couple) who clearly used to be regular contributors, but replaced their forum signatures with angry criticisms of the game and show up once in a blue moon to complain about how they were "censored" or "silenced." Obviously these people had some complaint which they took way too far, suffered appropriate consequences, and lack the maturity to recognize that they were the problem. Dealing with users like this sucks! You feel bad because they used to act reasonable and be helpful contributors, but they did actually step over a line, and they responded so poorly to being warned about it that they turned into huge toxic problems almost instantly and had to be removed entirely. You worry that you could have phrased things better (because you know damn well you aren't perfect either), and maybe then this obviously unstable person could have just continued doing their helpful and reasonable things. Wallow in that for too long and you get trigger shy about correcting even really obvious bad behavior. With all that said I may be wrong about the moderation here. The moderation team could plausibly be doing their jobs strictly in private without feeling the need to show the flag, and none of us would know the difference unless we decided to start getting in fights. In which case props to them. In any case I wish them all good luck in keeping this place as pleasant as possible.

Tannin already exists in the vanilla game as part of the leatherworking process. Scraped hides are soaked in weak tannin and again in strong tannin to get leather. Why this is only a secondary/tertiary step I'm not sure. Thorfinn says he always goes with linen sacks, as they're available quickly and are enough storage to get you through chapter 2 if you're stingy with what you keep. Personally I've found them to be pretty nice upgrades over baskets and quicker to get than backpacks. Flax is important, but if you're aggressive about gathering as many seeds as you can and planting it immediately, you should wind up with more than enough for a windmill by winter. Not sure how the reduced yields and slower crop growth are going to affect that in 1.22, though.

I think this would be a positive change. A berry bush with no adjacent bushes could consume nutrients at the replenishment rate, while more densely packed hedges require some artificial assistance. That seems more consistent with reality than either the current system or a nutrient-agnostic implementation.

The problem with this explanation is that it's a totally ineffective way to stop an anticipated "strategy" which itself is obviously silly? We already know people are more than willing to dig up and replace med fert soil for their crops, even though simply rotating crops and adding more fields seems a clearly superior approach. The idea that someone would be so uninterested in using all the bones they surely have lying around to fertlize bushes every once in a while that they would rather destroy the bushes and replace them with cuttings that take half a year to grow to maturity is believable, if only because people already do silly things. The idea that they would be discouraged from that by the need to bring in fresh med fert soil is obviously ridiculous.

Fortunately both the lore and explicit statements from the devs have made clear that temporal storm rotbeasts will not be smashing your builds, stealing your stuff, or killing your livestock, because that sounds absolutely miserable to deal with. That's not a reason to endure a temporal storm, it's the exact opposite: a further punishment for trying to engage with the mechanic instead of shutting it off or sleeping though it. Temporal storms are no joke even for well equipped experienced players with prepared "safe" places to duck into for healing. A mechanic which forced the player to specifically defend their structures, crops, and livestock against functionally infinite swarms of drifters, starting a couple months in when the best weapon they can get is probably a copper spear? That's far and away more difficult than running around dodging hits and getting in the occasional kill. In a heavy storm with a large base full of valuable stuff it sounds outright hopeless.

I don't interact with the Discord on any regular basis, but I have to imagine it turns toxic cesspool very quickly around unpopular changes. That's the way of huge communities where the only barrier to having your voice heard is if you can type quickly enough. My sympathy to all who wade into those dark waters. Everyone on these boards (with very few, highly visible exceptions, none of whom I've seen lately) is here because they really like this game and what the developers have done with it overall. Criticism of choices planned for the coming update comes from a place of love, and a desire to make sure the game continues to add fun and interesting mechanics while maintaining a very high standard of quality. I think most posters issuing substantive criticisms make this care and appreciation clear, but not in every single post, and in conjunction with high volume overt negativity from other places it's easy to understand why even thoughtful criticism can start to grate. I'm curious to see what mechanical changes the devs make from here. I imagine this being a rc release means they intended for it to be feature complete, but there are a lot of directions they could tweak things in. Personally I'm not an expert on berry bush cultivation, and although I don't love the idea of needing to fertilize bushes, I'm not hugely bothered by it either. I am confused by the more convoluted seeming aspects of this (minimum soil quality and downgrading quality on growth), but they won't be game breaking in any case. Med fert soil is easy to find.

This is an extremely good suggestion. I think the recommended process works fine with workpiece temperatures visible, and I'd even argue that it should display a "live" shatter chance for quenching based on current temp. Hiding information just to make knowing something a relevant player skill doesn't usually sit well with me, and I also worry about the effects on folks with various types of visual impairments. I'll also argue that completely resetting the work piece is a wholly adequate punishment for overheating. Overheating is likely to be a really easy mistake to make because all it takes is wandering off at a bad time. Players would be annoyed enough at loosing all heat treating progress after being distracted from the forge by a rogue drifter, a forgotten lunch, or a temporal storm. Losing the work piece itself is excessive.

This setup sounds genuinely fun in a way that current storms and most suggestions don't. You're never "safe," which is clearly something the devs want, but you're also not constantly and unavoidably an unlucky split second away from being one-tapped. You can hide in the basement panning if you want and will avoid most of the danger, but still face the risk of being driven out. Monster spawns being more closely tied to rifts and fissures will cause them to naturally cluster around points other than "wherever you happen to be", giving more opportunity to either evade the mobs or throw yourself into trouble as you please. Finally, having something of value to be searching for as you dodge clusters of enemies is another reason to keep drinking in the scenery, and a balance to the inconvenience of dealing with this whole thing in the first place. Obvious spawn points and clustering of enemies also means less immediate punishments (and thus fewer learned un-fun habits) for new players trying to engage with this mechanic who don't really know what they are doing. Combine that with sharper differences in quality of monsters faced in light, medium, and heavy storms, and I think you'll get a lot more new players who approach the storms with appropriate caution and come away with a more positive outlook.

Apparently the devs agree that they overdid the damage nerf, so I look forward to seeing where and how much they correct upwards. And yes this definitely is a "nerf". The word doesn't mean make something bad, it means make it weaker than it was before. Which has clearly happened.

It's an oven, it fires itself!

I think this is correct, and it's downstream of the first storms being so incredibly punishing if the player tries to fight their way through. The game makes a rudimentary effort to give the player a gentle start by starting with the weakest temporal storm and ramping up, the problem is that even light storms are ridiculous. If light storms were much more manageable while still showing the correct type of dangers (fewer monsters and only T2 or below) while also conveying that things will get much, much worse in time, that lets the player make some less disastrous errors and learn things in less infuriating / automatically death spiraly ways. As far as lore explanations for the weaker storms, I'm spitballing without knowing what the devs have in mind but maybe the same temporal weirdness which put our character where they are also had a temporary chilling effect on the storms? That would explain why the first storm is weaker and they ramp up from there, despite the fact that we know storms are getting weaker over the much longer timescale of the world.