Thicker forests

[ven]

Ocean DLC
Jungle DLC
Desert DLC
Arctic DLC

Would be nice if we started with a smaller map, and then one SG were added to each border for each one of those biomes. People who like the survival aspect of haven would enjoy it.

Some players have suggested game-supported community projects for the end game. Maybe access to those biomes should be enabled globally by building specific buildings or finishing long and complex quests. If a set number of buildings are needed (like X harbors or X caravanserai), this could trigger conflicts and a provide legit targets for siege and general trolling.

Btw
viewtopic.php?f=48&t=47001&p=614016#p614016

[loftar]

the foliage of the trees can block the sky completely except for small clearings.

Yes, well, the problem with the trees blocking the sky is that they also block the ground from above, so you couldn't see yourself running through it. We originally used much larger trees in Salem, but were forced, very much against our will, to shrink them down due to the exact problem. Otherwise, I've been wanting the same thing.

[ven]

I think that would only be an issue for purists who like to enjoy the landscape, myself included. Many players already hide everything with custom clients and I'd bet practically everyone uses :cam bad.

[loftar]

Many players already hide everything with custom clients

Sure, but I wouldn't really want to make the game so that it's only playable by using a custom client that destroys the graphics, would I?

[Ysh]

Many players already hide everything with custom clients

Sure, but I wouldn't really want to make the game so that it's only playable by using a custom client that destroys the graphics, would I?

Outline of object behind tree? Make tree half invisible in area cover player? Maybe some option to doing.

[Hasta]

I wouldn't really want to make the game so that it's only playable by using a custom client

I have a feeling that the game's already halfway there, tbh. After major patches it's very very painful to use vanilla client until custom ones get updated. I honestly see no reason to not incorporate at least some basic QoL things from custom to vanilla.

Back to topic, thicker forests are definitely needed; at least some patches of really close-together trees. As stated in some adjacent thread (suggestions for next map or smth), the biomes now are very similar. Basically, you have "mountains", "swamps", "plains" and "plains with some trees".

[Fierce_Deity]

I like the idea of thicker forest, but I do recognize that there are some obvious drawbacks. Perhaps we could have infrequent patches in biomes where the trees are significantly denser.

[DDDsDD999]

And this does what? Besides muh realism of course.

It's like all those map suggestions that pop up every time people want a new world. "LOL MAKE EVERYTHING SUPER BIG, 20 SUPERGRID SIZE MOUNTAIN DOWN THE MIDDLE, 79 SUPERGRID LARGE MAP, 70% OF THE MAP IS OCEAN, MUH REALISM" and then they realize that it just makes everything boring, conflicts with current game-mechanics and just makes the larpers complain when it gets taken away for being terrible.

[Grog]

Many players already hide everything with custom clients

Sure, but I wouldn't really want to make the game so that it's only playable by using a custom client that destroys the graphics, would I?

Outline of object behind tree? Make tree half invisible in area cover player? Maybe some option to doing.

The idea of half visible hearthling/tree is pretty nice. It would even add to the feeling of forest-density. This wouldn't even need ugly highlighting.
I'd really love to experiment with %ages (at what %hearthling am I actually able to see myself, when do I see the trunks, do I need to highlight the highbox-important aspects (=stumps) and if so, what colour is needed (/would be black enough?),...
And so on.

@DDDsDD999
I hate the suggestions you cite, but don't think this one is alike.
Despite the missing speed 4 and some swamps here and there we don't really have biomes that are harder to cross. I liked that "dschungel"-ish biome we once had for exact that reason. While I barely went into it (no stuff to forage, insane energy drain) I liked it for being a big obstacle.
This suggestion wouldn't even need the energy drain, as the slowing down comes with the need for navigating between the trees.

[jorb]

I think there should be more filamentary structure to tree placement, so that there are corridors through denser patches of the forest, but glitching on stuff should also not be made more of a thing than it already is.

More and bigger trees would be nice, but the perspective doesn't handle that well, unfortunately. I've experimented a fair bit with it during development.