MKMoose

That's intended. There were problems with handling liquid fat due to the pot's shortcomings, so that behavior was removed for now.

Yeah, I've just tested it and it turns out upgraded regions don't have animal maps. One way that I know you can fix this is by using /wgen regen 0 while standing 32+ blocks away from anything that you don't want deleted, which will regenerate the chunk you're in, as well as the map region. Remember to backup the world if you want to be safe. Unfortunately, you will have to do it in each region (512x512 area) separately when you want to fish there. There is a related bug report on GitHub, where I've chimed in already.

Having looked through the code for the fish recently, I do think it should work with no issues when updating to newer versions. If it doesn't, that would be a bug. Keep in mind that while the fishing pole allows to obtain fish from even where no fish are actually visible (most of the time), seeing the fish spawn in bodies of water as entities seems to be a luxury in 1.22.

The amusing quirk of the fish fillet is that it gives: raw, 50 satiety, cooked, 100 satiety, in meals, 375 satiety. Their value in meals skyrockets so high that I''ve been questioning whether that's even intentional, since most food items only give 1.5x satiety in meals compared to the best alternative, not 3.75x. Until you have a cooking pot, you can cook the fish whole on the fire and might even come out slightly net positive over fillets. But, once you have a cooking pot, it is absolutely crucial to use all of your fish as fillets in meals, if you care at all about maximizing the satiety you obtain from them.

I think this screenshot is a good example of where a terrain feature in the game just doesn't make any sense. It's too large and too repetitive, and doesn't even have a good real-life analogue. I genuinely don't know what this is supposed to represent, and the closest I can think of is either a marsh or prairie potholes, but it's just not even close to anything, mainly due to excessive vertical terrain variation and way too small scale. I would take a completely flat grassland with a lake in the middle over whatever this is, and it would at least be easier to traverse. My thought is to an extent the opposite - many areas of the VS world feel too small to me. While I wouldn't want to necessarily call for plain realism here because improper application of it can easily end up unfun, the VS world is already really, really small-scale compared to the real world, while also missing many details from the real world which would arguably help it greatly, including more natural altitude variation and large-scale highlands and mountains. This could also alleviate some of your issues regarding navigation despite increasing the scale of some elements of the world, because instead of navigating based on distinct, smaller landmarks, you could still navigate along large landforms, even those that stretch across a dozen kilometers or more. Just as a quick example, "travel until you see a mountain range and continue through the montane plains while keeping a swamp to your right". While I don't think making any of these even close to to-scale is a good idea, I think there is a lot of real places to be inspired from, instead of making "realistic" devolve into "boring". I also don't want realistic scale, but I think everybody can agree that realistic features would naturally improve the game a lot. Of course, in the case of mountains, we probably wouldn't want any massive ranges like these Alps (on the left/top), but something more like these mountains in the Southern Carpathians (right/bottom) could make a lot more sense than anything we currently have in the game. Both images taken from Google Maps, about 50 km or so in height. The Southern Carpathian ones in that image are roughly 1400 m in height from the base at 600 m, so even scaling those down 20x to easily fit within the default height limit would leave you with a ~2 km long range - normally you won't get even close to that in-game, and you're more likely to find a massive potato, 250 m in diameter, in the middle of flatlands. Flat areas are a bit more difficult to improve, because a lot of them are inherently large, expansive and samey like this savanna in Tanzania (left/top), but I think there's still a lot we could do with some mosaics and other ways to break up the landscape like in this other savanna in Angola (middle) with mixed woodlands, grasslands, shrubbery and barren riverbanks in varied proportions, or these deserts of Saudi Arabia (right/bottom) eroded by wind and water. All three images about 10 km in height. Overall, I think there's a lot that could be improved about world generation while remaining "inspired by the natural processes of the real world", as the VS home page puts it, with logical regionality, large-scale features like drainage basins and tectonics, improved noise algorithms, climate condition and world parameter interaction, smoother layer transitions, smoother slopes, vegetation mosaics and paths, and a whole lot of stuff like that. World generation is a serious undertaking that a person could feasibly spend their life perfecting, so I wouldn't expect the devs to just keep working on it forever, but I think there's few things that would benefit the game more in the long term.

Head and heart are in most contexts not practical targets. It would be an arguably much better and more realistic gameplay incentive to only add a weakspot for lungs, because that is what hunters typically aim for. I do think that bows should be reworked as well. I don't think a damage threshold is a good idea here. Bleeding has two primary purposes: tracking, ensuring a kill through bleeding out. For the purpose of tracking, bleeding should apply on every single hit, but by itself be unlikely to kill the animal unless the initial hit leaves it only on a sliver of health. For the purpose of bleedout, hitting lungs or other key areas should apply a much stronger bleeding effect which could kill the animal within ~10 s or less on a good hit, and up to around a minute if not more for weaker hits. Even when two weapons both can kill the animal in one hit consistently, a better weapon would have the advantage of faster bleedout and thereby shorter tracking distance. I do generally like the suggestion here, but keep in mind that the contents of the Butchering mod are not likely to be directly implemented due to concerns around gore. If we get anything, it will almost certainly be a simpler and less gory system. I personally think that most mods and suggestions tend to overcomplicate it, as it would be pretty simple to add multistage harvesting, alongside animal carry and a butchering table, in a highly flexible way with very little added complexity over the current system. Feel free to take a look at this post of mine, among others, for both an explanation of the reasons to avoid gore, and more details of my take on how butchering could be implemented. Also, extra mention: snares for small game and pit traps for medium game could be great, especially as a easier alternative to hunting. A lot of these changes would require serious improvements to animal AI, though. While I find the balance of taking a couple days to process and lasting several days to be somewhat questionable, this is absolutely the key design idea that current hunting is missing. It just isn't involved and rewarding enough.

The most likely option is that you happened to be in a place where there are no fish, as fish follow fish distributions similar to ores, although they're binary and not based on density - either there is fish, or there is no fish. More specifically, there's 10 groups of fish, each with a shared animal map, I think randomly assigned to different species, so you'll find some different species in different spots. Worms should generally work as bait in any region, since juvenile fish bite worms. Then, once you fish out a juvenile of a larger species, then you can try meat for a chance at adults, or you can use small and tiny fish to specifically target larger adults. Stinkmeat and meat are generally the most universal type of bait, but they can be expensive, so it can be better to first check for fish with worms or stinkdough, and then target the larger ones (if present at all) with meat or with the small fish fished out in the process. That said, I could be wrong, but there's also a chance that juvenile fish don't currently spawn at all, based on what I'm seeing in the assets. If you do find any juvenile fish, I would be greatly interested. Here's the fishing guide text, for your convenience, since it's bugged in-game:

I think it can be said, though, that there is quite a lot of interest in improvements to beekeeping, as evidenced by the popularity of From Golden Combs if nothing else. And you could even say that the fact that FGC leads to some disagreements also works well with the fact that mods generally don't get integrated straight into the game, and instead the devs tend to work out their own implementation of similar functionality. It gives the devs a lot more interesting feedback to work with than just "this should be vanilla". Frankly, I think a lot of discussion on mods focuses too much on a sort of "is this suitable for vanilla" back-and-forth and not enough on "how can we make this more suitable for vanilla". What I would mention is that Langstroth hives are relatively modern designs which are multiple steps ahead of skeps, and FGC's clay hives are really weird and I can't seem to find anything similar in neither historical or modern sources. While going straight to the 19th century or fictional designs might not be a great idea, there are some interesting historical beehives which could at least function as an alternative to skeps, if not an upgrade, and the single best option for that lies in cylindrical clay hives. There's a lot of complexities which may or may not be realized in-game, but the short of it is (skipping some factors which aren't really relevant to gameplay): higher up-front cost, clay cylinders are reusable, more difficult harvesting, though I'm not sure if there's a good way to reflect that in-game, higher chance of colony survival after harvesting (though that depends heavily on specific type of beehive, harvesting method, and harvesting skill), which could significantly reduce the delay between harvests, clay is a poor insulator, which makes it inadequate in areas with too cold winters, which is why it was most popular in regions like North Africa, especially Egypt or Levant - entire colonies of bees can easily just die in cold temperatures in a poorly insulated hive, so this is pretty important (even if we don't want to kill colonies, further reducing their efficiency in cold weather relative to the penalty suffered by skeps would make a lot of sense), easily scalable through stacking on racks or just on top of each other. Quick mockup of how that could roughly look in practice: Or if we're looking for improvements, then a direct improvement over the skep is the addition of a cap or eke (FGC's clay hives seem to be inspired by this), which is basically a secondary removable container serving as an extension of the hive connected with the main skep through a small hole (cap is on the top, eke is on the bottom, though not both at the same time), which allows partial honey harvesting without destroying the hive. Similarly, the cylindrical clay hives could be split into two tiers, one simplistic with nothing but clay closed on both ends except a small entry hole (kind of a clay skep, for all practical purposes), and a more advanced clay beehive made with a slightly tapered cylinder, internal supports and a removable rear end cap for non-destructive harvesting. And even if we were to go for more modern wooden box hives, there were intermediate designs as early as a century before Langstroth hives which were already much better than skeps. There's also a lot of improvements which could be made to the harvesting mechanics (including the usage of smoke, which could be very important for cylindrical clay hives), the pollination, scouting and swarming mechanics, and a lot of other stuff, some of which FGC implements quite well.

Didn't miss anything. Linseed oil currently doesn't have any use.

You're gonna be amused when you find, if you haven't already, that fish provide 3.75x the satiety when in meals compared to when cooked. Borderline absurd compared to other foods which tend to provide 1.5x in meals, and while I don't know whether it's intentional, I think it's already been like this for a long time before 1.22. It does feel pretty odd to me as well. While there are some fishing methods that don't use hooks, they aren't nearly as universal and they tend to use something instead of a hook rather than just tie a piece of bait at the end of the string. Flint hooks are actually not much of a thing from what I can find, but other options include wood, bone and some plants with thorns. I'm not sure whether that wouldn't be too much upfront complexity for newer player, but I feel like it would be fine enough to just include the hook or some alternative in the fishing pole crafting recipe. If we're talking about the same thing, then you have to right-click first to get the rod back from the cast position (sticking out in front) to the default position (on the side). I also feel like there should be a way to put the bait on the rod without opening the inventory. By default I think you can get almost 1 fish per day per 8x8 area, on average. The effect seems to be binary as far as I can find, i.e. either fish bite normally, or an area is overfished, with no in-between. If that is correct, then you may be able to get potentially upwards of a hundred fish per week from a larger lake. It does feel to me that they've set a pretty nice foundation in place, but a lot of work is still needed to make it actually good. To avoid overcomplicating things, maybe just require to press RMB multiple times per fish, each time bringing the bobber with the fish a bit closer, where pressing too fast would cause you to lose the fish. Then actually pulling the fish out of water and having it hang on the pole in front, or something of the sort, instead of it just materializing in inventory. I don't think that making a pond impossible to replenish is a good idea, though, at least as long as there is no clear warning that you're approaching depletion.

A few creatures got changed, but the only significant speed tweaks I can find are: pig - slightly (~14%) higher seeking speed (when they chase the player, that is), slower movement speed when passive, fox - significantly faster when seeking (~33%) and fleeing (50%). There were also quite a few behavioral changes, especially to sheep, and also to pigs and raccoons. Additionally, bears have had their attack range reduced, which I think made it a bit easier to escape them.

I'm getting some issues there as well, though it seems to be less that they don't eat at all and more that they eat rarely and the number of portions that they've eaten displays inconsistently. My male goat also seems to have a similar problem, though the female goat is eating normally, it would seem. Probably a good candidate for a bug report. Seems to be a 1.21.2 change. Absolutely nothing was changed about the loose ores in 1.22. Nothing that I can find changed in game files and code at least.

One thing that I think people don't appreciate nearly enough is the word "detailed". Redram has said at least on three separate occasions (this one on Discord is the most recent) that they aren't going to be implementing detailed butchering and skinning, but it doesn't mean that more involved mechanics and gameplay are off the table as well. I've argued before that the existing system could be improved with very little time investment while adding nearly zero gore over the current visuals, while leaving components of the system easily modifiable to allow modders to easily add detailed visuals themselves: If I were to point to any mods that the vanilla game would benefit from greatly which haven't been mentioned already, first and foremost I would have to pick and choose from some world generation mods like Watersheds and some of the Floral Zones mods, and maybe even Terrain Slabs. As much as the current world generation has its charms, it produces often extremely repetitive landscapes with samey vegetation and easily noticeable noise octaves, and even putting realism aside I think it kind of just looks bad and boring in too many cases. There's also smaller mods, even something like Sun Gaze, though there's way too many to reasonably remember and list out. What I don't like is that many mods tend to hyperfocus on specific features and add minor details and variations that don't mesh well with existing vanilla features. It's often very difficult to keep the game feeling cohesive as a whole when using them. For example, take something like the the Adventurer's Walking Stick mod - it would be a cool thing to add to the base game, but do we really need 14 variants of a walking stick? Two, maybe three, would be absolutely sufficient to get the neat functionality in without creating a large imbalance between the level of detail and depth of different features. The same goes for the Butchering mod to some extent - the mechanic itself is neat, but I can't help but feel like we could do with less than 5 variants of a butchering hook, 3 variants of a butchering table, and 4 different butchering bags, not even counting all the new food items which would arguably also need some streamlining for vanilla integration. A lot of mods are created because they are cool, not because they have a specific gameplay goal to accomplish, and while that's not inherently wrong, it often leads to mods being simply infitting for vanilla integration without cutting a lot of their features back out.

Based on the code, it should be storyStructuresDistScaling. If it's not in serverconfig.json, then you'd need to add it to WorldConfiguration in that file: "WorldConfiguration": { "gameMode": "survival", "startingClimate": "temperate", ... "storyStructuresDistScaling": "0.5", ... } Keep in mind that this value can't be changed after the world has been created. The value is just a multiplier, e.g. 0.5 gives you 50% of the default distance, and the normally available options are in the range of 0.15 to 3.

That's... not really true, though (though they indeed don't need fertilizer). Wild bushes might not be too much worse, but they're definitely significantly different. The average yield is ~6% lower, variance is much higher, and the fruiting cycle changes mean that the total ripe time for a single bush in much shorter, as well as that in most climates it's only possible to harvest one or two times per year, with the minimum temperature for two harvests landing somewhere in the temperate zone (variable due to multiple sources of randomness). There are more species of berries, which brings the average yield per unit of area back up a fair bit, though the availability time is still short. I think this is roughly the right direction and is actually surprisingly close to a proper seasonal fruiting system, and proper seasonal fruiting could actually allow to fix some issues with the current system, e.g. bushes being initially completely random and then synchronized after the first winter. Pizza has said that seasonal fruiting can't be added due to berries being one of the primary foraging foods, though I personally don't see how that is an issue, as the current changes are arguably much more detrimental for early-game foraging than a seasonal cycle would be. What many people including the person you're replying to seem to be taking issue with is that the bushes require fertilizer at all, not how much they require exactly. This gets mixed in with people who are overreacting or misinterpreting the changes, and it makes a right mess out of the average discussion on the rework. While communicating the changes a bit better would have helped with the initial partially unwarranted pushback, there is still a large portion of more reasonable criticism which is essentially impossible to significantly address without just redesigning the bush health system, because what is being criticized is in many cases the design and not the balance. Keep in mind that the largest portion of pushback is specifically about the fertilizer requirement and bush health in general, as shown by my poll if nothing else. Other parts of the rework are generally welcome, even if not exactly what some people including myself would like. New visuals, new species and cuttings are especially well-received and seem to be quite clearly net positive for the game. There's been a lot of discussion on it, though I wouldn't blame you if you're not intimately familiar with all of them, especially the almost 17k message long thread.