williams_482

Every once in a while someone on reddit posts asking what these weird doors in the side of a hill are, or why there's an enormous brown blob on the horizon. Story locations seem to be spawned at world generation. It's also definitely true that story locations spawn based on the player's original spawn coordinates. And why shouldn't they? Any story location, ruin, buried treasure, etc that we might stumble upon is supposed to have been there for a very long time, irrespective of our presence, and allowing the possibility of whimsical moments when the player randomly stumbles upon something unexpected are a pretty meager price to pay for upholding that.

I got a similar start on my first 1.22 stable world (well, technically my second, the real first had wolves in every direction that wasn't highly unstable, including right next to spawn). I spawned in a large blobby peninsula connected to the mainland by a narrow spit of rough terrain occupied by two wolf packs and a black bear, so it was functionally an island. There were some crops to find, but mostly mushrooms and berry bushes. I've sustained myself mostly on the mushrooms plus hunting and more recently fishing, after planting what seeds I could find and making raft voyages out to find more. From those voyages I can confirm that most places in the world are spawning crops at rates I would expect from their terrain. I'm pretty sure my problem, and probably yours as well, is that my starting region is too wet. The vast majority of my peninsula has rainfall of "very common" or "almost all the time." I couldn't find evidence of this on the wiki, but I believe wild crops are by far the most common in "common" rainfall level areas, and extremely rare in places with very high or very low rainfall. Berry bushes aren't affected as much by rainfall, and mushrooms love heavy rains. The solution to your problem is as you say: search further afield. You will eventually find land with more normal rainfall levels and many more crops to pick up.

There'a also a mod called Farseer which renders distant terrain features as low res blue shapes off on the horizon. It's pretty realistic, and quite effective for giving you grand vistas and a peek at distant mountains. It't not yet updated for 1.22, but once it is I strongly recommend giving it a go.

Evidently I was just very unlucky about where I chose to fish. I've ranged out further, and most places I try with worm bait will usually yield fish within a minute.

So, it's mid-May, and I'm hungry. I've got a rod. I've grunted up some worms and put them on the rod. I'm right next to an ocean so I cast the rod into the ocean and wait several minutes. Nothing. Move a few dozen blocks and try again with a similar wait. Nothing. I haven't seen any fish in the water, and nothing seems to be biting. What am I doing wrong?

The trouble here is that the line between "click" and "hold" gets very fuzzy. If someone has a habit of holding the mouse button down just a little too long when clicking on stuff, how many very nasty mistakes can they make before they figure out what the problem is? What if I want to hit something with a bare hand or a random object? Maybe my Elk is in an annoying spot and I'm a jerk so I just punch it to chase it off temporarily? I don't want to kill it, and I don't want to bother selecting the weakest possible weapon, I just want to whack it with my food bowl or a block of dirt that I already had in my hand. That's a bit of a silly example but I'm sure there are others, and it illustrates that this fundamentally is an exercise in predicting what players want to do based on various contextual clues. Those predictions will never be completely right, so you have to prioritize erring in the direction of giving the player a safe platform to experiment and learn. Every context specific change that is added is another exception the player has to remember, which as you say sacrifices the very consistency you are trying to get out of this new system. If users are accustomed to LMB for take in all other contexts, what's the first thing they're going to try when opening an elk's saddlebag? Better hope that first interaction doesn't happen next to a large cliff face or sinkhole.

I like the writeup, but I'm not sure I agree. Right now, the game is set up such that LMB is what you use for any and all inherently destructive actions: attacking and breaking blocks. Players may forget exactly which modifier keys are necessary for any given action, but they know that variations on RMB are "safe" while LMB is "dangerous". That's a valuable safety buffer which goes away if the dominant model guiding click interactions becomes the more theoretically consistent "LMB to take, RMB to place". Users in this thread have already mentioned berry bushes and elk as situations where misclicks with LMB can be very bothersome, and inevitably there are others (milking a sheep, for example). I don't think that's an acceptable tradeoff. Currently the game's interactions are occasionally confusing and inefficient, but messing up irrevocably is relatively difficult as long as LMB and RMB are being read correctly (Mac trackpad users beware). A system where users have a better intuitive understanding of what should happen, but their occasional errors are much more damaging, is a clear downgrade.

Run cd Applications first. "cd" is short for "change directory", it moves you into the given directory.

What do you get when you run ls -la "Vintage Story.app" from your applications folder?

My only objection at this stage is how long it takes for cuttings to mature. In my RC test world I planted my initial batch of cuttings at a point when they took a couple months to grow to maturity, and that seemed about right to make them useful without being super easy. Now they typically take an entire year? A year into a typical playthrough food is pretty well solved as a problem from pursuing things with much shorter turnaround times, such as every plantable crop, bees, and arguably fruit trees. I do actually quite like the current nutrient/fertilizer setup. It's a bit of an awkward graft of the three nutrient system farmland uses, but I think it works and does a good job "tiering" rewards for effort: you'll get some but weak yields from just planing in med fert soil, better yields from just adding bonemeal (which everyone should be swimming in anyway), and pretty good yields from both bone meal and saltpeter. That all seems fair.

How attached do you feel to your current world? If starting anew would feel like throwing away your current progress, or you have exciting plans to build in areas you've already explored in your current world, you should probably stick with it. You'll get stuff from the new update in any unexplored chunks. If you aren't feeling super attached to your current save, or feel like a fresh start would be a good opportunity to learn form past mistakes, I'd recommend starting a new world and going from there.

You can add in rapids in creative mode, and the new fish should spawn just as easily in an old world as a brand new one. So you have options!

This is a great change, unfortunately it isn't working. I just spawned into a new world to immediately see four(!) wolves less than 50 blocks away, and a brown bear not far behind them.

This is a known problem with the new version on macs, which are incorrectly identifying the game as broken. This wiki page has instructions for how to fix it.

It's pretty common on here or Reddit to see someone lobby for a mechanic that encourages eating a more varied diet not just in terms of nutrition categories (which is already reasonably well encouraged) but specific food items. They want a mechanical reason to eat more than redmeat-turnip stew and redcurrant pie, a combination that will safely max out the four easy nutrition bars indefinitely. There's a mod out there which adds a "novelty bar" that the player can fill up over time by eating a wider range of different foods, and gives rather substantial bonuses to damage and mining speed when maxed out. This does provide the right incentive, but it has two problems: 1. It doesn't just encourage you to vary your diet, but gives you a specific target for variety that you have to hit and keep hitting. For some players this is a fun little minigame, but for many it is more like a chore. 2. The bonuses are substantial. +35% damage and +20% mining speed? That's a big deal! But of course it has to be, or the effort gone through to maximize dietary variety wouldn't seem worth the incremental gains. Instead of having a progress bar to fill out and gain a benefit largely unrelated to the meals themselves, how about we just make meals with more novel foods more effective at being meals? There's no longer a specific target to hit and the effects are subtle, but there's still an incentive there for players to mix things up a bit. Mechanically, I'd suggest something like this: Currently (according to the wiki) meals pause the hunger bar for 30 seconds for each 100 saturation consumed. For a simple implementation I would cut that substantially by default, 10 seconds per 100 sat, plus an additional 0-20 seconds per 100 sat calculated from the percentage of the previous n (1,000? 5,000? not sure) saturation points consumed which came from this same ingredient. This formula would be set to give benefit for any ingredient that makes up less than 25% of recently consumed food, scaling linearly such that an ingredient which made up 25% or more of recent meals would give zero variety benefit, 24% would give a very slight additional benefit, and 0% would give the full benefit. So for example, if you eat hefty carrot soup for the very first time, that 600 sat would pause your hunger bar for 60 seconds baseline, plus another 120 seconds for novelty to reach the same 180 second pause you get from eating this food in vanilla right now. If carrots made up 12.5% of your recent meals, then you would get the baseline 60 seconds plus another 90 seconds for novelty. If at least 25% of your diet is carrots, another hefty carrot soup will only give you the baseline 60 second pause. Etc, etc. I would want these numbers set at a level where frequently consumed redmeat-cabbage stew becomes a worse travel food than a novel but less saturation-dense meat-veggie stew, but not enough to make that redmeat-cabbage stew useless for long distance travel. Also note that this will have a minimal effect on the early game, because that "past foods" bar will be empty at the start of the game and only slowly fill up as the player eats. If they scrape through the first day on mushrooms and berries but cook up a nice fish stew on May 2nd, that first few servings of fish stew will have the same hunger pause as they would in vanilla right now. The criteria for novelty could be made more complicated in many different ways if desired. For example, food could be grouped into subcategories (mushrooms, root vegetables, etc) such that occasionally eating any mushrooms at all will get you a significant benefit over just eating carrots, onions, and turnips, but eating many different kinds of mushrooms gives only a marginal bonus over eating just the one type plus other veggies. Meal types could have novelty benefits beyond just their ingredients, which would have to be carefully tuned because there are so few meals to begin with (soup, veggie stew, meat stew, porridge, pie, jam). This could have interesting effects, like encouraging players to subsist on less efficient meals while preparing for a large journey when they'll need their most nutritionally dense options to be as effective as possible. There is also opportunity to make currently unfavored foodstuffs more prominent. For example, maybe alcohol could have a disproportionate effect on the recently consumed food tracker, giving you a reason to get wine drunk in the cellar the night before embarking on a journey. Etc, etc. If this were implemented I would want the current hunger bar pause of any given meal to be listed along side it's saturation value, but I would not want any of the recently consumed food trackers to be directly visible to the player. I explicitly don't want to give players a new bar to track how perfectly they are varying their diet. Instead, the goal is to make novel foods mechanically more effective in a subtle but meaningful way, without giving an explicit target to min/max against.