Jump to content

redram

Vintarian
  • Content Count

    387
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    31

redram last won the day on December 11 2018

redram had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

161 Excellent

About redram

  • Rank
    Steel Worker

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. redram

    Error mechanical Power

    Not in-game. 1.9 is the world update.
  2. Could scale well, depending. I'm always wanting new reasons for players to fix better food. This could play into that. Do you see this as existing separately from a possible fatigue system? Or is this kind of an idea for if a fatigue system with stamina bar is never implemented?
  3. Transferring some thoughts regarding fruit trees from discord to forums for long-term storage. It sounds like the plan is for fruit trees to grow in many stages, similar to TFC fruit trees. As opposed to going straight from sapling to finished mature form. TFC handled this by having a final form that was exactly the same for all fruit trees, and grew in precisely the same way. Some thoughts: - I think it would be nice if VS could do it in such a way that the trees do not necessarily end up identical. I don't think it's necessary to make fruit trees have spindly trunks like TFC. Maybe an intermediate form does, but then they end up with normal full-trunk blocks? But spindly would also be fine, as they tend to be relatively spindly irl. - The trees may have a large number of leaf blocks, but limited yield. For instance, they might have a base yield of 10 blocks (at maturity) regardless of the number of leaf blocks they have. This could be modified by various environmental and player-influenced factors. - A beehive within X distance might influence yield. Perhaps even as many as 4 hives. This could be a major factor. - The surrounding soil profile could influence yield (and growth time). The searched area would vary based on the tree's growth stage. A sapling might search just the one under it, plus four adjacent, next stage includes the 4 corners, etc, up to an area about matching the max canopy coverage. Low fertility would be base case with 0 modifier. Non-soil such as sand, stone, or gravel would apply a penalty. Medium and High Provide a bonus. Ideally it would have a weighted calculation to account for mixtures (some low, some medium, some high, for instance). - Player fertilization could influence yield and growth time. Ideally this would be soil block based, so the player would fertilize the soil blocks under the tree. If that's not feasible in terms of mechanics, then perhaps a layer of fertilizer particles would be applied on top of the soil, kind of like snow but not a solid layer. Or if all else fails just fertilize the trunk of the tree. But the quantity required should go up with the size of the tree. - Climate match could influence a lot of things. Apples and plums might require a somewhat cool climate, bananas tropical, etc. If they're in the wrong climatic conditions, this penalizes fruit yield. Irl this can have severe influences on yield. A late frost for instance can freeze and destroy all the blossoms, meaning a 0% fruit yield that year. Some varieties of fruit trees such as apple, cherry, and others, REQUIRE a cold dormancy to regulate their lifecycle, and if grown in a climate too warm can die, or never yield fruit. This could also cause tree diseases if that were a thing. - It could be than any given leaf block must have either the top face exposed to the sky, or at least 2 of any sides be exposed, in order to yield fruit. If the tree is large, this would cause inner leaf blocks to not have fruit. Irl, it is an actual practice to prune some fruit trees in a vase-like shape, hollow in the middle, to maximize sun exposure, because their fruit requires sun exposure to ripen. You could also espalier the tree, for the same effect, if the tree generation would allow it. - This is getting pretty deep mechanics-wise, but genetics could be an influence on many factors, including base yield. It could influence tree size (again, very large trees are harder to harvest). It could influence bloom times (later blooming = less chance of frost killing blooms). It could influence the allowed climate range (tolerate lower rainfall, lower/higher temperature, etc). You could even have some trees that tend toward overbearing, which is where they will have a huge harvest one year, and then little to no harvest the next. This would basically mean a cyclical base yield (0-5 one year, 15-30 the next, for instance). All this would of course mean that saplings would have to be non-stackable. You could even, in the most tree-nerd scenario, allow grafting, where the player could combine root-based characteristics (cold & drought tolerance, size) with top-based characteristics (everything else). This would require high agriculture skill. It would also require fruit tree saplings to not stack, so that they can store their individual genetic info. So ya, there's some thoughts on fruit trees.
  4. I think allowing the player to grow giant trees so easily is a bad idea. It reduces the impact of the natural ones. I do like the idea (from that github issue) of making it harder to grow trees outside their native preferred conditions. I think the idea of taking longer is good, and possibly also reducing the max size achievable, based on conditions. Maybe even making saplings have a chance to simply die if the conditions are less-than-ideal. I'm not sure what all conditions VS has, but I'm assuming rainfall is one. So for instance a kapok might prefer (arbitrary numbers here) 100 rainfall. For every 10 rainfall below that of the area they are planted, they have a 5% chance to simply die as a sapling. Maybe they also need a minimum of medium fertility soil. For every X% below that in Y radius of the sapling, they had an additional Z% chance to die. Etc.
  5. "simplistic" does not necessarily translate to better either. If it did we'd all be playing minecraft happily. I'm genuinely curious how you draw this line. The game is nothing but a string of required processes. We're probably going to have to butcher soon-ish to get animal parts. Is that ok? Is having to smelt the ore ok? Why not just let the player use the ore in the grid to make things, or ingots? Four in the grid makes an ingot. Why bother with tedious smelting?
  6. The same reason we have different tiers of tools or anything else - progression. If one wants a game with just single blocks without progression, then minecraft is probably more their speed. Not important. They'd be there for the initial step. The game is already loose with what's 'realistic' in many of the copper tools, not mention many other aspects of 'realism'. After all: That opinion is noted - you think ore processing should be an optional reward. I'm not sure what 'staged progression I outlined' you are referring to. Another post? I have a different opinion regarding 'rewarding' but the confusion aspect could be a thing, mainly for those already used to TFC though I think. But what I was after was other peoples' opinions after all so I'm just kind of leaving it at that for now.
  7. Well, maybe not 'large'. But more than one certainly. The problem is 'trip hammer' is a general term that covers all powered hammers, regardless of power source. Looking about a bit on wiki, it looks like 'helve hammer' might be the best term for the wooden-beamed sort that a water wheel would power. Followed by 'power hammer' for the rotary spring-assisted type, and possibly followed by 'steam hammer', if we ever have a reason to get that big. Then there's planishing hammer, which is a specialize hammer. Lots of potential hammers. Sure that's fine, that can exist. But that doesn't mean there can't be a purpose-made vertical rolling millstone setup that incorporates the animal, rather than requiring a bunch of connections that will ruin the quaint feel of it. Just allow there to be a stone hammer. Frankly it makes a lot more sense than a stone shovel.
  8. The hammer part should be separate from the waterwheel, connected by the shaft/sprockets we already have. I was not suggesting it was an all-in-one deal. I call it a water mill hammer to try and distinguish it from what will eventually probably be a large number of hammery machines. Regarding your earlier comment about the horse mills being a power device, that's all well and good and I've suggested exactly that before. But the particular mill above has a very specific way of attaching the animal to the millstone. To try and separate the animal power from the mill, I think could end up looking a bit off. You'd have a vertical shaft, with a horizontal shaft sticking out, and a giant mill stone, but no logical connection except directly from the top or bottom. It could be done though if one is willing to ignore the visual incongruity. Ok that's fine for bonus metal, but what about the notion of *requiring* processing just to use the ore at all?
  9. @Erik Sure, there's other options for machines. I do think the water mill hammer would be more appropriately used to refine iron blooms, as that's a better approximation of it's historical use. I laid out some examples to give some detail, and because I think it's easier to give an opinion when you have specifics. But I think the larger question is, would requiring processing of ore to use it at all - using either a tedious hand method, or machines that are non-trivial to make - make the game too grindy for some of our players? As opposed to making processing optional, as proposed in that other thread, in which case the processing nets you bonus ores, but you can still just use the basic ores directly in the crucible. Thing is, I don't know if people would go to the trouble if the machinery is optional, unless the machinery is also easy to make. They would if the bonus was high enough, but I think one would want to avoid being too inflationary.
  10. So ok, to swing things back to metal processing. I'm curious, how some of the more casual players such as Ashantin or @Airawould feel about a more extended processing chain. I think that not alienating the more casual player base is an important concern. So I don't know if some of this would only occur in survival mode, or what. So for the more casual players, I'm wondering, how would you feel if you could no longer make a tool out of every 4 surface nuggets you pick up off the ground just being tossed in the crucible? My understanding is we're going to get graded ores similar to TFC anyway, so that'll be a good time to incorporate this nugget idea. What if those nuggets were worth only 10, or even just 5 units? Now you have to gather 10 or even 20 pieces. 20 Seems like a lot to me, but maybe the 5 unit nuggets are easily processed, like Tony says - just toss in the crucible. So maybe it's a mixture of 10 unit nuggets that have to be processed, and 5 unit ones that don't, that one finds atop the ground initially. All the ores - 10, 15, 25, 35, or whatever - have to be broken down into the 5 unit pure nuggets. Does this sound like too much? Personally I'd like to see more of a processing chain, though mainly because it would enhance the machinery end of things, and give more reason to build interesting devices. So the above is my TL/DR question, but below is going to be my extended scenario, if you care to read. EXTENDED EXPLANATION I'll say to start, that I don't think the quern should be involved in ore processing. Querns are made to grind grain into a fine powder, not to smash up rocks. The 'tiers' of processing could look as follows: Hammer - Your basic method is hammer the nuggets out of the ore. So in this case you can place 1-4 ore on top of a block of igneous stone. One mechanic might be to swing away at it with a hammer just as with picks and axes, till they break and release the nuggets. Or, another mechanic might be that you have to place the ore and actually break away the gangue (gangue is the unwanted stone around the metal) until you have just the metal left, at which point the nuggets pop off. The latter method would be code intensive, but I think the same mechanic could be used to process iron blooms, for instance. This would only require a basic stone hammer, which would perhaps be the only stone age tool where flint offers no advantage over other stones? This method would be kind of tedious, which sets up demand for the next step. You'll probably mostly want to make tools with this method, rather than lanterns and ornamental stuff. To go along with this early stage, when the player is searching for 10 and 5 units at a time, it may be necessary to incorporate another way to get them, such as panning, sluicing, or maybe even Stroam's fire method to mine actual ore blocks without using a pick. Just to give the player other options if they don't want to have to roam around to find the stuff (maybe the area is very wolf infested?). Monjolo - From a recent discussion on discord iirc. Basically a slow water powered hammer. In terms of assembly, it could require a beam or two, a trough, and a metal cap (so 2 metal tools plus cap). If beams are encumbering you'll still probably need a beast of burden to move the beam to your place, though not to power it. This would either be before or after Horse Mill. Depends on how easy it is to set up. If any falling water can be used, then pretty easy (maybe too easy), so before horse mill. But if the world had naturally generated waterfalls (with mist spray at the bottom!) that were the only way to get it to work, then it may be so niche that it could be higher than the horse mill. Or similar tier anyway, but very slow. Or perhaps if the player can construct aqueducts or something, from a natural river. The beam part should probably wear out over time. Horse Mill - The horse mill would be a vertical millstone which rolls around a central column, powered by an animal. The general idea of the look would be this: This would allow unattended ore processing. It would however have several potential costs: You would have to capture and domesticate a beast of burden (horse, donkey, ox, etc). Depending on how the rest worked, you might also have to obtain beams (as described above), and the base stone might be made of raw stone blocks. So if both those are true, you'd need to have a pick, and an adze. If it were taken further and you have to carve the 'trough' out of the raw stone, you might also need a metal hammer and chisel. So that's potentially 3-4 metal tools. Not to mention the leather and/or rope needed to harness the animal. And there could also be a cost in that to make the animal work, you have to feed it. The grindstone should probably also wear out, with those made of sedimentary rock wearing out faster than others. Further, if beams are an encumbering item as I suggested above, the player will also need the beast of burden to move the beams, and maybe a wagon. That or they settle near the tall trees. It would also be historically accurate to use this kind of a mill to press grapes or olives. Stamp Mill - The stamp mill is the next tier. I've talked about it before in another thread. I would look something like this: As mentioned in the other thread, the stamp mill would require even more infrastructure, in the form of several beams, metal caps on the beams, and either a windmill or water wheel to power it. The windmill and waterwheel would presumably require even more beams, plus canvas for the windmill, and who knows what else. The water wheel would be limited to rivers. The metal stamping caps would need to be replaced every so often, and trying to stamp iron with copper caps for instance, will wear them out very fast. Iron Age Methods - In the iron/steel ages, the player gets into ball mills, jaw crushers, and cone crushers. I won't get too much into those, but suffice to say I think they could be used to process ore faster, and even reduce it further - to granules, and again to grit, which might make the smelting faster, or give bonus metal, or produce less slag. These same machines could also perhaps process flux stones, chalk, and other stones that are not ores in the normal sense. None of this really addresses the suggestion of requiring some chemistry of course. Still a bit skeptical on that stuff. Machinery tie-in is probably weaker, and it might start to get confusing for newbs. I do think the notion of processing ore down in order to be smeltable might enhance the machinery part of the game though, giving more use in the wood era than just grinding grain.
  11. Not "logs", "beams". Logs would remain as they are. Beams would be a special resource used only for machinery or wooden items which one wants to be somewhat hard to get. Harder than logs and planks, which are very easy to get.
  12. If you're making a greenhouse or something, definitely. But it's nothing like the time you have to invest to find silver and gold, imo. If anything I'd drop the current lantern a point of illumination for clear quartz. That would make clear quartz non-mirrored lantern 3 points inferior to a mirrored glass version. But it'd definitely be nice to be able to upgrade lanterns later.
  13. You're putting 4 grain in one slot? You have to have grain in the first two slots, pretty sure. I've never looked at the cooking wiki. If that's what it says, that's kind of confusing. Those numbers are not indicating the stack limit per slot. The stack limits per slot are 6 in all all cases, for the clay cook pot. When it says 2-4, it means 2 to 4 *slots* of grain. So minimum of two slots must be grain, maximum of all four slots. 0-2 means you can have no slots of it, or up to 2. You can only have up to 3 separate ingredients for porridge, since 2 must be grain. Although, I'm not sure if those can be different grain or not? But you cannot have grain, vegetable, berry, and honey ALL in one porridge. At least one will have to be left out. Bony soil has no use currently.
  14. I don't think you can pick up lava. And I would hope never will be able to.
  15. - can't help on the porridge without knowing more details. What configurations did you try? - On firewood, different types of logs have different burn times. Hardwoods like oak and maple, you're correct, the log burns longer than the firewood, so as a fuel there's no reason to break it down...yet. But soft wood, like pine or birch I believe, the log burn time is actually lower than the sum of the firewoods. So for those you get more time by breaking them down. I'm hoping in the future nice cast iron cook stoves will only take firewood, for instance. And honestly I think fueling a camp fire with logs should turn it into a bonfire, which cannot be cooked with. - If the crop is not mature, you're not guaranteed a seed. I assume the chance gets less the younger the stage, but idk for sure. As for growing, wild crops are supposed to cycle. So once they reach mature stage, they don't stay there forever. They eventually revert to stage 1. This I assume is meant to simulate natural reseeding. So if you leave for awhile and come back and it's still young, it may have cycled all the way past it's mature stage. If you check it very often and it doesn't advance, idk. Could be a bug for all I know.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.