MKMoose

Seems to me like this is a relatively modern thing, potentially unsuitable lore-wise for Vintage Story. At the very least, the Bayer process specifically seems to be a 19th-century invention. As far as I can tell, a bunch of types of clay and feldspar already include an amount of alumina which is sufficient to achieve a decent quality glaze, though feel free to correct me, as I'm not as familiar with ceramics as you. It also appears to me that ash glaze would be a simple and very historically relevant kind of glaze, and would just require wood ash to be introduced in some way. It would likely be a simple and cheap early-game glaze, while the more complex mechanics would potentially be only available when using the beehive kiln or maybe some new intermediate kiln type. Boron oxides seem to fall under the same umbrella as the Bayer process of being relatively modern, as far as I can tell, though maybe borax itself was used earlier. Historically, lead oxides were used quite frequently as well. One or two new felsic rock types like dacite or rhyolite would arguably be a really cool addition to the existing igneous rocks to be used as flux when crushed, though it appears that lime would work perfectly fine as a flux as well, and maybe also potash, though naturally a more pure flux may require additional alumina and silica added on top. Rhodochrosite is already implemented in the game, although currently doesn't have any use. Allowing to pulverize it for use in glazes would be very easy. On top of the colorants you've mentioned, it seems that cassiterite (tin oxide) could potentially be used for a white glaze. Cobalt would be pretty nice and easy to add, though its role as a blue pigment could slightly conflict with lapis lazuli. It could be a child deposit in some copper or nickel deposits, or it could appear as its own ore.

I would like to mention a point which people seem to notoriously disregard anytime butchering comes up, which is that the purpose of butchering is not limited to gory, realistic animal corpses and detailed range of various cuts and offal. Butchering also serves a very specific gameplay function which does not at any point require gruesome visuals. Unless vague knife movements near an animal lying on a butchering table or hanging off a hook count as such, but I think it really doesn't seem that much worse than the same vague movements over a corpse lying in the grass, does it? And there's a lot of ways to mitigate risk further or add simple accessibility options like modified color palettes and textures. Granted, I'd have to double-check if the table and hook itself is a significant trigger, but again, it doesn't have to go anywhere near "detailed butchering and skinning". Even the Butchering mod, if skinning and a couple other details were removed or adjusted, I think would be very much suitable, while delivering the frequently requested gameplay functionality - it makes the player carry hunted animals back home and break them down on a hook and table, instead of just cutting off a couple chunks of meat in the field. It's a much deeper and more rewarding process that significantly changes the hunting dynamics, given that the player can only carry a limited number of animals with them and has to invest a much larger chunk of time and effort into processing the hunted animals, with an appropriately higher reward. With that, I want to suggest a more specific system that could achieve this with limited added mechanical complexity over the base game and easy integration of accessibility features. I'm not making a new thread here to avoid clutter, but I'm also making a post on Discord since that's where the whole discussion started for me. Disclaimer: I do not wish to discuss whether butchering should be detailed and gruesome or not. Feel free to consult Red Ram's explanation. Even if there was no concern about team members, gore can be an accessibility issue - look into something like BII reactions or particularly hemophobia. Also, for many other people gore is simply uncomfortable or undesired in spite of not causing a strong involuntary reaction. I'd be interested to hear if my simplified proposition would be satisfactory relative to something like the Butchering mod. Motivation: Increase mechanical depth of hunting and animal harvesting. Rework animal loot for more realistic meat yield, but require more effort to make the most of them. Features: Implement multistage harvesting, requiring to harvest animals multiple times, each time returning different resources in sequence (antlers, hide, fat, meat etc.), with no loot container, making the process more involved and immersive. Certain harvesting stages may require a different tool, or benefit from a specialized tool with a boost to yield or speed. The animal may change appearance at each stage (at least after skinning), but this could be easily disabled for accessibility or not implemented at all. Slight changes to model scale or color would be sufficient to indicate difference between the harvesting stages without any gruesome visuals beyond the existing animal corpses, and presumably at vastly lower development cost. Allow the player to carry dead animals back home (the Butchering mod implements this quite well). Add a butchering table, on which animals could be placed to harvest them more efficiently. Several harvesting stages would be only possible on a butchering table and not in the field, or have increased yield on the table.

There's a lot of ways to go about music tracks without basically disabling a whole game mechanic. If temporal stability is an important part of the story and several story locations are unique areas where temporal disturbances are supposed to be especially strong, then it might be a very reasonable idea to design temporal stability as an integral threat in these areas. Instead, the devs have realized that in its current state temporal stability would be purely detrimental in certain contexts, and made the decision that it should be paused entirely in all story structures, and in that same vein monster spawns are disabled there. Temporal stability is not integrated into the story areas in any way - even in the place which you might expect to be the single most unstable area in the whole world, temporal stability is entirely random just like in the rest of the world. At the same time, the village could be placed in the middle of a huge unstable region, with just the village's area magically protected from its effects.

Temporal stability is paused in story locations, just so you know.

Keep in mind the confounding factor in this specific discussion that is the hostile attitude of the OP. Insults, overgeneralizations and other bad-faith arguments are no way to give feedback to the devs, because it's pointless noise which distracts from the issues that should be focused on. I can practically guarantee (based on the reactions to other posts on related topics) that rewording several of the OP's points (and a few of your own, for that matter) to be more constructive and respectful would lead plenty of people here to agree with them, but alas. Just everything is fine to you, isn't it.. The whole game is quite fine. Plenty of people have been enjoying it as is, even without mods. And it's ultimately still very much a work-in-progress, so less developed systems are easily seen as simply not improved yet. If the current version is heavily lacking, then going a couple versions back it could as well be a barebones prototype, but it's clearly moving forward ever closer to the devs' vision with plenty of community feedback being addressed along the way as well. Both hunting and combat seem like they will reach critical mass sooner or later and have to be addressed, but they're not a great priority as of now. Tyron has expressed interest in improving hunting, and has said that their current core team doesn't really have the right interests and experience to deliver a deep combat rework. Regarding the falx, in the current balance of the game there's nothing really that wrong with it, ergo, it's fine. It's better than a spear for melee, but spears can still be optimal for hunting or general versatility. Spears will also most likely be buffed back up somewhat before 1.22 hits stable, considering the doubled windup time in pre.2. Enemies having no armor tiers is something of a missed opportunity to introduce deeper tradeoffs between weapon types, and suggestions to do just that have seen positive reactions.

Good to know since I'm about to be at bronze in my world. If the bellows really are needed to work bronze at the forge, that seems a pretty good change to smooth out the early progression a bit more. I don't mind quick progress being an option, provided the player has the knowledge and skill required for that kind of progression speed, but I also agree at least partly with some of the posts I've seen about the early game tech levels not really feeling impactful. Bismuth/tin//black bronze requires the metal to be at a temperature of at least 425/475/510 C for forging (nothing has changed since 1.21 in this regard). The forge can normally go up to 700 C, so bronze doesn't currently require bellows at any point. Spoiler just in case you want to mess with the mechanics further by yourself first: Also, the crude bellows can be crafted with a large or huge pelt, so there's no need for a bear. You can get them from huge boars, sheep, gazelles, moose and some species of goats and deer.

There seems to be nothing preventing rusty gears from spawning as far as I can tell, and in that same vein there doesn't seem to be anything preventing locust nests from spawning. Have you perhaps seen any locust nests in Homo Sapiens as well? Might be worth reporting if it's actually a bug.

You can adjust ore map scale, contrast and add a constant to it, you can change the rock types where deposits appear, adjust the deposit Y level, radius and thickness distribution, change the deposit frequency, and a couple likely less interesting parameters. All of that separately for each deposit as needed. While it's not the same level of control as you would have with an entirely custom solution, it goes much beyond just making deposits smaller. I'm not fully certain what the effect will be when you change these parameters on an already generated world, but I think new or regenerated chunks would follow the new parameters once the world is reloaded, because as far as I know the world generation system is initialized fresh each time the world is started up. It loads whatever is saved in the save file, including the world seed which it then uses to create ore maps and so on, but then generates everything using the current parameters.

Providing a custom, pregenerated ore map doesn't seem to be possible in a simple way, in part because the world is normally impractically large to provide an ore map to cover it in its entirety unless you tile it in some way, though it should be absolutely possible with a code mod if you modify the deposit generation code. But if you just want to make the deposits less common or otherwise adjust ore generation, then you can change a lot of the parameters through a relatively simple JSON mod by modifying the appropriate files in %AppData%/Vintagestory/assets/survival/worldgen/deposits. If you wish to go the modding route, then I can't help much further myself, but there's a bunch of available resources on how to go about it which you might find useful, or even there's some people who take mod requests.

Quoting Redram's clarification in the discord thread on it (I don't think I can find anything going into more detail): While on the topic, there's also this post by Redram from a couple years ago, in a thread about hunting.

There has been a pretty big (2000+ messages) discussion on related topics in the discord server. There are two main suggestions regarding butchering. The first focuses on the realistic process itself, and that could end up being pretty graphic and uncomfortable even if implemented in a less explicit way, not unlike proposed by the OP. The devs have said that detailed butchering and skinning is likely never coming to the vanilla game, because "certain team member(s) have a visceral reaction of nausea to depictions of gore that hew too closely to reality." However, that presumably doesn't exclude less detailed mechanics that achieve the same gameplay goals. And that leads to the second point about the gameplay purpose of butchering, which I think would fit the game very well as a relatively labor-intensive way to obtain more realistic quantities of meat and other resources from animals. Instead of killing six or so boars in a single hunting trip to get a decent supply of protein, you'd be able to kill a single boar, carry it home, set it on a butchering hook, break it down, make a meal from some of the meat and preserve the rest. The reward per amount of time spent could be similar, but the process would be much more involved, sophisticated and satisfying. This doesn't inherently require any graphic visuals, and I'd imagine that it shouldn't cause significant issues if implemented appropriately - if the current vague knife movements and the animal suddenly turning into bones are fine, then doing the same on a butchering table or hook instead of in the middle of a forest should be tolerable. Animal husbandry would then also have to be made more demanding as well to keep it balanced, with the reward being higher.

One thing that Vintage Story excels at which I find people really don't appreciate enough is that there's very little inventory clutter. And when there are any sort of items which don't have any significant uses, they are almost always picked up voluntarily. I can grab a couple specific tools that I need, a bowl of food and some other necessities, run off to do a specific task, and when I come back I just put back those tools and a full inventory of exactly the resources I set out to acquire in the first place. There's almost no additional clutter that I have to choose to either keep or throw away to make space for the stuff I actually initially wanted. One thing that was really annoying me when I tried Hytale was that swinging a weapon would destroy plants and some clutter, which meant a whole bunch of items dropping onto the ground. So I would go somewhere to do something, and while fighting three monsters or animals on the way I would inadvertently collect 3x grass, 1x stick, 2x purple petals, 1x yellow petals, 1x stone rubble and 3x green moss. It was genuinely infuriating after the 10th or 20th time. Vintage Story isn't completely free of similar problems, especially if you start collecting broken vessels, crops and so on, but I find that it's still ahead of most similar games especially considering that I've not felt these problems despite inventory space being more limited that in those other games. As a general rule, if I don't interact with it deliberately, don't shove anything into my inventory - anything that doesn't respect this ends up being annoying and undesirable, and broken toolheads fall squarely into that category. That's, side note, one of the less commonly mentioned reasons why monsters and animals arguably shouldn't have more varied loot (unless butchering gets made into a more developed mechanic, then you'd be carrying whole animals back home anyways). It can already be taxing on inventory space to return from a hunting trip with 2x flax fibers, 2x bone arrow, 10x red meat, 2x poultry, 3x bushmeat, 2x fat, 2x medium hide, 1x raccoon hide, 1x fox hide, 8x bone and 2x small bones, so having a whole bunch of extra variety on top would easily end up difficult to manage. This also tends to be a pretty big high-level design issue with many mods like Wildcraft - having a whole multitude of rock types, wood types, crop species and so on is already sometimes annoying to manage in the vanilla game, and having more things that serve only to create more variety is sometimes just not helpful. This is also why I'm gonna be looking out for the berry bush rework, and making sure to communicate it appropriately that there shouldn't be more than a couple species fruiting at the same time. I would be generally interested in managing used metal in various ways, like recasting, reforging into smaller tools, all of that, but it risks just adding more clutter at practically no benefit besides realism. A related alternative could lie in tool maintenance that is expected to be done in the field or when putting a tool away, primarily in the form of sharpening and oiling. It could be much more engaging to make it so that the player can maintain their weapons, tools and armor with care to improve their effectiveness and lengthen their lifetime, without making the player carry scraps with them. If you've seen a real scythe, then you may have seen it sharpened every couple minutes of mowing. If reforging or recasting is the goal, then I would at the very least look into allowing to break down all metal items into bits before they break and getting variable reward depending on durability, so that the player doesn't feel forced to use them up entirely in order to then reprocess.

That's pretty true in the current state of the game, though I'm not sure if it will continue to be true when any alternatives to flax get added. Cotton, jute, hemp, wool, silk, whatever the devs choose, I'd expect at least one or two to be added sooner or later (though some of them wouldn't be an exact alternative to flax, especially not jute). It would be a bit lame to feel forced into flax in spite of having alternative fibers - you might then end up with the opposite problem of needing a bunch of flax in nearly every single game just for easy oil. Adding some other sources of oil could then serve to make flax more of an optional convenience than a must, but I'd imagine that many people would still default to it just due to how common, universal and simple it is (sure, it has to be ground and boiled for some reason, but that's still nearly free and just takes time). Linen with all its uses, easy animal feed, emergency food if need be, one of the best sources of compost in the game, and add oil to that as well? While linseed oil doesn't have any really inherent issues and I don't really mind its addition, the main worry of sorts that I have is that it could make hunting borderline worthless for many players. Right now it's primarily useful for leather and fat - meat is a thing, of course, but once you get either soybeans or chickens going, then meat from hunting is pocket change in many cases, and it's less reliable. Removing fat as a significant incentive by giving oil nearly for free alongside linen which the player already wants for windmills would only leave leather.

As it is coded currently, it seems that it will only detect suitable power source blocks when fully constructed. And at the same time, there seems to be a bug that makes it impossible to build it.

The only reason I said "literally everybody" specifically in quotes, is to slightly less directly point out the absurdity of you saying "literally nobody" or an equivalent phrase four times in your litany of complaints equally directionless as you're claiming the devs are. I'd be more willing to take your "feedback" here seriously if it wasn't filled with ad hominem arguments, multiple inaccuracies and hyperboles that muddy all of your points, and senseless complaining about in-progress features that are confirmed or at least very likely to change before the update hits stable.

I know, but you did say that hunting is "maybe even too easy", which may imply that you're largely reducing the point you're replying to to a matter of difficulty. Difficulty is largely irrelevant, because it can be adjusted almost freely (ideally would be even better if they added a creature loot multiplier config), and what matters most for hunting is that the design as a whole is intuitive, engaging and satisfying. Don't discount a system before you even know what it does. Tongs having durability is something "literally everybody" wanted, because handling white-hot metal with wood in the first place is only a bright idea as long as the tongs keep burning. Try holding a cooking pot fresh off the stove with your bare hands and tell me how that goes for you. There have already been more constructive suggestions to reduce the maximum temperature to which certain meals can be increased and add a special items like a towel that would allow to hold items at up to ~150-200 C or a spoon/ladle that would allow to portion meals from a hot pot. Literally nothing has changed so far in how mechanical power works. It's a work-in-progress, and heat-resistant axles are still in the plans for the update.

I actually disagree, to an extent. The fun of variety, in my opinion, is just having all the options. There doesn't really need to be mechanics tied to every bit of it to justify its existence. I tried a mod similar to Novelty in Minecraft quite some time ago, as I had the same idea--give some buffs to a varied diet, to give a reason to actually eat something different. And it was fun for a little while...until I figured out that now it really wasn't possible to just eat whatever I wanted to eat in the game, without getting penalized for the choice. Thus the whole process becomes just an exercise in min-maxing, figuring out which food has exactly the right nutrients next in order to maintain all the buffs without triggering any debuffs. Maybe with the low variety that vanilla Minecraft offered for food, it would have been better, but that mod just really did not pair well at all with mods like Pam's Harvestcraft, which adds a TON of options. I feel like this mostly comes down to how difficult it would be to achieve complete nutrition. If you need to cycle ten types of fruit just to fill the bar, that would quickly get a bit tedious. But if it means you need to eat two or three types of fruit instead of just one when you have ten available, then that doesn't really restrict you to eat specific ones. That said, I would love to mention the idea to give different food items more varied amounts of satiety and nutrition, and perhaps some new mechanics related to how much energy or fat the food can contain. An effect similar to Novelty could still be included as part of this, potentially by reducing nutrition for a single food item if the player eats too much of it in a short amount of time, but the point is that the primary incentive to variety should ideally lie in the items themselves and not in an external system that somewhat artificially enforces it. Then choosing food items would be more influenced by the player's playstyle and momentary needs in a hopefully believable way: preparing food for travelling or preserving it for winter would call for something more fatty, filling and space-efficient, not just long-lasting, anticipating combat or hunting may get the player to pick up high-sugar snacks to eat in breaks during combat to replenish stamina, staying back home would allow to put more time and effort into highly nutritional and varied meals to get the maximum health boost.

Boooi, I didn't even notice the new fruits initially. Beautyberry, blackberry, cloudberry, gooseberry, guava, kumquat, big num-num, raspberry, strawberry and cactus fruit. And they exist as items already, unlike potatoes which have only had shapes for a while but no implemented items. No new bushes or trees so far, though, so they're presumably coming at a later date. One thing I kind of worry about is whether there's not too many of them. It's still got nothing on Wildcraft, but having 28 fruit types that barely differ between each other besides climate preferences seems a bit pointless to me. That's mainly because they can't be too common if they're a food source, so they'll probably just be small and fairly visible patches of bushes and solitary trees that stick out from the landscape more than they add variety to it. To me the plant debris looks like it's just gonna drop from berry bushes (and potentially other stuff) when broken without an appropriate tool (maybe shovel). My biggest request is honestly just to never make me pick it up accidentally, because it looks like it's gonna have zero use except as fuel or compost. As long as that's fulfilled, I don't expect much from it, but it seems like a pretty good addition. Regarding oil, a lot depends on what they want to do with it. Linseed oil could be used as a lubricant, as protective coating for metal tools, or for oil lamps. Its production method is kinda weird. Olive oil can already be used for oil lamps, and realistically it's very commonly used culinarily, so maybe they're gonna try something there. It could cause a bunch of changes to progression by reducing demand for animal fat and increasing the usefulness of some plants, though I'm not sure how to feel about flax getting another use.

Note that hunting being difficult is really not the problem, and I don't even recall seeing a single complaint about it just being difficult. The vast majority of feedback on hunting, for example the above post or this recent post, focuses on it being annoying, unrealistic, unrewarding, janky, unimmersive and a couple other qualities in that vein, if worded more or less subtly. It's rare that a single hit outright kills an animal unless it's very well-placed, and even less common to kill right on the spot with no flight, even for small animals, since that usually requires brain or nerve damage. Even when hit quite accurately, there's good chance that the spear will not pin it and it will bolt, and hitting it this way in the first place is a challenge in itself. But that said, there is no realm where damage having zero effect on an animal's state besides behavior can be considered realistic or satisfying. Hunting fundamentally relies on ambush and pursuit, especially prehistorically, but that dynamic is nearly nonexistent in Vintage Story at the moment. The distance at which animals notice the player is also much lower than it should realistically be, especially for boars. I'm not expecting significant improvements in this area until 1.23, though, and the current state is at least tolerable and can be supplemented with mods if needed.

I reproduced your exception. Make sure you exactly follow the syntax (though you can use double quotes instead of single quotes, and maybe there's some leeway for whitespaces): /giveblock tapestry-north 1 { type: 'nightfall1' } In case that doesn't work in multiplayer, you can try setting the target to self: /giveblock tapestry-north 1 s[] { type: "nightfall1" }

Besides other issues with black bronze, I want to just point out that regular gravel and sand don't drop silver at all - it's only obtainable this way from bony soil.

Assuming you're throwing the spear, then my diagnosis is that you've just gotten a double-hit once or twice (notice that I said "hits", not "throws", so my earlier calculations remain accurate).

I'll try to test it later, but I'd wager it depends on the class in question, and how the pig is being attacked with the spear. I want to say that in 1.21 it took 4 melee hits with a copper spear for a Blackguard to kill a pig. A pig has 15 health, so, with a copper spear which has 2.75 melee damage and 4.25 thrown damage, it should take: in melee, 5/6/7 hits for a Blackguard/commoner/hunter, when thrown, 5/4/3 hits for a Blackguard/commoner/hunter, up from 4/3/3 in the current stable.

Yeah, that's probably because the particles strictly require at least 0.4 average rainfall, or because you were close to the temperature threshold. However, it seems that for some reason temporal stability is disabled in story locations. How unfortunate. I would really like to see surface stability overhauled, but I honestly find these discussions about it kind of tiring and annoying. The main issue that I have with your argumentation is that the entire mechanic ends up hinging on whether the player is paying attention. If you want instability to catch the player off-guard and create this feeling of a pervasive, unfamiliar threat, then the first step practically has to be to remove the UI indicator or greatly reduce its reliability. Then the player will have to pay attention to their environment or create more specialized measurement devices, and there will be space for forgetting, missing clues, investigating and double-checking. From there, tension and immersion arise in very natural ways, much more suitable for eldritch horror. One suggestion that I really liked was comparing stability to nuclear radiation (not unlike it's done in postapocalyptic settings like S.T.A.L.K.E.R.), pointing out that besides very obvious cases you really can't tell at first glance whether an area is irradiated, but that doesn't mean that the radiation has no direct or indirect effects on the fauna and flora in the region. And you can still have the site of a nuclear accident as a particularly unique story location. One thing that gets to me about these discussions about stability is that details are not important at the design stage, and yet people tend to focus on them the most. What I like to focus on in cases like this is to settle on some basic assumptions, commonly including: a primary idea that defines the mechanic, e.g. "an ambient hazard that permeates the world and isn't easily noticeable", important goals regarding what these features aim to achieve and how they should interact with the player, e.g. "introduce tension and unnaturalness to the world", "catch the player off-guard occasionally", and constraints that keep everything in check, e.g. "don't impede builders on the surface", "make sure to keep everything clear enough for new players", "don't disrupt the natural appearance of the world in obvious ways"; development time and effort can also be an important constraint. From there, a concrete set of features can be drawn up. Further details are largely just an execution of these assumptions, and in many cases if the design is coherent then everything will fall into place neatly. One issue where this kind of goes off-track for me, which I think I've mentioned elsewhere, is that I genuinely don't understand how you see the current implementation of temporal stability as achieving some of the goals that you're saying it achieves. While preference is an acceptable explanation for enjoying a mechanic, I just don't see it as a significant argument once you've defined broadly what you think the mechanic should achieve. In my own experience, it just doesn't follow the "not easily noticeable" and "sometimes catch the player off-guard" ideas, at least not in a remotely satistying way due to the vastly different dynamics that it creates with different kinds of players. But that said, I've not seen you talk about any design-level goals or constraints that I would significantly disagree with. I do like the idea broadly, and I seem to recall a suggestion to replace trader huts in unstable areas with empty, ruined huts. A bunch of tiny structures and scattered items like abandoned campsites, ruined carts, lost baggage and so on could be added throughout the world, and some more recent ruins and remains would be fitting in unstable areas.

In density search, halite does appear, but sylvite does not. Halite generates in two types of deposits, and only salt domes show up in density search, but you can stumble upon salt lake beds near the surface in hot climates as well. In node search, halite is not detected, but sylvite is, so it's still useful to use node search when trying to locate a salt dome.