Thorfinn

I've done that, @Bruno Willis, but with nothing. Not even the shirt on my back. Just take off and go in whatever direction trips my trigger. Leave the homestead exactly as it is, including the stacks of ingots and all, windmill and all, but all the sails removed and placed in a chest next to to one of the rotors. Because pretend there's wear and tear. And that's fine in MP, where you can imagine that maybe someone found it useful, or at least something different. But almost all servers play on easy settings, so the build is just not that enjoyable for me. Plus, my schedule is pretty hit or miss. I'll have several hours to play one day, then a week or more goes by before I get back to it. Rather than doing anything fun, I'm just clearing out rot. So I play mostly single player anymore. And I can't take the fantasy that far -- that some seraph will pop into my single player world and take over the farm. So I just cut to the chase. Rather than find a place where I will probably never encounter my old way of life, generate a new one where that is guaranteed and get to the fun stuff right away.

I'd ask Salty about it. I don't see anything in particular about the off-hand equipping that should be an issue. All it does is add a storage flag to say they can be "stored" off-hand. Other mods might have done a "replace" and overwritten that. But the rest of the mod is compiled into a .dll. There's nothing I can do to investigate it.

Looks like it is a known issue, @Echo Weaver, @Dilan Rona. In the comments, Salty diagnoses it, and the people who were reporting the issue found that to be the case. It appears to have to do with mods that tweak the stick itemtype. That is a problem there's no good way to address, other than a mod that loads after everything else that restores default stick. But then of course, it removes whatever the other mod did with it. And thinking on it, that's probably the issue I was running into when I redid mushrooms to be able to be harvested via right-click, like berries. I just backed out my change rather than spend a whole lot of time diagnosing it, but its quite plausible some of the other mods were counting on default behavior. I'm not finding issues with JUST ConfigLib. It's apparently a conflict with whatever mods you use that ConfigLib is trying to, um, config. [EDIT] Oh, wait. ConfigLib itself may not be respecting the --addModPath. That I did not check. I wonder if it can? If VS allows mods access to its environment? [EDIT2] No, that's not it. I just went back to an older instance that used ConfigLib within an --addModPath setup, and it works fine. Either the API or the update to ConfigLib botched it.

This is true. So maybe they flying lava bowtorn just don't exist? Games that scale difficulty by progress are everywhere. It's refreshing to have one every once in a while where progress is really progress, not just something that unlocks higher level adversaries. Wolves are a challenge that you learn to overcome. It's not like they let slip the dogs of war just because you killed your 50th wolf.

So long as there's something else to do, I like them, too. But, for example, I can't just sit and fish. If I can read while fishing, that's fine. That's what I run into with VS. "Well, I have the two chapters knocked off, I've got a homestead I'd never have to leave if I didn't want to, I can wait a full year for the fruit trees to start bearing fruit, and while I'm waiting, I can level up my livestock, which is also mostly waiting, and make compost, which is mostly waiting, too. Or... Squirrel!"

Huh. How do you deal with that? Build a coop big enough that you can feed them without getting close to their nesting boxes? I just quit bothering to try to get chickens to level up. Have enough to get an egg from time to time and call it a day. Or skip the whole egg thing entirely. There's plenty of protein just from wolves that you have to thin out anyway.

But it's really only punishing to one type of player. If you build your house out of packed earth, who cares if it gets damaged? How hard could it be to replace a few blocks, or even just build yourself another shoebox off to one side? Or live in a cave. Presumably the ice storm doesn't wreck everything. IMO, the real problem with this idea is that it basically would convert every block into a chiseled block, because you have to keep track of the damage somehow. Better Ruins gives you a pretty good idea how your machine handles widely separated buildings in various states of disrepair. Imagine that being your entire homestead. Even if I thought it would be fun to go around repairing everything after every storm, you could never get away from the lag. You would be much better off never building anything.

A good example that I'm now playing through (because of a new major release with a whole new ship concept) is No Man's Sky. Beautiful landscapes, if a bit repetitious. There's a tutorial that gets you through most of the game concepts that you can probably finish in about 20 hours, but since you can build 400 bases on different planets in different systems and galaxies, if you are a builder, you could stretch that into years. If you are a completionist, at least decades, or, if you wanted to just set foot on every planet, not in one lifetime. There are something like 18 billion of them. But in maybe 10 hours you can equip yourself and your ship(s) to the point that nothing can defeat you, unless you screw up. Self-frags from grenades, for example, or not noticing your shields are getting low. I'm getting close to running out of new content. So trade away your buff ship to some NPC for his junky ship and space pirates can be a threat again. Trade away your weapons for starting junk and experience the thrill of having to run from the basic enemies again. VS is a lot like that. You don't really need to have the game impose goals or challenges on you. If you like the challenge of rebuilding after disasters, just construct everything out of wood and burn the thing down whenever you get bored. If you aren't a vanilla purist, it would be easy to make whatever building materials you use flammable, and you could (presumably) get the thrill of chiseling the whole thing again. Or pick up stakes and build somewhere else. Or start a new game on a higher difficulty or with different goals. "Irwin M. Fletcher, you choose."

I'm not sure it really helps WITH notice. Realistically, what can you do to protect your massive chiseling project from a damaging ice storm? Build a packed earth building around it, and remove it after winter passes? This is supposed to be interesting gameplay, relieving the tedium of existence? Seems to me a much better solution for those of us who enter a state of ennui as comfort builds is just start a new game. Play the fun parts over again. Set your own challenges, like you are allowed only 8 tiles under cultivation. Limit yourself to one storage. Not one type. One. You get to decide if you take the 12 slot storage vessel for the longer food lifespan, or the 40(?) slot trunk. (In case you couldn't guess, I don't use them anymore. They just feel cheaty.) Or maybe trunks are off-limits, and it's the 16 slot chest. Can you use aged crates and other found containers? You decide. Or nothing higher than stone your first year, copper your second, etc. A no armor challenge. No axe challenge. (Yes, it can be done.) There are all kinds of ways to make the later game more interesting if the standard progression model bores you to tears.

I don't believe that's her position. Its more that you should not be comfortable until you achieve the advancements to make it comfortable. Farming gets rid of the constant search for food, animals for milk and eggs, windmill for manually doing everything, particularly the tedious stuff, etc. And steel armor gets rid of much of the threat from storms. [EDIT] I don't do anything more than utilitarian chiseling, and it doesn't sound like you do, either. That would be a serious problem for people who do, though. "So they can just shut that off." "Yes, or the few who want that can just add a mod." Doesn't matter much to my playstyle anyway. I rarely play more than one year before it becomes too meh and I start a new world to get some of the thrill back, as well as to work on avoiding the errors I made in the last playthrough.

Must have been a stealth change that didn't make it into the changelog. Because, yeah, I've seen that a lot in the past, and know from personal experience it used to work that way. Don't know I could pin down exactly when it happened, because my animal husbandry efforts are purely opportunistic. Some family wanders into my immediate vicinity and I fence them in, otherwise it does not happen. Wouldn't surprise me at all if the authors of those guides drifted away, before the changes, or maybe even, like me, quit bothering because it was such a long time horizon.

@Apache of Campaign Cartographer fame said that was his goal -- to be able to have waypoints connect to waypoints, but there was some structural thing in how waypoints are done internally that prevented it. He had submitted something specific that had to be done differently. I haven't checked in recently, as I don't use a map anymore, but maybe a good way to get this suggestion some traction is to follow up with him. Or at least his mod. Specific changes, particularly those where a mod author has already figured out exactly what needs to be changed, are almost always easier to implement.

Does your 'puter act like that with older versions, too? [EDIT] Oh, I had a system with marginal ram. 16, I think, but might have been 8, I don't recall. But it absolutely could not handle the game and a browser simultaneously. Since most browsers do not shut down "clean", I had to cold-boot and go straight into VS. Mods can add a serious load to your machine, too, particularly those with large atlas changes. There are a lot of machines out there that cannot handle things like Wildcraft, for example. I'd start by doing as @LadyWYT suggests -- start by setting your graphics at minimum, and play for 5-10 minutes, then nudge it up a notch and see if that's what's causing the issue.

But think of all the jobs it would create. Of course, paying all those people would price it out of the ability of most people to afford to play, but such is the price of providing jobs, yea?

@Rexvladimir, I apologize up front for not having zoomed in to see the prospecting data. Based on that reading, you aren't showing anything odd. You wouldn't hold up a royal flush and say it somehow disproves the probabilities in poker, would you? That's all density search tells you. The probability of being dealt a royal flush. It neither guarantees you will get one every x hands, nor does it say you won't get one before x hands. I get that you want it to be something else. But it isn't, and the people you are discussing this with you are fine with just knowing the probabilities. To us, it's simply not "broken", any more than the chart in Hoyle's is broken. Since you want something drastically different, like it or not, that's the place for a mod, not for ripping the page out of the book and making everyone else play your game.

Punched card decks and paper tape are pretty slow, too.

Oh, is that how it balances things out? That's pretty cool. "You can have your easy mode, but it's going to cost you." Seems it would be hard to charge enough. If it said, "There is definitely a chromite vein straight below this spot," that is pretty seriously OP. Well, he did start out saying he was playing the game with his wife and friend... This. And it's not because of the mechanic, but rather that by June, I usually know where everything I need is. I've encountered it cave-diving or just running around looking at exposed rock. I think if I were to propose a change, it would not be a better way to find these ultra-high grade ore veins the game uses, but rather implement low-grade ore. Homestake it. You can either spend the time searching for veins or you can process tons of low-grade matrix. Either way gets you filthy rich. One approach is suitable for a prospector with a burro, the other a grind with machinery and lots of processing. I'd probably favor the burro most games, but would enjoy the construction of a massive ore processing plant, too. One solves the issue with brains, the other brawn. [EDIT] Extending a bit, in case anyone is inclined to develop something like this, I'\d use the crucible as a portable matrix assay. That way you don't need to be a geologist or even look in the handbook to figure out which layer is the mineral bearing rock. Just put the propick in your grid with, say, 8 rocks to make a powder you could assay, put it in your crucible, and fire it up. If it reads the 3.2‰, you know your machinery is going to have to process 1000 blocks to get about 3 ore. Or to make something that isn't a dead loss, every 1000 stones results in about 3.2 (x difficulty modifier) nuggets.

Picture in Picture. It's a little more primitive version of dragging the window to whatever size is mostly out of the way, kind of like you do with the various popup screens (inventory, storage, handbook, etc.) in VS itself. Except unlike the in-game windows, you get to decide how big the VS main screen as a loading window is.

Right. It pauses every time I load, into the second year, precisely because once I figured out how it worked, I chose to have pause over having a character class. You could make the same choice. But I do agree. Games should pause on load, particularly those that can have lengthy load times. FWIW, when I'm playing one of those games, one I can't figure out how to pause on load, I either shrink it to PiP or slide it off onto my second monitor. Either way, it's just a click away, and it's more or less in my face the whole time. All it takes is a bit of forethought. Must have just gotten in a fresh prescription of nasty pills, eh?

Plus, clubbing baby seals. The time I spent in Alaska made me realize you could about skin the skeeters for meat, too. Baskets out of tree bark is a great idea! Should be a standard thing.

Thinking a bit about it, it would be very cool to be able to do this for multiple mods. It would create a directory that has only the files that this particular set of mods affects. Since it's just accumulating key/value pairs, it could also identify if two mods change the same key/value and flag it with a bunch of exclamation points or something. To be really useful, though, the various zip programs would have to start making it easier to retain directory structure. They used to do it by default, but now it seems to be only available at the command line, and even that can be fiddly.

Not for the "decompile" part. At least to the best of my knowledge. I'm thinking something that turns something like "op": "replace", "path": "/whatIWannaChange", "file": "game:whateverTheFilenameIs.json", "value": {inGameHours:48} back into { code: "tallplant", class: "BlockReeds", entityClassByType: { "*-harvested-*": "Transient" }, attributes: { climateColorMapForMap: "climatePlantTint", seasonColorMapForMap: "seasonalFoliage", transientPropsByType: { "tallplant-coopersreed-*": { convertFrom: "*-harvested-{cover}", convertTo: "tallplant-coopersreed-land-normal-{cover}", inGameHours: "48", resetBelowTemperature: -4, stopBelowTemperature: 2 ... so that you could then diff that with the original game file to see that this mod changed harvest time from 168 to 48. If you wanted something in between, 96, say, the easiest way to do that might be to change the other guy's mod, but people can be a little touchy about others making changes to "their" mod, even though in this case it was nothing but the output from ModMaker. I'm not sure what creative effort went into that part of it, but what is is. [EDIT] The game itself does this when it adds mods in at load. The code to do this already exists. It's just a matter of being able to pipe the resulting JSON to a file, rather than just in memory at load. Yas, I probably should have made the change and run ModMaker so that the mod code was correct, but you get the idea.

@Rexvladimir, one of the things I don't think you are understanding (or at least it's not coming through in your posts) is that there are TWO distinct ore generation algorithms -- deep ores and surface ores. I do not believe the propick tells you anything at all about surface ores. Pretty sure it didn't in the past anyway. So if the copper or tin you are taking screen shots of is relatively shallow, it tells you nothing about the propick readings. You can take your first sample on the block right next to a surface copper ore body and it may still come back miniscule or worse if there's nothing in the bedrock. Should the propick tell you about surface ore? Dunno. Do you have the faintest idea of how misleading that would be? In the right strata, on default settings, you can pretty much strip mine for copper and come out positive. In other words, everywhere you tried would be at least "Decent" which would tell you nothing at all. Which is why I play with surface tin at "Never" and surface copper at "Extremely Rare". Otherwise, the game is way too easy to be awash in metal. [EDIT] Incidentally, the number is actually useful. Or at least as useful as it is IRL. Prospecting IRL tells you nothing about where the actual veins are, but rather an estimate of how much metal you should be able to get out of 1000 units of matrix rock. So, yes, a "Decent" of 2.6 is substantially worse than a "Decent" of 3.2. It is definitely worth it finding your local maxima. (Keeping in mind that does not guarantee success.) But you have to compare apples to apples. So long as you are comparing tin numbers to other tin numbers, you are doing it right. It's just that a, Ultra-high" chromite reading is going to have a far smaller number than a "Decent" copper reading. I'm guessing, anyway. Never seen an "Ultra-high" chromite.

I'll have to look and see what bugged out. Used to work. Might have. Not exactly what I meant, though. I just run them in a VM until I'm content (which is usually forever) and/or crank the heuristics to 11.

It would be nice to have a "decompile" script for .JSON mods. That would make it so anyone could understand what the tweak was, rather than figuring out what each replace did. Might have to think on it. I'm thinking it would require an instance installed for the last version it worked on. [EDIT] With such a script, it would be a piece of cake to set Notepad++ to do a side by side compare, highlighting the changes. Then you know precisely which lines or parts of lines need to be copied/adapted into the new version.