by VDZ » Sat Mar 17, 2018 4:08 pm What problem are we trying to solve here?
I feel currently the biggest problem with cupboards is that they are by far the best mobile container in the game. You can load them with 64 items and then carry them on a horse, transport them via roads or even just hearth home with them. This problem will persist for as long as cupboards remain cheaper than any other container with an approximately equal amount of slots. Adding 'lifting decay' won't do anything to resolve this problem, nor does adding extra building materials to them until they require
azrid wrote:
. Even at a cost of 2 Gold, 2 Hard Metal, 4 Bone Glue, 6 Boards and 4 Blocks (i.e. everything but the silk) it would still be the best mobile container in the game, and people would still be carrying cupboards around to move items.
The root cause of this is the fact that cupboards can be carried when full. While further nerfs could make it less problematic (disallow lifting on horses, disable hearthing home when carrying a cupboard, don't allow road travel when carrying a cupboard) it would never truly solve the issue (if I don't have metal I'd generally prefer to just slowly carry a cupboard somewhere than to move 4 crates in a faster manner).
In the announcement thread, MagicManICT said
MagicManICT wrote:VDZ wrote:@devs: If people moving goods around using cupboards is a problem, why not just revert to the old rule that cupboards with items inside cannot be picked up?
He answered this in the C&I discussion on the matter. To summarize: better to be able to rearrange things easily.
. While this is a valid concern, I do think the side effect has a bigger negative impact (game design wise, as it renders a whole class of objects nearly useless) than the intended use has benefits. I feel like some alternate solution to switching cupboard contents should be looked into; lifting cupboards is obviously doing completely different things than it was intended to do.
An alternate problem stated in this thread was: Cupboards give too much storage space too easily, too early in the game or cupboards render alternative forms of (non-mobile) storage useless (because they're so much superior).
First of all, let me address
synaris wrote:a game being hard doesnt ruin it. just look at darksouls.
. Being grindy is not the same thing as being hard. I wouldn't mind having to take all kinds of risks to get awesome amounts of storage space (in fact, that would be pretty awesome). However, I do mind having to do the same things over and over again to accomplish the same thing. By your logic, we could make cupboards require 80 boards per cupboard and it would be 'harder'. I tend to like hard games, but if storing my items becomes that excessively grindy (with no proper alternatives) I'm probably quitting H&H.
jorb wrote:I am quite serious in that I do think cupboards are too cheap. There's very little reason to use anything else.
I could see adding a slightly smaller rough cupboard, perhaps costing something like 6 boards, and then adding a bone glue to the normal cupboard.
This, I feel, would be a much better solution. The primary problem that makes cupboards completely superior to other containers for mass storage is not only the material cost, what I believe to be a bigger problem is the form factor. You can build cupboards side by side against the wall, making optimal use of space, using one tile per container and leaving no hitbox clunkiness that would make moving between them a hassle. As far as I'm aware, the Cupboard is still the only container with a hitbox of precisely 1x1 tile. There are some other containers that fit inside a 1x1 tile (wicker basket, birchbark basket, wooden chest, urn, maybe coffer too?) but aside from the poor space-to-storage (6 slots for one tile) for the first two and hassle-to-storage ratio for the last two (wooden chests are decent once you have a proper supply of metal, but that comes way after cupboards), their hitbox size makes it a pain to open one container, move to another container to open it, then move to a third container. This was made less painful with the pathfinding improvements but it's still annoying. The most viable early-game mass storage container other than the cupboard (the crate) has a terribly annoying hitbox that makes it completely unsuitable for indoor storage.
As a result, cupboards are the superior container for mass storage because there simply are no viable alternatives. Adding 'lesser cupboards' having the same hitbox would remedy this issue and allow for more varied storage choices inside houses and mines. (It could also go the other way, having 'greater cupboards' for increased cost.)
Now, one other thing mentioned in this thread has potential in allowing for more storage variety:
LadyGoo wrote:If you feel the problem is that no-one uses the other containers, then you should make them all useful for specific purposes, rather than implementing punishing mechs that will be unpopular and degrade QoL. Bad QoL = n*botting. I have suggested some time ago to tie the container sizes to their quality. Make it true for the urns or your bone containers, and you'll see people using them more than the cupboards. Or make them have additional storage space/stockpiling mech. for specific things (like cauldrons are, they have 3 storages for water, fuel and internal inventory).
There is actually one 'container' that is often a situationally superior alternative to cupboards and which I have allowed to use valuable space in houses and underground claims that would otherwise be taken by cupboards: Stockpiles. Most stockpiles are close enough to having a 1x1 hitbox that they align neatly with the other things, and their ease of creation and sometimes superior storage capacity make them a viable alternative to putting everything in cupboards. I'd say it logically follows that 'limited containers' that have specific item storage requirements but either a lower cost or superior storage capacity could also replace cupboards as viable containers.
Granger wrote:Cupboards should simply deteriorate quite quickly when not in a house or being used as a transport container. The last patch was a good start, I think decay should be added to the lower levels to clean them of cupboards.
And yes: I myself have used them quite extensively for storage underground and think they make mass-storage way to easy, leading to unhealthy gameplay styles.
No. Living in a cave is an interesting alternative play style which has unique benefits (no decay and plenty of (expandable!) space) and disadvantages (requires an 'outside base' for farming, harder to get wood and some other common 'outside' materials) and adds variety to the game (both to those living underground and those who stumble upon (partially) underground bases), and the lack of decay is key to making this alternative play style (which I often see people advising against due to the drawbacks it has) viable unless we get some form of decay-resistant mass storage; without being allowed to store cupboards underground the drawbacks greatly outweigh the benefits (as they already seem to do for most people).
