DeanF

Coin armor. But made with gears.

I was pretty opposed to firearms in the game. But then I watched some videos where players used the firearms mod that basically added smoothbore muzzle-loaders and I had to admit... it didn't seem discordant. It still seemed primitive. And heck, we have bombs already. So I guess that now I wouldn't object, especially if reload times were appropriately long. Meh, those are all debatable. Early muskets were practically small cannons. .75 caliber was typical. And no, muzzle velocity wasn't particularly high compared to a modern rifle, but it was still supersonic and that's a big chunk of lead. You're thinking of things like the little .36 pocket pistols that ladies carried in their muffs when you say underpowered. But muskets ended the age of the plate-armored knight, for heaven's sake! Yes you could make musket-proof plate, but that was so heavy that they eventually only made them as cuirass rather than full suits. And early firearms like matchlocks were certainly cheaper than swords- by a huge margin, actually. But not cheaper than common soldiers' weapons like pikes or other polearms. So that's a bit relative. Accuracy, again, is relative. No, smoothbores are not accurate by modern rifle standards, but nonetheless more accurate than most people think, especially when carefully loaded. That's why commanders tended to save the first volley- "Don't fire until you can see the whites of their eyes!", and so on. I won't get into it, but they lose accuracy mostly during rapid fire. Which is what militaries cared about, so their bullet tolerances were loose so that they could be reloaded faster, for instance. But a tightly-fitted smoothbore ball could be pretty accurate. At least as much so as a bow or crossbow. Here are videos of someone shooting a smoothbore and ringing the target like a bell, center of mass hits every time: Seriously- when you see the target later in the video he had three shots stacked on top of each other. If you are unfamiliar with Karl Kasarda, he's one of the more academic GunTubers. (As opposed to the hairy-chested GunTubers.) He is one of very few that I'm willing to watch any more, along with his old partner Ian McCollum. And here is a relative firearms novice (see his awkward stance) doing the same: You got the big advantage right, though- it was a hell of a lot easier to train a musketeer than an archer. Especially at long ranges their trajectory is much more flat. "To train an archer, begin by training his grandfather." But firearms are better in many ways. There is a reason that every culture that was ever introduced to them came to prefer them over their other historical weapons. Yes, even the Japanese.

Yes, this is true. The folks at cartographersguild.com, where they make fictional maps, are quite dedicated about criticizing this mistake. They call them the River Police. With extremely rare exception, rivers combine, they don't fork. Another thing that trips up amateur cartographers for some inexplicable reason is the fact that water flows downhill. I still get boggled when I see that one violated. Given the way that VS worldgen proceeds in chunks, I can see a lot of difficulties with generating rivers. They sort of have to flow downhill, and how can that be predicted for a downstream chunk that hasn't generated yet? You might have to recreate the whole worldgen process to include an erosion mechanic. Steal it from a program like Wilbur?. (Wilbur works by moving voxels downhill scaled for slope and rainfall.) I suspect that is why all of the mods that add "rivers" result in some pretty odd geography, like holes punched through mountains. That's just a problem with any game that descends from that other voxel game, y'know? The basic worldgen that got inherited is problematic. It really should be erosion-based instead, but crap that's practically starting development over again completely. The little streams and rivulets that we have now are a lot easier- they just need to end in ponds in low areas instead of magically dissipating.

I like it. The clamming might be easier to implement. Put "shows" like breathing holes and squirts in sand that has clams. But oyster shoals in shallow saltwater would be pretty nice, too- those could work sort of like berry bushes. An while we are at it, where are the crawfish and crabs?

A very interesting video. But the programming isn't really insurmountable- it's been done before, at least as early as the 1990s. The problem is players... Players generally decimate ecosystems in games. See Ultima Online for an example: Or at least that's the example that I remember. Have complex ecologies actually worked in a game at some point? Also, the idea might actually work in a solo game. If you decimate the local wildlife, then there are no animals left to hunt and it's your own fault. But in a multiplayer game the Tragedy of the Commons always manifests.

Hmm, I just learned that animal spawn areas persist. For instance, even if you deforest an area, the wolf spawn locations there will still spawn wolves. So maybe we do need animal markers? For marking hunting grounds, per se... A wolf and bear to mark danger zones, or maybe their paw prints or something, and then prey animals: a pig, a sheep/goat, a deer, etc. A fish symbol, for sure.

You can already preserve meat in salt; I think that fills the sausage niche. But a smoker for making jerky would be nice, though for gameplay reasons the smoked meat should not last as long as the salted meat- it is harder to find the salt, so it should have a benefit. You should also have to make it in batches- sort of like charcoal- to keep it from being ubiquitous in the early game. For example you might have to make a firepit in a hole, build a tipi smoker over it with sticks and some raw hides, load it with meat (and I think that bushmeat should work as well as red meat), and wait 20 hours or so before breaking it like a skep. These smokers could be different sizes and capacities, depending upon whether you use two small, medium, or large hides (and more sticks). The sticks and hide should be partly recoverable- when you break the tipi you get one hide and half the sticks back. These could be raw hides- they shouldn't need to be preserved, though preserved ones or even leather should work fine in a pinch. I envision each smoker having four input slots, like making a meal. Red meat, bushmeat, poultry, and fish filets should all be smokable, and lose a slight bit of nutritional value when smoked, again for gameplay reasons. The small smoker only accepts one item per slot (total 4), but the medium one accepts two (total 8 ) and the large one accepts four (total 16). But meat, fat, and berries is a pretty simple recipe, so pemmican gets my vote. Even better if you have to use the smoked meat above as the meat to make the pemmican, since after all pemmican is supposed to be made with ground dried meat, and then the benefit of all of that effort is that pemmican should last as long as salted meat. And it probably shouldn't be possible with fish... maybe? (Was there ever an example of fish pemmican?) You definitely should still have to make pemmican in a pot, though the cook time would be very fast. Production chains in survival games are always a good thing. So long as animal fat and the vegetable oils from sunflowers and olive are discrete, the vegetable oils should not work for making pemmican- only animal fat. Yet again for gameplay reasons, it might be best if pemmican were treated like other meals, meaning that you need a bowl, and crocks. Two smoked meat, a fat, and a berries makes one meal of pemmican. With all of these mechanics, you can definitely make salted meat more easily in much larger batches... once you have the salt. That's it's big advantage over pemmican. Pemmican should be a small-batch stone age technology. Hardtack or pilot bread might work, so long as you had to make soup out of it to actually eat it- the resulting meal could be called "mush". Otherwise hardtack should be inedible. But it should have some sort of shelf life, even if it's a very long one, like grain.

I want landform labels- a mountain peak symbol for naming mountains, a wave symbol (or maybe water droplet?) for naming water features, and something for naming valleys and depressions (not sure what symbol). I want to annotate that I live on Half-Moon Bay with Elephant Mountain to my north... There should probably be windmill and water wheel symbols. Likewise, a tipi symbol for campsites or small structures you've built that are less than a home base. I leave standardized 6x7 waystations everywhere, for example. An anchor symbol, for marking good landing sites for rafts, boats, and the sailboat. A question mark would be nice for doing map recon- as sort of a "What the hell is this?" on some map feature that you want to check out. And if we're doing that, then an exclamation point as a danger marker might be justifiable, perhaps even in a triangle like the European "Caution" traffic symbol, so that the color is easier to see. Alternatively, the circle-slash symbol might work. A symbol for a wolf and a bear have been requested by many people, but I'd rather just have a single generic symbol of a fanged mouth to represent any animal threat. Maybe a fish symbol, too. And honestly, I'd love what Simple Map Markers gives you- chemical element abbreviations. Perhaps as a toggleable option for those who don't like such things. Finally, what I hope is a helpful critique from someone with old eyes- the pickaxe symbol is too skinny to see the color easily. It should be crossed picks instead. Likewise, it might help to make the berries on the berry branch symbol a tad larger.

I mean in the ocean, not in lakes. And mundane animals like sharks, of course. Both only over deep water, since what I think would be desirable is to discourage long deep-water swims. Or is the sea supposed to be a peaceful, idyllic place?

Hmm. I'm not sure about a trunk in something like a canoe. But a chest, sure- all of the 1 block storage options. So I think that reed chests, wooden chests, and storage vessels should all be allowed.

Ah, yes, my chisel was used...

Is there a way to recycle a copper anvil for the copper? I tried putting it in the crafting grid with a hammer and an chisel, but nothing happened. I tried attacking it with the chisel with the hammer in my off hand, but it just dropped the anvil whole.

I'm thinking this, too. Even a stack of 8 would be overpowering. I agree that the game is very inconsistent regarding the size of gears, though, and sort of agree with a string of something less than a thousand. Sounds reasonable.

Yes, bears aren't really endurance hunters. Wolves are, though- they should pursue you relentlessly. They swim slowly, though- a human should out-pace them in water, unlike bears (well, brown and polar varieties) who can swim as fast as Michael Phelps. On that subject, boar can indeed be aggressive, but they generally don't make long pursuits. They should have the lowest pursuit times. And is it just me or are the goats OP? They're relentless, faster than you can run, and a butt damned nears knocks off half of your health in the early game.

Ooooh, nice. Madder- delightfully ancient. I approve. Isn't madder the reason that British uniforms were red? It was available and cheap? Or am I thinking of something else? Also, like cinnabar, I'm pretty sure that lapis was used as a pigment in paints, not as a dye for cloth, wasn't it?

Oh, I already reached for it...

I'd wager that this has been hashed out before, but my search-fu is weak, and heck that's why the subforum is called "Suggestions", right? I don't necessarily advocate for the addition of all of these- some are just included for (hopefully) useful design discussion. In particular, despite the inclusion of bighorn sheep and raccoons the devs seem to be going for an Old World flavor. But they also seem to like ancient things, and to prefer obscure variants- for instance spelt instead of a generic "wheat". Emmer Another ancient form of wheat, more heat-tolerant than spelt, and certainly than of rye. Also more reliable and a bit more drought-tolerant than spelt, though lower-yielding. But really the difference would require high granularity in the game to make a difference, and it has a lot of overlap with spelt. It is not nearly as heat- and drought-tolerant as... Millet Highly heat- and drought-tolerant, great in porridges. And really, the hot/dry climates need some fleshing out. Very short growing season- it grows like a weed- so it might be a good early game "panic crop" to recover from setbacks. I had a millet infestation in my yard from spilled birdseed once. Sorghum Originally from the Sudan... or possibly India? Another heat- and drought-tolerant option. Not sure about what niche it would fill that millet wouldn't do better, though. Can also be used to make syrup, like maize, but I don't think that sweeteners really have a place in the game, do they? Maize Only included because I just mentioned it. I think it's a bad fit for the feel of the game due to it's New World flavor. Barley It's niche overlaps that of spelt, but historically was used a lot as animal feed and for brewing, and is a bit more heat/drought tolerant. Tolerates poor soils, but not as well as rye. Oats Possibly a niche competitor with rye? It is mostly a cold tolerant option like rye, but it is less tolerant of drought and poor soils, too, so maybe? Rye actually doesn't like waterlogging, but it is a "nothing else will grow here" sort of crop. Whereas oats are a "cold and wet" crop. Buckwheat A pseudo-cereal (like amaranth) from East Asia. It is also a fast-growing "panic crop", like millet. Tolerates poor soils, kind of like amaranth. You'll notice a theme recently about occupied niches, though. Quinoa Altitude- and drought-tolerant pseudo-cereal. Not Old World, so there is that problem, but certainly ancient, and it would fill a niche in high mountainous areas. Spinach I'm new, and the wiki is badly out of date, but I think that the only leafy vegetable in the game is cabbage? One requirement, I suppose, would be that any vegetable be appropriate for stews and soups, and spinach meets that. Lettuce would not, for instance. Spinach is a cold-weather crop, it even tolerates a light frost. Chard Another leafy vegetable, but it regrows after cutting, so the devs might not like it as a sort of "passive income" plant that doesn't need re-planting every season. Sorrel A plant from the buckwheat family that was very common in soups and stews because it is tart and lemony- it is sort of both an herb and a green. Purslane A starvation food from hot/dry climates, another leafy vegetable for soups. Bok Choy A soup-appropriate leafy vegetable for warmer climates? Very fast-growing. Water Chestnut Could be grown sort of like cattail or papyrus, but solely for it's rhizomes. Leeks Ancient, but sort of the same niche as onions. They are more cold hardy, though- is that enough? They were even left in the ground over winter as "living storage". Onions store well, but don't like a frost. Maybe leeks could just be rare, for variety, and only available as seeds from traders like cabbage? Potatoes This one definitely suffers from it's New World character, and also feels like a bad fit for the game, but it does lead us to... Yams Several kinds have Old World lineages, often from Africa or southern Asia. They could supply both grain and vegetable nutrition, sort of how legumes should provide both protein and vegetable nutrition. And on that note... Fava Beans Possibly one of the most ancient cultivated plants, and we need more legumes. Hopefully at some point they will aid with crop rotation. Chickpeas Also an ancient crop, as above. Lentils Ditto. Things are sort of getting redundant again, though. Vetch Sort of a generic vining bean, more a family than anything in particular. Beets Can be both a food and a dye source? I don't think sugar beets should be a thing, for the same reason that sorghum syrup and sugar cane perhaps shouldn't (or is it already?)- sugar doesn't seem to fit into the nutrition system. And it also seems too "Minecrafty". Mustard I heard that spices are coming, right? This is an obvious one for a pseudo-Europe. As are coriander, dill, garlic, or caraway. Cumin and anise are more Mediterranean, fennel is already a thing. Ginger Another obvious spice, for warmer climates, as are tumeric and black pepper. Cinnamon could probably be in there somewhere, too. Fenugreek? Silphium A fun option- it is extinct now but was a highly prized spice in the ancient world. Many theories about what it might have been. Give it special powers? Healing when eaten? Sunflowers Already in the game, but I wanted to mention that they should be able to be pressed for oil, like flax and olives. Oh, and most crops that get pressed for oil should leave behind cakes that can be used as animal fodder. Sesame Another source of oil. Hemp I'll make my pitch again for a fiber and oil source. Yes, there will be jokes- ignore them. Abaca The source of Manila hemp, from the tropics. Actually a tree in the banana family, broken up for it's fibers. Figs Sort of seems like an almost obligatory warm-climate fruit, especially for an Old Word feel. Dates Again, sort of seems vital to warmer Old World settings. Grapes Is this in the game already? Seems like it should be. Like the beans, though vining might be an implementation challenge. Beavers Ok, not a crop. But if rivers ever get implemented wouldn't beaver dams be neat? Also- fur! Madder EDITED because I just saw this mentioned in another thread, and it's a great idea! An "earthy" red dye, sort of "brick red". Or think of it as a little "orangey", it could almost have a color like terracotta at times. We already have woad for blue- there is a reason that blue and red were the most common colors around. And on that note, some other common dyes... Dyer's Chamomile Bright yellow. Weld Also yellow, and from a similar climate, so maybe only one or the other? You can make green from this and woad combined- multistep crafting! Or weld using iron as a mordant looks more green. Saffron Golden yellow, from warm climates. Hmm, yellows seem common... But saffron is different enough from the prior two to be included separately. And saffron is also a spice. Murex Purple, of course. We could just find them like shells, but they should be very rare. Henna Orange-ish. From Africa, Middle East, and Asia. Oak Gall For black. Walnut For brown. Also, nuts! Kermes A rich scarlet or crimson red, to contrast with madder, but I'm not sure how harvesting tiny insects might be implemented (it's sort of like cochineal). Perhaps you just find clusters of them on oaks in warm climates, like the way that you find resin on pines? It needs a Mediterranean climate, whereas madder is less picky- Kermes should be much more rare than madder! Fire away!

Still stirring the pot, eh? Damn, I thought that we had reached an accord, there. Not to mention, do you always fixate on glib offhand comments like that? Go touch grass, Lady. Processing speed, working memory, and attention span all decline with age. (I can testify to working memory- I keep forgetting where I put things.) This is so-called fluid intelligence. No, these aren't "plasticity", but that's the phraseology that seems to be used in lay discussions, and I didn't feel like penning a 20-page footnoted dissertation to get my point across. My bad? And no, these are not insurmountable, but they are challenges. Interestingly, crystallized intelligence increases with age... up to a point. As I understand it, it turns out that general knowledge and experience do matter a bit. But I admit that this subject is getting out of my area of expertise, so if you really want to continue to be snippy, here is your chance because I'm not really going to put up a fight. Still accusing others of your own shortcomings? Regarding "inaccuracies" and "addressed", I mean? I have been quite willing to be critical of my own assumptions- I did so several times, and even told you the ways in which it turned out that you were correct about thrown spears. Take the win, there. I mean, really? Who is entrenching here? Yes, a standardized shotgun slug is used. For, y'know, defining standards. Just like there is a standard ISO 3103 cup of tea (which is horrible tea, actually). And no, regarding body armor "stopping" does not mean "bounces off". Yes, deforming armor can still cause injury- I have treated several fellows with rib and sternum fractures... who were alive because the projectile was stopped instead of passing through their body. Admittedly, those guys wore hard plates, not just soft aramid, and were shot with rifles, but the principle stands. Almost any rifle round will easily pass straight through the level IIIa soft armor that will stop a shotgun slug, and through the body behind it too, and possibly through the back of the body armor as well. And you generally don't wear soft body armor on your head- you wear a helmet, for which 44mm of deformation would indeed generally be considered a failure. IIRC one standard is 25mm (the NIJ standard, I think?) and even less on the crown and sides where the skull is vulnerable. (EDIT- Yes, I looked it up, the standard is 16mm on those areas, though this can vary by contract.) And yes, I have seen men killed by deforming helmets. Which in no way invalidates what I said about armor rating standards. So yet again, you are spouting off about a subject with which you have an incomplete understanding. And I wager that again you will refuse to learn. Instead of glancing at a web-page desperately trying to find excuses to attack people, ask questions for the love of God! I'm truly done with you now, though. Too much bitter contrarianism and entrenchment. So, how long are you going to keep looking for retaliatory opportunities?

A real man may not fear bee stings, but a smart man is wise enough to use a smoker...

You kind of need a lot for wattle fencing, and wattle and daub, too. It'd be nice if we could coppice or pollard trees, maybe, but that seems like it might be complex to implement. Perhaps if you leave a one-block stump, a nest of branchy leaves grows? For the correct types of trees, that is. (Alder and willow might be decent additions to the game, for this.)

Yes, I am aware. But my point is that you can mass-produce boards in huge quantities by cutting down a small tree, yet you have to scrounge around for sticks.

I sort of expected to be able to put firewood and an ax in the crafting grid and get sticks, but that doesn't work. Maybe it should?

It would be nice if there were another use for feather. I always seem to accumulate huge amounts of them. The problem is that I can't think of many. Down clothing, perhaps? And a down bed. Down clothing would be warmer than furs or almost anything else, but less durable. A down bed would just be warmer. Maybe other feather clothing, like headdresses and the cloaks that the Aztecs used to wear? But none of these will consume huge numbers of feathers. Perhaps we could make fishing flies that last a bit longer than using worms or stinkbait? Then fly fishing would work differently than other fishing- you'd have to land your cast near a fish for one to strike. A fly fishing simulator would be pretty neat Otherwise, I'm coming up empty.

You make my argument for me. Sort of. Remember, terminal ballistics is one of my things, and I get a lot of argument from people who learned the subject from video games. And real life is indeed balanced... Shotguns are shitty weapons for modern conflict- no army issues shotguns en mass to their infantry for a reason. Range and penetration both suck. So, the rule of thumb is 1 inch of spread per yard of distance (only slightly more than your one degree, actually- about 1.6 degrees). Thus shotguns are literally useless beyond 80m or so, at least with shot- slug is different. Heck, hitting someone at only 50 yards with 00 would be highly questionable to be a "stop". 30 yards is about the point where you cannot truly rely upon it, though I might extend that a bit further for things like Flight Control ammunition. Slightly. FBI practice was to transition to slug beyond 30 yards or so. It turns out that buckshot effectiveness is highly dependent upon the number of pellets hitting. Three is the usual number cited, and based totally upon patterning assuming that the shot was accurate the odds come out to ~100% inside 25 yards, 80% at 40 yards, 50% at 50 yards, on up to 10% at 70 yards. (Note that this is a mathematical model that will overestimate the odds.) At 70 yards with an M16, I would hit 100% of the time, and with a projectile that is a hell of a lot more deadly than a shotgun pellet. Heck, I would hit 100% of the time out to three times that range. With iron sights, no optic. And at any range buckshot will not penetrate even soft level IIa body armor. Slugs cannot penetrate soft body armor, either- level IIIa soft body armor is defined as stopping a shotgun slug, no plate needed. There are specialty armor piercing slugs for shotguns, but they tend to keyhole beyond 10m or so because you are launching long, thin projectiles out of a smoothbore and that doesn't work as well as they do in a tank's main gun. Shotgun shells are also huge, so magazine capacity is highly limited. But they remain overpowered in video games only because the gamerbois expect it. It is a meme that was established in the early moments of the gamerverse, back when packets were small and the phone modems were hot. They expect ridiculously high damage at close ranges, and since most video games make armor effectiveness a percent damage reduction (which is very unrealistic) they seem to penetrate armor well. And that ain't true. See: Gunshot Wounds: Practical Aspects of Firearms, Ballistics, and Forensic Techniques, Vincent DiMaio. The Defensive Shotgun, Awerbuck. For general terminal ballistics reading I usually point people at one of my old schoolbooks, because even though it is based upon old Vietnam War data it is still instructional, and as a government publication it is available for free online: Conventional Warfare: Ballistic, Blast, and Burn Injuries, The Borden Institute, https://medcoe.army.mil/borden-tb-conventional-warfare-ballistic-blast Check out the authors. Ron Bellamy was one of my professors- a gigantic figure in the field. His Vietnam Vascular Database was highly respected. The same generally holds for snipers- reality is already balanced, because few games make sniping as hard as it should be. Again, in real armies snipers are rare for a a reason. Wind alone makes it hard as hell. I do long range shooting and I'll tell you, the hardest part is doping the wind. Thank God for Kestrels. But also, too few games implement parallax and fatigue well enough, leaving it far too easy for a sniper to run around, stop, and immediately plug someone. Some of those rifles are also incredibly heavy, and snipers cannot generally just jump up and run away when they get spotted- it takes time to break down a hide and load up. Snipers are usually alone or in small teams, so they are easily overwhelmed by firepower or fire and maneuver. Which is not a great threat in a video game, but in real life you die, so they tend to be very careful and don't shoot a lot. If they attract too much attention their opponents tend to point some manner of grid square removal system at them. Barrels heat up and mirage obscures the view, making a series of many sequential shots almost impossible. But honestly, it is very difficult to demonstrate the downsides of sniper weapons in a computer game. That's why they seem over-powered. But real-life is still balanced. For a bunch of gamer idiots in an arena game they might seem unfair, but for real life militaries their uses are limited. A sniper team isn't going to take a hardened defensive position with trenches, razor wire, overlapping fields of fire, and mines for you. Mind you, I'm coming at sniping from a military (and milsim) point of view. If the Great Lord PUBG just dropped 100 randos into an arena, yes, the snipers would probably dominate. Patience counts. Basically, every player would become a sniper/countersniper.

But does it stop spoilage? I had assumed not. But I'm new, so I might be seeing a problem where none exists.