redram

Hmm, well that should be possible.  You fired the mold right, so it's dark brown now, rather than blue?   If you've got the modl baked, then did your copper cool down in the crucible and harden?  

Also be aware that 20 units is not enough for a full tool, you need 100 units.   However if you meant 20 nuggets (which are 5 units each) then you should be good.

4 minutes ago, shaftique said:

As the title says - I can't pour from crucible. I've tried everything. sneak and hold right mouse button over the clay tool mold right? Or am I missing something?

What metal are you trying to pour?  Only certain metals can actually be poured into tool molds.  Brass for instance cannot be used to make tools, but is easily confused with Bronze.  Also pure zinc, or tin, or lead, none of those are valid tool metals.  But every metal can be poured into an ingot mold, which is why they can all be melted.

Also, it is a thing that if animals take damage from falling, they blame you and will attack you (that is, the code is such that taking any damage is interpreted as a hostile player act, regardless of whether or not the player actually caused it).  At least last I knew.  So that might have also been a factor.  Though if you change to never hostile mode I think it shouldn't matter.

Also, you can change individual settings after a world is made, you don't have to start a new world.   This wiki page lists the available commands:  https://wiki.vintagestory.at/index.php?title=List_of_server_commands/worldconfig

Specifically, you want /worldconfig creatureHostility [aggressive|passive|off]

Note that you may have to quit and reload to get the setting to actually take effect.

30 minutes ago, JonasXIII said:

This has probably been answered elsewhere, but I was wondering if there are plans to add Vintage Story to the steam market place. 

First item on the FAQ page:  https://www.vintagestory.at/features/faq.html/  Short answer is 'someday maybe'.  It's not really mentioned in the FAQ, but another reason is that steam crowds can be pretty harsh, and you only get one chance to make a first impression.  There's a desire to get the game to a really good state of polish, before throwing it upon steam's tender mercies.  And it's not there yet.

@Feone Varen  Have you tried the secondary propick mode, that detects actually present ore? 

Depends what you're searching for.  bismuth and cassiterite occur in smaller discs, but some ores occur in extremely large discs.  If you're searching for cassiterite and using the secondary mode at a range of 8, you could probably dig every 24 blocks and have a high chance of finding any cassiterite.  You don't need to dig every 16 in such a case, because cassiterite almost never occurs in a single block size, so you'd be very unlikely to miss it, probably.  But again, this pattern will depend on the secondary search radius you select, and also on the ore you're searching for.

@Tyron  Seems to be a somewhat common problem.

@jakecool19@Hussar@Thundathighs What version of the game are you guys on?

Not possible currently.

10 hours ago, Maxwell Ellington said:

The default mode tells you the likelyhood of an ore being within the triangle (after testing 3 points)

Streewind kind of covered this but I just wanted to make a focused reply, that this is not actually how the primary mode works.  The primary mode references ore density maps that are made on world gen, and the first spot of the 3 that you break, is the one that it is giving you results for.  The subsequent two required samples are just to make it a non-trivial operation.  As opposed to say, TFC where you could just spring around at a dead run right clicking sampling everywhere.   The subsequent two samples don't need to be in a triangle, all 3 can be in a straight line up, or down, for instance.  They just have to be spaced out is all.

zinc is found in any of the major stone types, I think.  That is, ones that aren't themselves a deposit, or the oddballs like bauxite.

One or two of the traders sells zinc nuggets I think (commodities trader, I think?).  You might be able to find it extremely rarely panning, or in ore loot vessels.  Those and mining are the only ways I think.   Finding some zinc to mine will be by far the most profitable in terms of quantity.  If you're not familiar with the propick yet, I'd suggest maybe looking into it.  There's a link to a good tutorial pinned somewhere in the discord, iirc (if you're not on the discord yet, join us!)

Welcome!   And ya, we want fishing too!  If you haven't seen it yet, here's the link to the roadmap page:  https://www.vintagestory.at/roadmap.html/ .   We need 2 or 3 more Tyrons, unfortunately.

6 hours ago, Magitex said:

 it's not intuitive mechanically because it's not built anything like a real greenhouse

It requires a 50% clear roof.  That's not really how real greenhouses are built, but if a player builds one with walls and ceiling of all glass, what they built will work.  It's fine to err on the side of letting what the player built work, imo.  In case they want to have some 'decorative' solid areas, such as a rib in the center.   The mechanic is such that if a player builds a greenhouse built like a real one (within the volume limit), it will work.  What's wrong with that?  

I'm not a coder so I can't really comment much on the code limitations specific to room calculations.  I just know what Tyron said.  I know enough to feel comfortable saying that the world having no limits and a structure having no limits are very different things, because your world will never be loaded all at once.

6 hours ago, Magitex said:

Which is why I thought a mechanic where you could be allowed to grow the next tier of warmer crops (or frost immunity)

There is no such thing as 'tiers' of crop warmth, any more than there are 'tiers' of climatic temperature.  It's a sliding scale.   The game also doesn't track the climatic conditions necessary to form frost irl, so it's really just about temperature.  Which is why a simple temperature bonus makes sense.  I don't know why you say this is 'unrealistic'.  It's more realistic than what you're proposing, and far more realistic than what Stardew Valley does, as I understand it (never played it, but I gather you don't have to heat that greenhouse).  Unless Stardew Valley is set in a climate like Georgia maybe.

It's true we don't require the venting of the greenhouse in the summer to avoid having a +20C temperature rise during the daytime.   Just a uniform +5C winter or summer.  But that is frankly a boon to the player and falls in line with a more consistent positive benefit for the player.  It's also not really 'realistic' that what would presumably be a single-pane glass greenhouse maintains a +5C temperature at night in the dead of winter, but again, that errs towards making it of more consistent and better use for the player.  It's also true that we don't require constant air circulation to avoid extreme problems of fungal infections, and aphids (yet?).  But again, better/easier for the player.  And yes, we do not currently require active heating to maintain the benefits.  Again, easier for the player to work with.  So by my count we have four instances of divergence from 'real' greenhouses, all erring on the side of easing the gameplay for the player. 

I'm honestly quite curious how you think it is that (pre-20th century) greenhouses 'really work' vs what we're representing, and what reasonable improvement you think we could make, that would be simple for the player to understand and execute.

Finally, it's important to realize that a big part of gameplay is the prepping for hard times.   A greenhouse that just provides year-round growing would do a lot to negate that aspect of gameplay.  So I wouldn't expect greenhouses to be an easy-peasy mechanic, ever.   Down the road, if glass becomes more difficult to make, maybe things get re-balanced.  Right now glass is very easy (and unrealistic) to make.  In general it's still a relatively recent addition to the game, and may indeed be rebalanced.  So I want to be clear I'm not trying to dissuade from criticism or suggestion.   But I just want to make clear that the building restrictions were not arbitrary, as I understand it, and we're taking a conservative approach to start.   But at the same time I'd also like to hear a bit more clear criticism on the 'realism' end, because I have more than a passing video game familiarity with greenhouses, and disagree pretty strongly with calling our mechanic just as unrealistic as Stardew's.

edit: oh, and as far as the water issue Gazz mentioned, that merely requires addition of some automation to address.  Work in progress and all.  There is still the option of watering can, for now.

4 hours ago, Narc said:

Please don't forget the time spent maintaining the code that makes the system work: bug reports, related code changes -- it all adds up, and opposing it is a similarly weak argument of "I kind of liked having that mechanic". Overall, I'd rather spend a modder's time than Tyron's, if anyone felt up to the challenge.

Oh don't get me wrong, Tyron's time is super-important.  It's just that I'm sure he is quite aware of the opportunity costs and maintenance costs or whatever, he doesn't really need other people trying to use his time as an argument, especially if they're not coders.   When I called it a weak argument, what I'm saying is that it doesn't really add anything to the conversation about the actual topic.  It's kind of a deflection, to me. 

What it comes down to is simply that everyone has different tastes.  Nobody is wrong or right here, in broad terms.  I loved mining supports in TFC, for the verisimilitude they provide.  They made my mine look like a mine.  Verisimilitude is a fairly strong theme in VS.   Other people just found them (and the cave-in mechanic in general) a nuisance.  These are simply opinions.  However the great flaw of TFC's cave-in system was that it would cause cave-ins in natural caverns you hadn't even seen yet.  It could destroy ore, and just generally ruin the cave landscape.   And there was no way to avoid it.   That is objectively bad, to have a bad result the player has not power to stop.    However, the important point is, you can make this system a config option, so that those who don't like it can turn it off.  There's really no argument against it at that point, other than that it take's Tyron's time to make the system in the first place, and you (generic third person you) might want to see that time spent elsewhere.  But that's a very weak argument.  If you like it use it, if you don't flip the switch.  Everyone's happy.

In a similar but opposing vein, TFC had a seeded random smithing system.   VS has opted for a defined 'sliding blocks' puzzle system.   You can't really put a config switch on that without literally building two separate systems.  That's an unreasonable expectation, and so a choice must be made.  These kinds of choices are more impactful to the game.  So really it isn't necessary to have an argument about collapse mechanics ye or nay, because they can be easily made a config.  There's no reason not to have them, other than the opportunity cost of dev time.  Details of exactly how it works would be worthwhile discussing though, because every little mechanic within the general collapse mechanic can't be a config, and the TFC system can be improved upon.

A greenhouse is pretty intuitive, people used to build them all the time even before there was a mechanic.  However what's not intuitive is the size limit.   It's possible the size could expand if the algorithms get optimized, or it just generally does not impede the game much.  But there will always be *some* size limit.  It's unavoidable.

Greenhouses are not a free pass to grow anything at any time irl, which is why the game is not making it a free pass (we ain't Stardew Valley).   The idea, essentially, is that it lets you expand your growable window for your climate zone.  If you're already pretty close to the southern climates, and you just barely get freezes, well this might allow you to grow year ground without fear of frost. If you're temperate zones, maybe it lets you grow an extra month.  Maybe that's enough to squeeze in a second round of the right crop.  It's not meant to let you do the same thing everywhere.   A large part should be learning what crops work in your location, and which ones benefit from the greenhouse.  Basically like irl.  It's still a system in progress, and plant growth is intended to become more detailed down the road.

If mining supports make it into the game, I'm sure they will have a config toggle, just like so many other things.  It is possible to have the mechanic for those that like it, but not force it on those that don't. 

12 hours ago, Magitex said:

As it stands, I think greenhouses should be adapted to allow you to grow fruit and vegetables that normally are a little too cold for your climate (if this isn't already the case)

This is supposed to be the case already.  The bonus they give is a +5C to effective temperature of the soil blocks (and hence the plants) in the greenhouse.   When you have a properly constructed greenhouse, looking at a tilled farmland block should tell you that it is getting this +5C bonus. 

I know that at one point snow accumulation could also destroy them.   Not sure if that was fixed in an update or not...

6 hours ago, Gazz said:

The question is if there is something planned to make all that progression matter beyond creative building.

yes

I think there's only 1 or 2 very rare ruins that have them.  Possibly the luxury trader might rarely sell them rarely as well, but I'm not sure on that one.

That sounds very strange.  You're using just the base game, no mods?

To best of my knowledge, inside/outside is not a thing yet.  It's just a uniform penalty based on time.   I don't think clothes have any effect yet either.  This is kind of why it was backed off - the penalties were put in prematurely, without any way to counter them really.

The mod owner had real life issues intervene about the time the pandemic thing settled in, so I don't know if abandoned is the right word, but at least on hold for now.

That was backed down to 10%, due to player objection, and given the fact we don't have player-constructable clothing yet to combat the cold.