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."
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Bioxx

Encumberance Inventory system

143 posts in this topic

Ok so since I'm just pondering this at the moment, I've decided to make a suggestion post to hear thoughts on this subject. The suggestion below is purely speculation and may or may not happen.

 

Specifically I'm talking about adding some sort of weight to items as an alternative to the clunky size/weight system from TFC1. Here are some thoughts in no particular order.

  • Will use a reference based weight system instead of anything real world based so that we can avoid those arguments. The unit of measurement would be based on Raw Granite Stone blocks and be called, simply, Stone. So one granite block is equal to 1 stone. Lighter stones such as Shale might be 0.8 stone per unit. Other lighter items such as a ceramic jug might only be 0.1 stone.
  • Player has some number as the default carry capacity. Lets use 256 as our max capacity just for discussions sake.
  • Being able to carry obscene amounts of really heavy objects like stone won't be possible and will require other transportation methods such as the hand cart that I've already added or minecarts.
  • Overburdening yourself should be possible but will cause a linear movement speed reduction.

Any questions/suggestions/observations are welcome.

9

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I absolute love it. One thing I would add is that heavy objects should be carried in containers. So as you go mining the rocks would pile inside a barrel in your back, and not in your inventory. The heavier the barrel, the slower you move. One important feature would be the automatic placement of the barrel upon the player being attacked.  That would free the player to fight or flee and come back latter.

Some things will need more or less weight depending on gameplay balancing and no way should be based on real life. I agree with that. After all no one can transport that much stone on their backs. On another hand it may be interesting to make some items a lot heavier than  in real life. Like for example pottery and food in general.

That would go in hand with the suggestion for butchering, where the player should not be able to lift all the meat from a bear by himself.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How are you going to handle very light items, such as berries etc.?
would they be 0.01 stone or some such?

 

Might it be possible to use the TFC1 system of ounces for "smaller" items (including most food), and then the stone for "larger" items.

A ceramic vessel with 2 or more items would have a static weight of (e.g.) 0.5 or 0.75 stone, and they would not be able to hold any items with a "stone" weight as these would (by definition) be too big and heavy.

 

One thing to be aware of if you're not already is that the stone *is* a unit of weight in the real world - equal to 14 pounds.

For any of us Brits of a certain age, it's just as real as ounces :)

Edit:
I like the idea of stones etc. needing to be carried in a "container" - barrel, minecart, handcart...

And as TonyLibaretto says, it will fit in very nicely with the butchery idea.

Edited by ChunkHunter
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would personally go with an inverse movement speed formula once you hit the point of over-encumbrance, simply because of my experiences with heavy objects. Once somethings heavy enough to inconvinience you, life kinda starts sucking when it comes to getting to your destination quickly. However, past that, the only thing that stops you from trying heavier objects is the simple things in life.....

 

Risk of death...

 

Being unable to lift it in the first place...

 

Too many impractical sharp edges that would make things a dumb idea....

 

Of course, I would also try to tie your maximum encumberance to your characters reletive health level, which might add an engaging element to long journeys of "Crap. I won't be able to get everything home with my ankles broken like this.... Better find a way to hide this stuff so I can find it later without it getting stolen."

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you are confusing getting the groceries from the car to the kitchen to actually having a heavy burden on your back.  A wood cutter with a heavy log on his shoulder is not going to walk faster, a soldier with an 80 pounds backpack is not going to walk faster. 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Edited by Darmo
1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like it as long as it doesn't add more grind than TFC already has. Any handicap should be "upgradable" to a method that is easier to get things done. Building requires huge amount of resources so i would like to see building still being viable. Building will always be an end-game scenario.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 Building will always be an end-game scenario.

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...

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

IMO limiting inventory space in games gets in the way of fun way too much. Inventory management, while "realistic" is NOT fun in a building game.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have always been a fan of encumberance but I heseja's point highlights how dificult it is to get right. I've been formulating a two-fold solution which has been touched upon in part.

First ensure the player can observe the logic behind the rules. This is primarily graphical in it's manifestation. The item icons don't really help with this, as they effect the 'pokeball syndrome'.

Second though is provide the literal and interaction based tools to allow solutions. Being restricted from taking the log you've just cut down home is much less frustrating when you are allowed the tools to build a solution. This hinges upon interaction with the world, allowing manhandling of objects by dragging them perhaps.

If we can ensure the player can see the need for the limitation such that they don't really need to be told of its existance, and instead would miss its absence then we will be more likely to accept it readily.
 And whatever dificulties we face seem like entertainment when we know we have all the tools we need to solve it, and the solution is based on out efforts rather than being a fault of the mechanics.

 

I feel that any solution to the issue of encumberance needs to be measure on two axes to maintain a degree of reality. The weight of the item and its bulkiness. To work with this I think things like holsters might be good idea. I have no idea about coding but they certainly have evidence in real life. Anyone who needs several tools with them uses hosters of some type, and its very rare for someone's entire set of accoutrements to be carried in one resceptacle.

Certainly any attempt at internal logical consistency requires a diverse range of transports to fascilitate the aims most players have. The question becomes, I suppose, how do we scale this effectively.

 

Items

Irrespective of the mechanics one solution might be a progression of containers. Pockets and pouches, rucksacks and bags, and finally as many have speculated handcarts. Not withstanding TonyLiberatto's suggestions of course.  That might also address some issues surrounding variable types of item and block being dificult to measure by one system.

Another might be more subtle interactions effected by means of the 'grab'/'grapple'.

 

I have some more specific ideas for solutions. I'd be happy to mock them up for you with diagrams and such if my ideas seem good to others.

 

Hope that all soundd respectful, and I'm aware the ideas weren't absolutely original.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the point to consider is that if all you want is build, you can always switch the game to creative and have all the building materials instantly available for you.

 

Any serious building in Survival should be a testament to your capacity as a leader to organize players in a community effort. How good is your tribe as far as collecting building materials? It gives a totally different sense of accomplishment when you and others know how hard it was to gather those materials.

 

Another aspect is that the only way hand carts, wagons and animal cargo will be a thing is if there is a need for them. For as long as you are able to carry all that yourself, why would you go to the trouble of domesticating a mule?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another aspect is that the only way hand carts, wagons and animal cargo will be a thing is if there is a need for them. For as long as you are able to carry all that yourself, why would you go to the trouble of domesticating a mule?

 

This is precisely it. I used to toy with railcraft in a mod pack in the past and it always bothered me how little point there was to making trains to carry goods.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is precisely it. I used to toy with railcraft in a mod pack in the past and it always bothered me how little point there was to making trains to carry goods.

 

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.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Darmo Doing what you're suggesting regarding stacksizes isn't really possible in mc off the top of my head. Stack sizes are determined either by the item itself or the container in which it resides. And it applies to ALL items in that container. So for the player to have a max stack size of 16 stone, ALL items in the players inventory would have to have a max stack size of 16 OR stone can only stack to 16 in ALL inventories. There is not middle ground with how containers work in mc. Obviously limiting the players inventory is a no-go and setting the stack size to 16 just keeps the same problem and makes others worse.

 

Obviously there is the argument to be made about efficiency but that ultimately just requires a discussion of balance and a reason to not take a donkey deep underground into your mines for instance. As for the builders among us, Nothing really changes for them except a slight bit more inventory management since they'll have to go back to their work cart or other transportation source to pick up a bit more stone.

 

On the flipside, what we gain is a more fully realized world with a purpose to a vanilla mechanic (minecarts) that even mojang has yet to provide.

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So far I love the way this is going.

I envision a mine to actually need tracks and minecarts. The player would need to extend the tracks from the surface and keep filling the minecart. On the surface there would be a wagon pulled by horses or bulls. 

People talk about building, but this idea would not interfere with the actual building. When I am about to build something the maximum I get is 2 stacks of whatever materials I am using and if I have to go back to a chest to get more is no big deal.

The way we have now in many cases is possible for a single player to go down a mine and get all the ore plus a whole bunch of rocks. It totally denies the possibility for any one to actually want transportation. 

It would also add value to transportation. In the sense of a caravan.

How much it would be worth to have goods delivered to your place if it was otherwise time consuming to do it yourself?

Edited by TonyLiberatto
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah I'm definitely liking how this is shaping up as well.

 

I agree with Darmo and Bioxx that it creates a more fully realised world, that is what I was trying to get accross with the idea of internal logical consistency.

 

TonyLiberatto

Another aspect is that the only way hand carts, wagons and animal cargo will be a thing is if there is a need for them. For as long as you are able to carry all that yourself, why would you go to the trouble of domesticating a mule?

Which point I feel adresses this point? :/ right?

 

We have also brought into the convosation the purpose of transportation. I agree that there needs to be a neccessity. I defiitely feel that having neccessities of transportation which are logical increase immersion which I'm a big fan of. In this vein we need to be careful not to make things feel crowbarred in. As though they're there so as to give the transport a need. The solution to which I think rests on that obvious logical aspect of a bloomery fitting in your pocket.

 

The other point to make however is that real world transportation rellies on geographically dispirate resources. We mine in this place and transport it home becasue we wouldn't want to live near the mine for various reasons. I'm not trying to digress into the geography of TFC2, rather to highlight that a portion of the features transport/encumberace require will depend on the geographical neccessities of the world.

 

The point this all raises with Steve is that maybe he should be able to carry barely anything when we start. I appreciate it would certianly be a rebalance but I understood that that was the idea anyway.

I lie the idea of being able to carry basicaly nothing other than what you can with two hands myself. Then having to make up sacks and bags. This would integrate the idea of transportation logically by having it there from the start. We woudl then be required to live very hand to mouth initially and we would have transportation as a logical evolution of encumberance.

I feel as though that would add in the idea of neccessary transport options and bind it into the world physics naturally, and would make things like pockets, and holsters quite useful.

What do you all think of that?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...What do you all think of that?

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?)

Edited by Darmo
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What do you all think of that?

 

The #1 issue with that is that stuff despawns. When you limit inventory that drastically, players are going to have to constantly drop and pick stuff up to switch between them. If I only have two hands, and therefore have to set down my food so I can pick up some rocks to knap a new tool, which will then require me to drop the rocks so I can put the tool head in my inventory, and then drop whatever is in the other slot so I can pick up a stick to craft the two together, I see that getting ridiculously annoying very quickly. I also then have to worry about storage options from essentially the moment I spawn in the world, because otherwise everything I gather is going to despawn.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is an interesting idea, but only with a progression system. Now, I have no idea:

 

a) If the metal/tech progression system in TFC2 will be similar to that from TFC1. I'm basing my suggestions on "how it is now".

B) If coding a horse (donkey, mule) pulled cart is doable in a reasonable manner. If not, then some suggestions need to be adjusted accordingly.

 

Having said that...

 

1) Early game. We have only our inventory. Let's not be too particular and say we have only our hands, because that would not be playable at all. It can still be the size it is now, we just cannot lift too much in terms of weight and maybe not too many of the same, big items (like who can carry ten axes together?). We are hunter gatherer. We make one axe, one shovel, one knife. We gather seeds (those are light and small), food (not very heavy too), ore nuggets (not very heavy). We travel the land and look for a place to put down roots...

(Logic: max one of the same kind of tool, ie one knife, one axe, one shovel, one of any other kind. We can make another only if the current one breaks. We can keep as many tool heads as we want, as long as they are not too heavy. This is true for the whole game. One big vessel or barrel on our back, but none in the inventory. I was thinking about cap for small vessels too, but I'm afraid to mess with casting and food management too much...)

 

2) We decide on a temporary (or final) place for our future home. We build a basic shelter. We can fire big vessels to store stuff so we can basically empty our inventory of the stuff we initially gathered. We can go and look for stuff to build and stuff to progress.

At this point we need a cart to haul stuff. One, to allow us to cart more heavy things, two, to allow for bigger items. Tools should be able to go into carts, even the ones too big for chests. First could maybe be crafted even without saw*, with axe only? But it would be crude (seriously slowing us down) and small, not giving us much more weight/space limit. Maybe half single chest size?

*the only thing is I cannot imagine a recipe in 2x2 crafting grid...

 

3) We have basic tools, including saw. The second (if we do the first, crude one at all) cart comes along. This one should be single chest size, much more resource demanding than cart (so people do not use carts instead of chests when not necessary), but allow every kind of thing to go inside (tools, logs) and have bigger weight limit.

Also, if possible, horse driven cart. More resources needed, higher capacity and weight limit.

 

4) Next step would be to make iron / steel strengthened carts, human pulled and horse driven, each having progressively more inventory space and weight limit. So that the best cart has like 10-20 times more than what a human can carry.

 

5) If horse driven carts are possible, human pulled ones should have significantly lower capacity. If not, then for the sake of gameplay the best ones just need to fit a LOT in ;)

 

Weight limit for player should be related to our max health level, although I would set a minimum that would be what a player starts with and not go below that. The only thing that would temporarily alter that would be hunger/thirst.

 

Overburdening: should be possible to some degree, should get exponentially worse with time. That would allow us, early game, to transport some heavy stuff (logs to make a campfire or basic small house) over short distances. So, if we cut down a tree, we can either take logs one by one and walk normally or take a stack of 16 and walk 30 meters before we slow down to almost nothing. Putting down the heavy stuff should result in us "catching our breath" (2 in-game minutes?) and being able to lift it and carry it again for a while. The speed of slowing down would of course be dependant on the level of overburdening. 1% over limit should be noticeable only after longer time, 50% (100%?) almost instantly.

 

Overall, I imagine the whole gameplay to be harder at the beginning, but giving us some bonuses at a later stage (like, with iron strengthened cart and a horse we can haul 20 barrels full of salt water and drown in brine ;) ).

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 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.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@miamia
Yup that's definitely the gist of it. Progression is something I can't comment on too much until we know much more about Steve's abilities and limitations. But it's a nice sketch of the idea.

@Trix
That would be a fairly severe limitation, to the idea. I certainly didn't intend for people to be dropping and picking things up all the time.
I assumed we'd just be able to shift place them like we do for most things early game. E.g. Pots, tools, ingots.
I'll have to check out to see what can and can't be shift placed. I'll think about that. Maybe I will make another post.

@Darmo
Well I suppose it depends on exactly what's decided on for encumberance. Effectively yes we have a minimal carry capacity to start with and that's expandable with whatever the system allows (backpacks I suppose).
We would only need a variety of storage options if the rest of the factors of gameplay neccsitated it. My idea was more in essense to ensure that there was a hard observable link to the things you carried. An effective solution to which would be to have the character craft the various resceptacles.

What they might be would depend primarily on how complex we'd like it to be. I think the idea of a hotbar being built of the pockets and pouches you'd created would be very cool. You could manually assign the number to it. If it was a pouch pressing the number would open an inventory GUI. If it was a holster it would switch to that tool, I'd find that system realy immersive and entertaining because there would be a logistical and mechanical reward for my effective organisation.

I appreciate that's quite unusual however. One thing I think would be more generic is a discount on weight/encumberance based on specialised holders. If your sword and axe being holstered reduced its effective weight, I'd go for that. It would be realistic and entertaining.

 

Whatever the case I feel that to avoid encumberance feeling like padding for the game, or becoming tedious which is the great danger. We might focus on observable benefits from a mechanical standpoint. To the same end it needs to benefit from direct interaction with the world. What you can do should be what is natural. Being down a mine and needing a minecart to mine out all the ore just makes sense to me. As does needing a means to transport a large amount of building materials long distances. Or actually setting up a base near a new ore vein in the desert, because noone wants to live there, but that's where the coal is.
 

Apologies for concentrating on priciples but what I'm trying to do is discuss a groundwork rather than try to build a game that I am not building. Throw some ideas around that stimulate the minds of Kitty, and Bioxx. Hope that's helpful.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Trix

 

Who was that response meant for? There is no one by the name of trix in this thread.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One thing I think would be more generic is a discount on weight/encumberance based on specialised holders. If your sword and axe being holstered reduced its effective weight, I'd go for that. It would be realistic and entertaining.

Apologies for concentrating on priciples but what I'm trying to do is discuss a groundwork rather than try to build a game that I am not building. Throw some ideas around that stimulate the minds of Kitty, and Bioxx. Hope that's helpful.

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.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0