Content: Slate Blackcurrant Watermelon Strawberry Orange Banana Apple Emerald Chocolate Marble
Background: Slate Blackcurrant Watermelon Strawberry Orange Banana Apple Emerald Chocolate Marble
Pattern: Blank Waves Notes Sharp Wood Rockface Leather Honey Vertical Triangles
Welcome to TerraFirmaCraft Forums

Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to contribute to this site by submitting your own content or replying to existing content. You'll be able to customize your profile, receive reputation points as a reward for submitting content, while also communicating with other members via your own private inbox, plus much more! This message will be removed once you have signed in.

  • Announcements

    • Crysyn

      Only help if you can be helpful

      Hey All, A topic has come up of late in the IRC channel in regards to the general feel of the forums and the community that supports them. Things have progressed further than I would have liked with out this being addressed more publicly because I would much rather have snubbed this out sooner rather than later.. but I have been busy. Here is the general rule I would like people to follow: Wheaton's Law "Don't be a dick." Those of you from the IRC channel know that this is the only rule I ask people in there to follow and we generally have a good and lively time chatting about all manner of things. This is basic rule that just about everyone understands and I am going to expand it to the forums from here moving forward. If you can not help people in a helpful and polite manner then I simply ask you to stop. Now I generally take a back seat to moderating the forums as I like to participate in the suggestions forum fairly heavily at times and would rather do so as a forums user than a moderator. But I am also fairly well known for being the person who constantly puts their foot down and so I am stepping up and doing so on here. If you find yourself unable to respond to a message politely then I ask that you do not respond. This mostly focuses on the increasing level of hostility found within the Suggestion forum as well as the Server forum. I do not care if this is the 30th some odd time you have seen someone make the same suggestion. Or even if the new post on an older topic is one entry above the old one. I expect the members of this forum to respond politely to the user, new or old, and point to the older topic if it applies and even go the extra step to suggest they either add in new information or to summarize the outcome of the previous discussion based upon the new post's entry into it. That is what we are here for, that is why I close most topics instead of deleting them, so that they can be found and referenced down the road. The next topic is the slew of derailment attempts I have seen as of late. If you want to have fun and joke around that is what the off topic forum is for and pretty much anything goes there. I do not expect to read a suggestion thread and have to go through 3 pages of image memes people have shot back and forth. Quite simply this is a waste of my time to read and then have to clean up. Now for the summary. I am going to start taking a more active role, especially in policing the suggestion forum, and handing out warn levels to people whom I see doing this. These will be indiscriminate and applied not to just the first person who derails or is impolite on a topic or response, but to everyone whom follows the lead of that person. As I do not like doing things with out giving you all warning this post shall serve as that warning. If you have a desire to bring this topic up with me then I invite you to do so on the IRC channel. Lets raise the level of quality and grow the community. Let us not descend into the quality often found on the minecraft or league of legend forums. There is simply no need for that here. Be passionate about things, just do not be abusive.
    • Kittychanley

      Offline Servers

      Recently I've seen a few server listings showing up on the first page of the Servers forum that have been closed for an extended period of time, but have recently gotten a reply from a new member who didn't realize the server is offline. To help prevent this from happening in the future, it would be greatly appreciated if you could use the report function on the original post of any servers that have been confirmed as offline, so that the topic may be locked. If you are the admin of a server and plan on taking the server offline, please use the report function on the original post of your topic to let the TFC Staff know that the topic should be locked. If you are the admin of a server that has a locked topic, and would wish to bring the server back online, please use the report function on the original post of the topic to let the TFC Staff know that the topic should be unlocked. As always, please remember to follow rule #3 of the servers forum and update your topic title to contain the version of TFC that the server is currently running. You can do so by editing the OP, and then clicking on "Use Full Editor."


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Darmo

  1. Encumberance Inventory system

    Some of my concerns with just weight are similar to Tony's I guess. Will anvils and water barrels be super-weighty to simulate the limits now? Specially coded? Or will the player just be able to carry multiples? But not just heavy items. Will a player be able to have a barrel/large vessel full of containers full of very light things in inventory? When starting, can I have my large vessel, filled with vessels, and thus carry every single seed, nugget, and other bric-a-brac I happen to pick up? Plus one full of water? Can I go on an epic gathering trip and have a barrel of vessels for all the berry bushes and saplings, and another for all the flowers? And another for hides and bones and other miscellany? Right now there's a limit because you can only carry one barrel/LV that has stuff in it. I have to choose between a barrel of water or a barrel of items. And there's a practical limit on how many vessels you can have in inventory before it becomes hard to operate I've always thought it weird that arrows and leads didn't fit in vessels. I won't be at all sorry to see those liberalized. But I did think the back carrying limits were a good choice-forcing mechanism on those particular large items, and contributed to the believability of the game. Maybe we don't need the size system for that, but I do hope that something like it is present. I'd be a bit disappointed if that went away.
  2. Encumberance Inventory system

    Heh, that's what I was arguing at first. I wasn't really seeing the benefits of weighted vs size based, and was concerned that if size wasn't still a component, it might be difficult to maintain some of the container hierarchies which play an important part in current inventory management system. But, I realized a few things: - The weight system allows a sliding scale of overburdening with speed reduction, rather than a binary move/not move system. Which is probably a good thing. Though the size system could probably be adjusted to allow a size that disallows sprinting, and another that reduces movement to foliage speed. That many size/speed relations may be hard to balance with containers though, unless none of them fit in containers. - Concerns over building material limitations could ultimately be addressed by simply upping the default weight limit if the devs or community decided it was not 'fun'. If there's a config option for it, there'd really be no reason to complain I think. - Having a weight system allows for magic and potions that can increase the limit. Which provides more unique opportunities for those systems. I'm not sure this would be very easy to code with a purely size based system. - A weight system will probably allow for some gradations of transportation, so a hand cart has a greater weight capacity than a player, a donkey greater than a hand cart, and a mine cart greater than a donkey (or whatever). In a pure size system I think the only way to reflect that would be with variance in number of slots, which given the player inventory already has as many slots as anything, might not have been a huge incentive. So I do think there's some advantages to having weight as a component, though I still think keeping size in the mix is probably a good idea.
  3. A more complex iron age.

    I guess my main question is, if iron tools are made harder to make well, what will be done to discourage people from just skipping them entirely and moving on to steel? Will the iron plates for the Blast Furnace require the same degree of care in making? Creating a separate class of sheets that have some sort of NBT data? I feel like the current game already has something of a tendency to encourage skipping over iron tools entirely, in the push for steel. The lack of graphite being the only true roadblock to that. Or is it just considered that hey, if the player has graphite, good for them?
  4. Encumberance Inventory system

    I hear ya on principles. At the same time, sometimes when presenting an idea, it helps to have at least an outline of a way things *could* work. Even if it's not the best way, or the way the discussion ends up, it can help stimulate it. I think the weight discount could be an interesting mechanic, but only if it's a considered choice between one of several options. If all I have to do is craft a pouch and have it in my inventory, or in a pouch slot, that's easy and a no-brainer. As soon as I have a little extra leather I just do it, and it's there for the rest of the game. Kind of boring. However, if storage options have to be weighed against other wearable options for clothing, then it becomes an interesting gameplay choice that they have to always consider. So if I have to choose between backpack, quiver, or cloak for warmth (assuming we ever have body temperature as a thing). Or breastplate, bandolier, or warm jacket. Greaves, cargo pants, or warm pants. Now the player is having to consider and plan. It's not just something they do once and never again. In that context, I like the idea.
  5. Encumberance Inventory system

    I think this progression of inventory notion hinges on if the goal is to draw out the start longer. But in general I think it'd be sensible and reasonable to have a barrel loaded with liquid weigh a whole heck of a lot, to the point where it slows the player significantly, just on it's own. They're used like backpacks right now, but we could have actual backpacks instead to serve that purpose. Wood too, I think has the chance to be a more involved process. But I'm not that interested in something like a hard limit on tool or barrel quantity. I think the weight is probably enough. I'll probably not carry extras if I don't need to, if weight is at a premium.
  6. Encumberance Inventory system

    I'm not clear what you're suggesting. Are you suggesting we have a hotbar, and a series of wear locations for containers that we have to remove and open up like vessels to access? Or that you start with just a hotbar, craft a 'backpack' and it gives you like, four columns of inventory? Craft a few 'pouches' for a few more columns, etc, or something like that? None of these sounds that attractive to me I guess, but if there were a more detailed proposal...? (perhaps in it's own post?)
  7. Encumberance Inventory system

    Awesome, I'm on board. I guess in the end if the mod has enough awesome stuff people will hopefully come.
  8. Encumberance Inventory system

    If that's the goal, does it need to be building materials? Or what if new items come into play (and existing items adjusted) that are are just too heavy for the player to carry, period? In the magic thread I suggested large crystals, with several sizes a player cannot carry no matter what. What if quern bases, bloomery blocks, blast furnace blocks, crucibles, and beds cannot be carried on the player, but on a cart at minimum? Though quorns are trivial to make so that wouldn't affect the game much if their manufacture does not change. What if mechanisms came into the game, and could not be moved by the player? Bars of ore? Could there be a strategic number of things that are just not player-moveable period, to incentivize transportation? And yet still allow freedom with building materials for people that want that? Material difficulty could definitely expand the game in other ways though, that's for sure. perhaps bringing more incentive for machinery and power. If we're sacrificing some ease of building for general expansion of usefulness of things...that's another matter perhaps.
  9. Encumberance Inventory system

    Creative build, sure, in an absolute sense that's true. But I think most people like some challenge too. Otherwise it's not such an accomplishment. But there's a limit, which is different for everyone. And personally, while I love watching TFC survival LPs, I have no interest in watching a creative build LP. One can kind of look at it that way - if someone is not wiling to watch an LP of a thing, will they want to do it in game? Some grind is unavoidable in the context of minecraft I think - namely ore grinding. But I kind of enjoy it at times, and I think others do. But travelling the same terrain a bunch to transport material...ehhhhh. As for the transport, I'm not sure that providing a use for transport is by itself a great reason to make building materials less transportable. Which is why I was wondering if there are other issues that a weight system would solve, or opportunities it would provide. If the main idea is to reduce buildling material transportability, and hence give impetus to transportation use, what about reducing stone and plank block stack maxes to 8 or 16 in inventory and don't let them go in vessels or barrels? It would have the same effect, would it not? Stacks could still be 32 in a chest on a donkey or minecart or cart? Ore too. You could even make breaking an ore block result in the actual block, (maybe placeable, maybe not), and then the player has to process it somehow to get the ore out, so you can't just pit-kiln ore while you're mining, unless you've set up that machine in the mine. Make those blocks stack low as well. If the processing machine is hard to move, it might incentivize some more minecart use? Even with this system, I feel like donkeys will win out, because they don't require tons of track laying and iron smelting, etc. I don't think we've been told how carts work yet, but I'd presume they slow you down. Can I jump pulling one? Or does it give me the ability to walk up a full block height change, like mobs, and not jump? I love tracklaying, but I think on the balance a donkey is faster, unless the minecart holds quite a bit more. I mean either method of item weights/bulk can accomplish the goal. But will there be a loss of fine gradation in terms of items in vessels and chests? Will ingots have to weigh so much that they can't fit in a chest? Or will that be some kind of hard-coded exception? Tools will have to weigh enough to not fit in vessels or chests either, or that's another hard coded exception? If a bunch of exceptions have to be hard-coded, again, is it an improvement over what we have? If it's just easier to code overall, great. But I'm curious. It kind of seems like maybe the question is boiling down to not so much do we prefer a stone or bulk system, but are we ok with being able to transport a LOT less building material at once?
  10. Encumberance Inventory system

    Are they though? I ask this in all seriousness - how long do people wait to start a serious building (one that is designed, no just a starter hut)? I would guess most people like to do at least a semi-serious take on a house in bronze age. For which a 200 block carry capacity is probably sufficient. It is really the epic builds (or roads) that require a lot more than that. Most of the LPs I've watched involve some fairly serious building attempts before iron iirc. But as it stands, a person can get to bronze and not really go any higher, and still do a lot of building. Though red/blue buckets are still needed for fancy water/lava effects (I'm hoping those buckets are gone in TFC2 though). A more limited inventory would probably be most obvious where a player bases in a location that does not have all the things they *want* - their favorite building materials. Currently it's doable to make many thousands of blocks trips, fill a barrel with vessels full of the material, and run home. A more limited system would hinder this. Forcing the player to either make more trips, or build with what they have, or get transport. An interesting way to alleviate some building material shortage issues, might be to have merchants that actually deal in building material. So the player can use precious metals and gems to buy them from a boat on the island they want to base on. For true convenience they can build in the port where the merchant is, and so be able to transport the material easily. If they want to base off in the boonies, then they'll need a conveyance, but since islands are (last I knew) planned at maybe 4k max diameter, depending on how many merchants any given island had, the player might have to make a maximum of 4k trip to get the materials, which is better than 10k by a long shot. Especially since it's not clear if carts/mules/minecarts can go through portals between islands. Maybe with enough cash (and I mean a LOT of cash), the player can actually pay a merchant to come set up shop in their town. And pay more cash to upgrade the merchant's selection. And more to upgrade the rate at which the merchant gets in blocks each month. Actually this may require it's own post...
  11. [Solved] Saplings, trees, and axe AOE?

    1. Those were probably old videos. The 'wood wall' is an exploit and I think the devs tried to fix it. I thought they had to be more like 4 blocks apart but I guess I don't know for sure. Maybe it depends on tree type? 2. Trees can generate pretty close on world gen, which will sometimes cause them to be 'linked'. And like Mathias says acacias are especially prone to it. Later naturally generated saplings are supposed to spawn no closer than 8 blocks from another tree, making it less likely they will be linked. But saplings placed by the player can be closer. Was the difference about the time that you switched from mostly cutting down natural trees, to cutting down farmed ones?
  12. Encumberance Inventory system

    Huh, interesting. Currently We can carry 256 granite blocks in two vessels. So that's definitely a significant downgrade in terms of building material carrying capacity. Will containers then have a weight capacity, rather than size? Would that mean that tools will then fit in containers? I honestly kind of like the current system, quirky as it is, in the way that certain items such as tools, wood, and ingots, won't fit in containers. It requires better inventory management, and also gives rise to specialized containers and storage solutions which to me enhance the feel of the mod. If there will still be those specializations, great. But I look at specific items right now that to me seem quirky - the bed and quern base fit in vessels for instance. Yet the quern handstone does not. I've wondered it that is intentional, or just oversight. And in this context I wonder how those would be handled in the new system. Will vessels now only be the domain of extremely light items? And stone will not only weigh a lot, but will not fit in vessels, so regardless of the weight of the stone, we'll only be able to fit however many that is (like 50?) in our inventory? Plus a few extra if they can fit in a barrel? Or will it be strict weight, so maybe a vessel holds 8 stone, meaning 8 blocks per vessel? Will each slot be weight limited, or just overall? I feel like it'd be a good idea to keep some sort of size as a factor, with regard to containers anyway. Mostly for non-building materials that may want to be limited in storage options for game balance reasons. And would the back slot still have some items that only go there? Like anvils? Or can the player carry an anvil in inventory if they have the weight capacity? I like the idea in that it opens up much more definite usefulness for transport items like minecarts, carts, and pack animals. And presumably also the upcoming 1.9 boats that will hopefully be able to hold a chest. Maybe even someday magical/mechanic automatons. It would also open up avenues for potions and magics to increase this capacity. It also opens up notions such as raw logs being extremely heavy, and maybe plank blocks too, but raw lumber not so much. So transport in plank form becomes desirable, to the building site, where it's assembled into blocks. In combination with other stuff, could bring progression to materials gathering such as wood and ore perhaps. At the same time, I would hate to see it turn off a lot of people. I think it mainly depends on the dev plan for TFC2. If it's still going to try to cater to people who are primarily builders and maybe don't want to have their building limited by mundane details, or if it's going to be more about the progression to some eventual goal of some kind? TFC already caters to people who want at least some challenge, it seems like. But it also offers things like chisels and more wood/stone options that probably attract some people more than the hardcore-ness. They maybe just put up with the increased difficulty to get their hands on them planks. It seems too me, just from the abstract here, like it will be a step away from primary builders, depending on the actual numbers (but maybe 1.8 is already taking a step away from these people if planks and chisels cannot be implemented). With 256 as an example, I wonder how the weights might scale for other things. Will it be such that the player basically has to choose between armor and weapons, or building material? Like, a tool weighs 5 stone, and a chestplate 20? Or will such items weigh about 1 stone? If 1 stone, then 256 would be nearly unlimited, except for building material. But in the former case, the building material is trivial, and the items weighty, which is similar to what we have now and then I'm not sure much was gained. That's the problem I think - how to balance building materials vs items involved with game progression. They're sort of two entirely different classes of things, that have different audiences to a degree. I would presume the utility items would be balanced to be similar to now in terms of how many the player can carry, so I think the question comes down to building material. I kind of feel like the current system can already be used to balance building materials vs other items, and I kind of like the current system as is, and feel like the permissiveness of building materials as it is provides builders with plenty of leeway for their mad dreams, so I would ask in return: - What are the flaws of the current system? - How is it hoped this new system will solve these flaws? - What new benefits might such a system offer that the current could not? (aside from providing uses for transport) - What are the devs plans for TFC2 with regards to primary builders. This is rhetorical, I know it's probably still being considered. But I'd think it would factor heavily in the direction of things.
  13. [Building] Fantasy Windmill Refuge

    Wow, very nice job! Love the use of trapdoors for detail work and shutters
  14. Initiation of Agriculture

    Agreed. The OP seemed focused on the very beginning though, so I tried to limit myself to that. I think a lot of different areas of the ag system have been touched on in a lot of other posts. Just no overriding topic for it I believe.
  15. 1.7.10 mods with TFCb79

    Desire to see useless items have a use?
  16. Initiation of Agriculture

    The suggestion with regard to wild crops would definitely make the start very hunter-gathery. Personally, I wouldn't mind the stone age being longer, but I'm not sure I want to have to wait through a season of crops to farm food, much less jute, and especially if it's combined with scarcer wild food. And I don't think this suggestion will prolong the stone age. I don't think this suggestion will extend the stone age because there's not been any tech dependencies suggested to make that true. Which you did say is fine, but it sort of conflicts with the opening statement suggesting that extending the stone age is a goal of this change. This change merely hoped that by increasing the food workload, the metal progression will suffer as a result. But the metal progression in the game is relatively simple as it stands - gather surface nuggets, pit kiln them. Making a clay vessel and a couple molds is very fast, they won't be hindered at all if they don't change significantly. And really, making the player an obligate hunter-gatherer in the start is going to require they wander more, which will in turn mean they probably will find plenty of nuggets. Picking nuggets up is easy. Putting them in a vessel is easy. So overall, I don't think what you suggest will impact metal progression all that much. So people will have a pick and saw, but maybe not the time to mine. I think that will frustrate people, and in general I'd imagine most people aren't really looking for an extended hunter-gatherer phase. I do like the general notion of a tree of devices for all production. In my mind it's not really a tree without at least 3 steps, so in the case of grain grinding your first step could be a grinding stone. I'd suggest plants should not give seeds unless mature. That would reduce the ease with which players can get seeds. If more difficulty were desired, it might be interesting if early on, when the player has low skill, they don't just get seeds popping off, but instead have to somehow sacrifice food to try and get seeds. That sets up a choice - food or seeds - which was actually a very real choice historically oftentimes. Offhand I'd say soaking in a large vessel for a time (more clay and large vessels used!). Potatoes wouldn't work for that obviously, but since they are already I think 1st or 2nd highest producing crop, maybe you just can't get seeds from them by soaking. Them or onions. You have to increase your skill with other crops, then eventually you get seeds from everything via harvesting. If the player manages to get a saw before he's teched up in agriculture, then he can soak seeds more efficiently, since barrel is double the capacity of a large clay vessel. I just feel like forcing players to wait through and entire season of crop growth to get seeds is not going to be fun or interesting (and the way suggested requires a bunch of additional items). But giving the players a choice to make via which they can balance their food and seed needs, might be.
  17. I like the dropping of back items on damage, even as a standalone suggestion. I don't think it's a great solution to the corpse issue, because you still take damage, but Bioxx said there's another easy solution, so no prob there I guess. As for stone vs metal, there's already a durability difference, and I think few people currently makes metal knives except as a novelty. Stone shovels are also very common even when the player has higher tier metals. These could possibly be addressed by reducing those stone tool durabilities. But I'm not sure if it's easy to balance the uses (i.e. durability loss of knife in combat vs trimming) It's funny about ark, the first time I watched videos and saw people punching berry bushes and getting all sorts of berries, I was like "ok, this is stupid". I expected different plants specific to different berries - you don't bet blueberries form raspberry bushes. The awesomeness of the dinos though, made me able to overlook it. But as for differing quantities, I guess to me it's fine because it is entirely what drives the progression in that game. In order to get the materials needed for better and better weapons and items, you have to tame progressively better and better dinos to harvest the materials better and faster, and more specifically. The materials grind combined with level limits on items (very artificial imho) is what make the progression there. And I don't think it hurts that game. But dinos are awesome. Tools for materials is not necessarily 'realistic' as I presented it for TFC2, but it's a useful game mechanic I think, and to me anyway, it falls within the realm of believability. It's no more unrealistic than, say, tieing the yield to material of tool. Even the skill wouldn't change the amount of meat and bones on the animal. It's a matter of theoretical efficiency, and I think it's believable for a tool to affect that as well. Oh, and as far as speed, I never did mention, that's one reason to try and make the slice-breaking a block breaking mechanic. The speed can be adjusted for tool material then. On the role of tools in the system - making hunting and butchering focused actions I think one way to bring a unique sort of ambiance to the butchering is by having many tools. Right now, you just find an animal, kill it, get meat. No matter where you are, or what you have. It can be very opportunistic. I think it would be good for the feel of the game to discourage that, and encourage butchering in an actual area, or hunting for animal products as a directed goal. Part of that is the butcher block and clean room - that can be circumvented though. But the other part could be the tools. If meat and any/everything else just pops off to a knife, then the player just carries a knife anyway for food trimming, and with a little effort field-makes a butcher shop, anywhere they're at, and they can get anything. But if there are were specialized tools, the player is not going to carry butchering tools with them everywhere they go. The more tools, the less likely they'll have them. That helps localize butchering to a shop with a rack of specialized tools. And I think that would be good for gameplay, personally. The player won't be out doing something else, run across a deer, and get a bunch of extra goodies from it. They can get some meat, but the rest they need to either have the tools on them, or bring the deer back to the butcher shop. It's far harder to make tools in the field, especially if they can't be pit-kilned. Personally I think the stone knife could be switched a stone cleaver - a stone is knive is basically a cleaver really in some respects. Speaking from fish-cleaning experience, the role of a good knife is allow to make narrow cuts close to the bone, which I cannot imagine a stone knive being good at, and cleavers could believably be used for trimming too. Knives could be metal-only tools. That's kind of an aside though. One the affects on animal husbandry and tool-specific material gains Another factor, right now it seems like after the player has a bit of skill in butchering, there ceases to be an incentive to raise animals. Bones and leather both have pretty limited uses in the game. Once the player has some decent butcher skill, one pig will last a long time in terms of meat. In order to encourag enimal husbandry, I would think it would not be desireable to have the player get tons of everything from each slice. So your choices are basically make each slice yield very little, making it a grinding numbers game, which will probably produce loads of excess of meat or something else, or make it so the player can affect the quantity and likelihood of what they're going for. There's only so many slices per haunch. So if the player needs meat they use that tool, get meat, but very little of anything else. They want bones they use that tool. This allows players to have what they need at a given moment without having to grind. At the same time, because they don't get everything from each slice, they're going to need more animals, assuming there are enough products and uses. So hopefully the player will raise more animals, because they need more things from them, but can't get all at once easily. The meat is the base need, everything else can be relegated to later tools or higher tiers of skill and metal. SUMMARY I hope I'm getting my notion across clearly here - In the case of butchering I think it's a better mechanic for the player to get reasonable quantities of specific things via specific tools, than get smaller quantitites of everything every time from one tool. I think it's better for the obtaining of the things, from a material grind perspective, and I think multiple butchering tools would reduce opportunistic butchering greatly, and make hunting and butchering more directed activities, especially for specialized products (assuming we ever have such products). I think it would also encourage raising of more animals, without making animal raising for specific needs a grind, because the player can focus on a specific material they need, and have it in a reasonable time, rather than having to do more hunting/husbandry/butchering to get what they need, and ending up with tons of potentially wasted side-product. Hopefully in a believable and enjoyable way that adds to the atmosphere of the game. And PS, if later exotic materials are added, more along the lines of dissection (poison glands, phosphorescent glands, brains, hearts, etc) it could easily be an expansion of the same general system, via more special tools, such as scalpels, forceps, bone saws, extractors, syringes etc.
  18. Oh, ok then. Glad there's an easy solution! I did rather like the field dressing stage.
  19. I did think of an issue, if corpses are indeed encumbering - it would be problematic to have an animal corpse drop off in combat, but the player is still trying to fight other enemies, yet they are suddenly immobilized by a corpse they got close to and picked up. That's definitely a scenario to be avoided. Not entirely sure how to avoid that without making corpses simply not immobilize people. Takes a bit of the work out of the system, but I guess better than getting killed by it. I guess another option could be if the corpse immediately places itself either as a block, or as a place-able item (like large unfired clay vessels are placed in a pit kiln). Not sure if that would lead to eventual issues with clutter, since they wouldn't de-spawn then. But then, maybe the player should clean up their mess I guess. It would also be kind of cool if a placed corpse in block form eventually decayed down to a pile of bones if left over enough time.
  20. Stone is actually terrible for butchery. At least if you value your tools. Butcher blocks were historically made of hard woods, end grain up, as the cleaver could hit this and not be damaged, and by hitting the end grain, the wood is self-healing to a degree. The block was kept well oiled (mineral, tung, linseed), and cleaned, which kept the blood and bacteria from finding purchase. If the butcher block and butcher are both good, there will be no sawdust or wood chips to speak of. Code-wise, I wonder if it's even possible to use the cooking surface, because cooking surfaces technically take the block above the block you put them on, I think. I know I've had torches on the wall block me making a cooking surface several times. So the haunch would have to replace it. And then you could just use any old block. By using a burdensome butcher block, I was hoping to again encourage people to do their butchery at an established place, not just plop down a bunch of wood or stone blocks in the field and go to town. It won't stop it, but it'll help discourage it.
  21. Mechanisms and Mechanical Power

    Utility issues aside, I think perhaps the best route for such power to take - should it ever be implemented - would be simply mechanisms and rods. Mechanisms will be familiar to DF players. There they operated through quantum mechanics, no linkages required! But TFC could simply have a block called a mechanism, and to transfer power between them, rods. If you want to see a real-life example of this, check out this page, or this one which shows pictures from an oil field in Illinois that, at least in 2003 when the pictures were taken, was still operating off of what I'd call 19th century technology - a central power house, and then a series of rods that transfer that power to various wells on the property. It's a fascinating system that is apparently nearly self-sustaining, being powered off the natural gas from the oil it pumps. The hard part would be the maintenance of the rod lines I think. But it's incredible to look at, being supported with simple Y-shaped logs and branches, and yet it does real work. So, you'd basically have two mechanisms. Between them you can string some specific length of rod. Perhaps longer for higher tier metals. Any time you change direction, you have to use a mechanism, except that they will go up and down with the terrain in a straight 45 degree diagonal, again, as long as there is a mechanism at each end. Then whatever you want to power must be next to a powered mechanism. It'd be graphically simpler I think, than try to do a bunch of gears and cogs convincingly, and would only require two types of blocks. The mechanisms could be designed graphically to be not dependent on direction, so truly a single block for them. The rods would need a variety to account for all the configurations, but they would be fast to create I think, and hopefully low overhead.
  22. Heh, well, I'm an irl hunter, so highly pixelated animal corpses have no chance of grossing me out. but I guess it may be a concern for some. I think it's basically a matter of textures though - I don't really see why the method of gathering would be a concern. I might try to put some examples together, maybe there could be options for both tastes.
  23. I was just thinking sticks anyway, so 3-4 sticks vs 5-9 wouldn't be a big difference. The main sacrifice for the sledge is the speed reduction. The notion of large corpses being extremely large could lead to things like leading the cow into the butcher room, and killing it there, to avoid the hauling of the corpse, rather than just killing it in the field. At least bringing it indoors. It's a small act, but I think it would help lend a sense of authenticity to the process.
  24. Well, this *is* the TFC2 suggestion forum. I hope it's assumed that all suggestions here are for TFC2. If you're playing TFC at work and your boss sees, I think there's going to be other problems aside from the detail level of the butchering system. But ya, I'm not suggesting it be super-graphic. No more so than the existing chunks of meat. The corpse would need to be pretty generic and stylized anyway unless each mob has their own. If the graphics is the concern, that can be toned up or down according to player taste. The idea there was kind of to both give a logical step for skinning to occur, if a more thorough skinning mechanic is desired, but also to give another level of risk/reward. Sure, you killed that bear, but if you want that large hide you have to skin it basically where it died. If it's close to night you risk attack. There could even be increase predator spawn chance when a corpse is in place. So players could like, build a temporary hut around it, or come back later, etc. But it makes such a significant kill, presumably with more meat products, also have a few more risks. And though fidelity to RL isn't the end-all be-all in TFC, it does bring some of this - If you kill a deer irl, you're not carrying it anywhere. You have to cut it up in pieces (unless you can reach it with a vehicle obviously). The player can just hack it to piece with an axe quick-like, but no large hide then. Another thought might be to have a sledge the player can pull, and large carcasses could fit on that. No sprinting though!
  25. Why TFC Multiplayer is highly problematic.

    Maybe I've been playing computer games all wrong, but imho, aside from a very few cases where I made some lasting friends, every computer game I've ever played, no matter how much depth or shiny design, was ultimately 'a wank'. Unless you've figured out how to make irl cash off a game, or otherwise derive a lasting benefit, it's ultimately a waste of time in the same way many hobbies are. But if you enjoy it, that's all it needs to be justified. It's no more wasting of time than watching sports, or most of 'entertainment' television, certainly. Resource-wise, yes, on big servers you have to be willing to either travel a bit, or join another town. It would probably help the game a lot if caving wasn't so unattractive right now due to the cave-in mechanic. That would allow deep exploration without tedious boreholes and branch mining. I think part of that issue stems from the creative nature though - many people don't want to have to deal with a 'committee' of townsfolk, or a dictatorial mayor - they want to build whatever they want, how they want, and also not log in and find out someone else logged out with the red bucket, or best picks. Cooks in the kitchen and all. And that's no fault of the game, that's human nature. Edit: I would also add, that the devs have stated in the past that they are designing the game with 'small' groups in mind. So to some degree there's a conscious choice in the design - not for huge servers. I believe the popping off of nuggets is what causes large servers to feel depleted. I think people pop off starting metal for their first tools, and later pop off nuggets of good ores to 'hide' the deposits for themselves, and then don't harvest the vein before they get bored and quit, leaving a deposit with no surface clues. Personally, I make it a policy when starting, to never pop off all surface nuggets in starting metal groups (copper, zinc, bismuth, cass), if I can avoid it. I try to always leave at least one nugget in place as a marker. And I NEVER pop off the surface nuggets after I have a good starting tool supply, unless I'm actively mining the vein, and have decided I want to fully pursue it. That is, except within a couple hundred blocks of my town. Even on a towny protected server, it's very aggravating to invite someone to your town, and then have them start running around popping off surface nuggets within a few chunks of your town. Even then, if I ever decide to quit, I plan to go back and mark all those close veins with signs. I think if more people would be considerate citizens like that, it would help large servers a lot. I do think it's a fair point that the game is very one-dimensional in it's tech progression right now. The metal tech is very in-depth and drawn out, and functionally - in terms of fighting badies - everything beyond maybe bronze, and certainly steel, is arguably a bit unnecessary, unless you want to move source blocks. The other 'techs' are very shallow. I don't think it's for lack of desire - old forum posts are littered with grand plans - it's just they don't have a big team, like you mentioned. However, if you don't already know, there is a TFC2 in the works. It is still in planning stages, and sounds like it will be a different sort of game in terms of the overall progression of the game. There's still room for input there, I think, so you might want to check out that forum.