Rainbow Fresh

The industry doesn't work that simple and most developers I know of that tried something like this ended up in big trouble.

Just for clarification, are you talking about the "Rift activity" changing between calm all the way up to apocalyptic, or are you talking about the very same block you stand on changing between your temporal stability gear going up and going down persistently?

Granted, in retrospect I did misremember and as such misinterpret what the original question of 4. was and how it did, indeed, explain your point about machine translation already - but I have still read your post and still got the questions that I asked when I did so it wasn't that fully obvious.

Sure, there is more depth and nuance to it. Even art (as in drawing/painting) isn't infinite *ptsd flashbacks of fandom's destroying themselves in the endless struggle to have the single most special snowflake OC* But generall speaking, from a consumers perspective it's big differences. Two people can draw an image about "a female character sitting at a pond in a forest" and both will look similar but certainly like different pictures, and both are nice to look at (probably). Two developers can make "A calculator that can auto-suggets formular completions" and they will, effectively, both be the same. The inside code differences - nobody cares about. To the user, they are the same. And even if they are not, you will have to choose to either use the one OR the other cause nobody wants to install two calculators because of one minor difference.

I may not have made mods for Vintage Story, but I have made mods, even big ones with several years of support, for other games. Let's start with the primarily important question: Is it fun? That's a question you should ask yourself when doing it, because if not, you shouldn't be doing it anymore. What most users forget or blatantly ignore is that with modding, you are the one voluntarily offering something for others. You don't make a living doing it, and most likely never will even if you wanted to. You are investing your personal freetime and mental energy to do work for others. You have no obligation to do any of that. You don't need to give support. You can make a mod that works once, publish it, and proceed to vanish from the face of earth. You can un-publish your mod anytime if you feel like no longer sharing it. You owe nobody, nothing. Even if many people will demand things as if you do. So the only reason you should be doing this, is because you want to. Because you have fun doing it and/or feel great about what you accomplish. For me, I like coding. And a big problem of coding is finding a project worth investing your time in. Sure, you could just make a "Hello World" program or write a calculator - but what for? It's been done a million times and adds nothing new for anyone. And the amount of work needed to make a calculator that CAN do something all the others can't, is irresponsibly unproportional. An artist can draw a new image and it will be unique to other artists' artwork. Coding isn't that easy. So having a project you actually feel acomplishes something is a really great opportunity. That's why I enjoyed myself. I got to code on something that isn't done in 5h, share it with people of which atleast most were greatful because it positively impacted their daily gaming life. That's why I did it, that's why I continued atleast giving first-hand support for years after, and why it took me so long to finally acknowledge "I simply do not have the time or interest to continue this anymore, the mod is officially abandoned, feel free to fork it". As for your first question, building up on that: Another question you need to ask yourself and yourself alone. Is it too much to handle? Then you should rethink how you're doing it, or if it's worth to continue at all. If you can AND want to continue supporting it, updating it, keeping up with things: Do it. If not, simply don't. Don't ever risk burning yourself out over something you alone decide to do for others, for free.

Dayum. I'd say I love the staircase idea so much I'd want to steal it for my own Singleplayer world, but man do I have no idea how to recreate that even if I wanted to

I only encountered my first winter so far and I didn't have time to be bored or depressed, too busy fighting off starvation for yet another day after learning of my grave miscalculation that winter is supposed to be only 3 months long.

Ok, this is intriguing. Could you explain this in a bit more detail? You said anything and everything where AI ever generated any part of the code which, including your "Yes" to scenario 3, also means generating any examples to explain coding concepts (as was the premise of scenario 3) is AI Slop. Then what is the difference between someone googling "How to do X in language Y", reading Stack Overflow threads where people asked similar things and got answers with full, working code examples and then use that as a starting point/reference vs. someone asking AI to do the same thing for them but in less time? Furthermore you say even machine translation is an absolute no-go. Does this only count for AI use or in general? Cause imagine the following, very realistic scenario. Let's go, say, 10 years back. Someone posted a mod for some game on some mod sharing platform that has a cool concept. The thing is in Chinese/Russian though. The mod description's broken English version makes it apparent that the author doesn't speak English, like, at all, and just slapped the whole description into Google Translate - which back in that time period certainly did not classify as "AI". The same can hence be safely assumed to be true for the mod's content. Notably rough (cause Google Translate was never really accurate for more than single word dictionary lookups) but making things understandable, because otherwise you couldn't use the mod at all (lest you happen to fluently understand Russian/Chinese). Would that be different from using modern, AI driven translators which much clearer and more fluent accuracy, or would that also have been a no-go because they did not crowd-source community translations from actual translators? Also just for clarification, you said "Anything the AI wrote, even frameworks, art assets and machine translations" is a no-go sign but then go on in 5. to say machine translation is not the same as AI writing code and should not be put in the same basket, as if saying that's a different story - so which is it now?

While admittedly steering off-topic into another discussion about another suggestion/mechanic all-together, I did not include the prospect of a walking stick's balace in any of this. I solely stated my view on the currently available options and how they tie in, or not, with the current hunger penalty system. I also think that your point of "The hunger penalty doesn't really bother you" because food will readily get over-abundant in the mid to late game further proves how poorly chosen this approach to penalizing offhand use is. To the player that still cares who stops a moment to think about it, it feels like annoyingly oversteering a debuff that must not necessarily be, while to the advanced player it is utterly ineffective. Sure, it gets either of them to think about offhand use more than "I have slot, I use slot". Which is fair. But also achievable, if not already achieved, by other means already present in the game. Because again, it is not only penalizing overly abundant offhand use, it is also penalizing fully unavoidable offhand use. Also specifically to your point about Minecraft: I, too, am always holding something my offhand. Which is the shield. Because aside from the occasional-odd situation where you want a block in there (for fast gravel shoveling or something), there is no reason to not have a shield equiped. Is that a sign that the shield would need better balance, or that the offhand would need to be discourage in general? Left hand support would be a nice touch. Though in this instance I merely said it as a mocking methaphor for the off-hand being the left hand. Exactly, it doesn't have to be a hunger penalty for holding anything in your offhand. The things that can go there are already limited to begin with. Two of which forcibly require the offhand to work at all. The rest could be balanced differently. Shield, as the prime culprit and as I mentioned before, could very well do with getting general armor penalties. No matter if main or offhand. It's a defensive tool, like armor, so it could have the same drawbacks as armor. Weighed based on tier of the shield, like armor. And lightsources? Do we really need a penalty for carrying and using lightsources? If you want, make torches last only 2 days no matter if placed or not. Nerf the thing giving you and advantage if that advantage is perceived to be too big, not the hand holding it.

Yes but also no. It enhances your usability in a sense where there is no other utility for that scenario besides the use that is discouraged. Taking the example of a sudden night-time encounter with an enemy. You have the option of A: Holding only your torch. And... probably die. Cause a torch ain't a good weapon. B: Use only your weapon and... probably die. Cause you can't hit what you can't see while that never stopped no bear nor wold nor drifter chomping on your butt. Or finally option C : whereas you hold the lightsource in your offhand and fight off the threat with a weapon in your main hand to atleast try and survive. You probably get hit somewhat, losing health, which in turn is gonna tank your satiety anyway for healing purposes and on top of that the brief excursion of left-handedness tanked it even further. Why? To prevent you from holding that torch in the forbidden hand any frame longer than absolutely necessary? The only alternatives to this scenario that don't require using your off-hand briefly involve placing down alot of torches to light up the entire area to have enough arena to dodge in even without a lightsource in hand, or being late-game enough to wear NVGs. The former of which is not always viable, the latter of which a silly "root" of balancing decisions since the NVG also doesn't qualify for most armor sets, being a tradeoff. Or let's take the hammer. You need to have the hammer in your offhand to use the chisel, no other way. Same for tongs. You need to use tongs in order to smith. Both actions (chiseling and smithing) do no inherently cost you satiety or penalize you in any other way. There is virtually no harm done running around holding tongs all day and virtually no reason to run around holding a hammer all day. Yet for both of these unavoidable interactions you get penalized with a 20% hunger rate debuff, not because you physical labor but because you use your left hand. Doesn't sound like good balancing to me. Then there is the shield, which iirc also only works, in the first place, if used in the off-hand. Now this is the one and only scenario where I can see a reason to come up with this penalty system in the first place, especially since shield have passive block. Passive damage reduction just for holding your shield in your off-hand? Sounds OP, needs a counter-weight - boom, hunger penalty. But that is the extend to which it makes sense. And only for as long as we cling to passive blocking. If one insisted enforcing a hunger penalty for left-handed people, then atleast choose reasonably balanced (in relativity to other, existing mechanics) numbers. How about 5% for a light/crude and 10% for a heavy/metal shield? Cause it basically works like armor, so it should function (debuff-wise) like armor. Can still get rid of passive blocking imo, this RNG mechanic isn't that great and passive blocking, while trying to emulate realistic behavior, would be better suited for a Combat Overhaul-style physical damage model. Then we get a 2.5% for holding tools and a 1% debuff for light sources. Maybe even 2.5% for lanterns specifically to further incentivise the use of torches in the later game. Are these numbers potentially fully neglectibly low? Maybe. But better than a flat out 20% across the board. And there are situation where every % of hunger rate matters. Like a beginner starving through their first winter. Winter is boring enough when you cannot even leave the house without freezing and starving to death, so penalizing the warmth of a torch to combat the starvation in the cold by even faster starvation is bogus.

Lemme get this straight - you had a mod (like draconis), then removed the mod and played which removed the entities from the mod, now reinstalled the mod and want the animals back? For as long as there is no more indepth entity data nuances going on, the base step will likely be to just go into creative (/gm c) where you'll likely find a tab for stuff from that mod which will likely have all the entities of that mod in their gendered and tamed/untamed/semi-tamed variants as "item" which you just pick up and plop back into the world. Then go back to survival mode (/gm s). If the entities can be named, iirc that is something you can do anytime by pressing U or N or something on them? If there is deeper rooted stats schenanigans going on, you will need to use fancy schmancy /entity ... magic - but as to for what exactly to look for and try and edit, I neither know about the draconis nor the tameable wolf mod to help you myself.

Carrying anything in your offhand giving a hunger penalty equal to basically a full set of metal chain armor is the stupidest thing to begin with. I get that it was probably done to balance the offhand so people don't just use it as a free extra inventory slot - but that falls very short if you put it into any logical perpective. On the realistic side, there is no logic here. On the game-realistic side, why can we carry thousands of tons of solid rock and metal in our inventory and be unaffected but holding a torch with your *le gasp* left hand make you instantly starve? From a balancing perspective - there are only, like, 3 items that can go into the left hand anyway. A shield, a light source or a hammer. Much "free inventory space" that needs balancing, for sure.

I don't consider "Artificial Intelligence" actually intelligent to any degree yet either, mostly because it is stupid to consider the term "intelligence" is solely tied to how many loops/neurons you built into the web. If that was the case, every human being in the world that didn't mis-deleveop in the head region due to pregnancy issues (or blunt force trauma) would be equally intelligent and our very hubris to define a metric like "IQ" would be even more fundamentally flawed than it already is. Also, we consider animals like Ravens intelligent/smart (to a degree) because of what they can do while they have inarguably less physical space in their heads to develop any brain compared to larger animals we consider "dumb". At the same time, however, I do very much think humans are just biological computers to a degree that we can estimatedly replicate the way human thinking works one day. That day is clearly neither today nor tomorrow, as we are still lacking fundamental understanding about how our own brain actually works, but the logical components of how human thinking works can be transposed into how a computer "thinks" and "remembers" quite well.

I thought they only tweaked campfire stack heating into oblivion while leaving cooling awfully unbalanced? Oh well, more mods to fix I guess.

Considering the OP said: Can't teleport to what ain't there anymore, but you can still guess roughly where the first marker was if your remember and teleport to coordinates close enough.

A much simpler and faster "solution" to balancing water would be to just make it finite (for as far as block moving operations are involved). Currently, you pick up infinite water from a single source block with the same bucket over and over again, and can dump every single bucket load into a new infinite source block. Whereas rapids, because of their use for mechanical power, are immovable at all times. Instead, just remove the block of water you pick up, and don't create new sources if two water sources are one block apart. You can get any amount of water and rapids, so it's not restricting your options for building, but every block you take is also a block less where you took it from, forever. Meaning you not only have to painstakingly cart in enough water from elsewhere, for all those that hate nothing more than seeing unnatural terrain in the wild (like single blocks of water missing from a source, or in TOBG someone only taking a single log from a tree...) you have to go even further out where it does not matter how it looks as you will likely never return there. Of course proper water simulation and mechanics measured in liters instead of blocks would be very nice (oh god I can already smell the PCs burning), but this sounds like a much simpler "bridge the gap" approach for now.

I am saying that like it's the reality I have been working with for the last several month and I don't feel neither threatened to be replaced by AI nor pressured to use it. I am working with it to a sane extent, know it's very flaws and shortcoming aswell as the areas in which it can arguably improve my own work efficiency without sacrificing any of the "human seal of approval" quality of the end result. I can also assure you that I do care about the projects that I work on, not from a paycheck perspective but from a "I just love coding and I just love to create something that makes people's lifes easier" perspective. If you can find the headspace to believe this is or not I leave up to you. I am not moving goal posts, I am merely trying to showcase the main flaw in your buckshot bird hunt approach of logic, like Grym7er tried, clearly to also no avail. Following your "it's that simple" logic and using your previous explanation of any sort of AI use in coding is just a no-go, immedate sign of "AI Slop", disengangement and capitalist greed: This very forum we are typing in right now is, as the copyright notice at the bottom of the page shows, powered by a product from "Invision Community". Seeing as AI disclaimers, especially for minscule "behind the scenes" use are not really a thing and I can't be bothered to sign of for a free trial to try and snoop around their source code I have no definitive proof, but statistically speaking the sheer size of Invision Community and their product fleet essentially guarantees a near 100% probability of atlest one developer on their team having used AI tool assistance to atleast the same extent as I do. Following your previous explanations, that makes this forum software "AI Slop" and Invision Community a greedy corporate not "giving a shit" as long as it works and makes money. Furthermore, because Anegos Studio decided to use this software instead of making their own, 100% human work fueled alternative, they in sequence also do not care, as long as it works and makes them money. Finally, you are here, having paid money for one of Anegos Studio's products (bought Vintage Story) and are now actively engaging with "AI Slop" software. Because your buckshot logic is so wide-spread, essentially anything on the internet created or updated in atleast the last 5 years is tied to AI Slop at some point, and if that is such a huge no-go bother, not using the internet as a whole the only cure. However. I have said my opinion, you have said yours. It is clear that the two us will not come to any agreement, so I will now abandon this specific chain of discussion and will kindly ask you to do the same, as I do not want to make the warning of the guy a couple messages up come true.

Hmm. I see. Welp, guess I am making a living with "AI Slop" then, and my still remaining many, many hours of good old work are just inefficiencies I have not yet outsourced to the great AI cloud. Voluntarily, mind you. That however also means, especially regarding your other statement that I'd recommend you stay away from the internet, as I can 100% guarantee you that you are interacting with "AI slop" on the daily just by doing anything out there.

While that is certainly true for many people, what about actual software developers with a full-time job and a decade of hands-on manual coding experience using AI tool assistance to speed things up or skip unnecessarily tedious tasks?

Is that the new procedural dungeon? If so, don't know about the overall spawn frequency but what I do know is that it currently only has a tiny handful of design variations. More are meant to come before 1.23 but for now is basically just a PoC template.

So recently I gave it a first try to update my world with all its (remaining) mods, many of which needed "temporary fork" alternatives, to 1.22. As a long story short, trying to fix ID shifts (cause the fork chose a different mod ID than the original, or maybe something just broke, idk) I logged the list of all item IDs trying to spawn in an item/block? to replace the old questionmark block version. Aside from not finding any hint of this thing's existence I have realized, that all item IDs are doubled now; the ones under the OG mod's prefix, aswell as the ones under the forked mod's prefix. Alongside the IDs of items from other mods that needed to be removed entirely. I get that this is done in order to have support for placeholder items so that things can go right back to normal should the item for the ID be added back, or atleast that a player can cleanup the placeholder items instead of the world exploding. However, I would like to clean this list up; remove all the now unused item/block codes from mods that got removed, especially between the mod-fork-duplicated. Is there a way to do that and how badly can that mess things up?

The mod side does not define the "supported" side, but the "required" one. A mod with mod side "client" work only on the client, and can therefor be installed on a client even if the server does not have it. A mod with side "both" is required on both server AND client to work. Meanwhile, a mod with side "server" only needs to be installed on the server and can hence change the game even if players do not have any mods.

While I do agree that AI annihilation of human society is the next most likely world end scenario after nuclear world war three, the current state is not scary at all; from a "AI is replacing us all" perspective atleast. Innovation can surely happen, and many people having bet their big stacks of cash all on green certainly pray it happens, but considering what a frail house of cards AI as an industry is built upon I still wouldn't expect dystopia to knock on the door tomorrow.

Buckets do not remove water. I know because I have turned on that buckets can create new source blocks, thinking it is like Minecraft, just to find out I can spawn infinite water out of a single block.

Welcome to both the game and forums! That is perfectly normal, yes. Like many other block games, when you die with settings that drop your items on death, you physically drop these items. Like any other item dropped in the world, they eventually despawn. Otherwise you (or especially in multiplayer someone with malicious intent) ultimately greatly impact the game's performance. The default (I think) time for how long your death-dropped items remain is 1h (real time). You can either change this timer via world config or in-game command /worldconfig droppedItemsTimer [number] or turn it off entirely by changing the setting that makes you drop your items in the first place, or via command /worldconfig deathPunishment keep EDIT: Assuming you have the in-game map enabled, you can look at the death marker and teleport to the coordinates with /tp x y z