I noticed that we have a backpack and a traveller's sack for carrying large amounts and a seed sack for seeds. How about a haversack style bag for collecting small objects larger than seeds? It would be nice to store tree cones/seeds, hops, even those smaller foragables. Like the seed bag it should be a limited class of objects so as to not be abused and diminish the larger ones.
The second sack I think would be nice to see is a harvest sack. Simply a large sack for storing crops in. I mean a sack of onions or beets is not a new thing
Both would be nice additions to add to crafting and very useful. They are limited in scope but they fill a role that is needed. A tree seed should not take up as much room as a wine bottle in a cupboard and filling a cupboard with onions is unpractical.
-
MagicManICT
- Posts: 18435
- Joined: Tue Aug 17, 2010 1:47 am
Re: New Sacks
There is absolutely no need for any more storage items in the game. If you do it right, you can already have a carry inventory of 56: Base inventory (4x4) + Backpack (4x6) + 2x Traveller's Sack (6x8) + Merchant Robe (7x8). If you're farming and using seedbags, that's potentially multiplied by 9!
As far as in-house storage goes... no, no more is needed. If you are hoarding that much junk, build more houses, build more cupboards, or maybe QUIT HOARDING!! Most of what you mention there should just be replanted as fast as you harvest it, like tree seeds. For food items: craft the foods you want as they take less space. Yes, you'll still need room to store some supplies, but do you realize how many cupboards can be placed in a Timber House with a cellar?
There are some realism arguments that are fine to bring up: Using real life solutions as a basis for concepts in a game or using real objects as a model of how something should function in a game. However, it should never dictate the actual workings and constraints in a game unless your ultimate goal is to create a simulation.
As far as in-house storage goes... no, no more is needed. If you are hoarding that much junk, build more houses, build more cupboards, or maybe QUIT HOARDING!! Most of what you mention there should just be replanted as fast as you harvest it, like tree seeds. For food items: craft the foods you want as they take less space. Yes, you'll still need room to store some supplies, but do you realize how many cupboards can be placed in a Timber House with a cellar?
There are some realism arguments that are fine to bring up: Using real life solutions as a basis for concepts in a game or using real objects as a model of how something should function in a game. However, it should never dictate the actual workings and constraints in a game unless your ultimate goal is to create a simulation.
Opinions expressed in this statement are the authors alone and in no way reflect on the game development values of the actual developers.
-
Tonkyhonk
- Posts: 4501
- Joined: Fri Sep 10, 2010 6:43 am
Re: New Sacks
as for sacks for crops, it might be a waste of time to suggest since farming system is supposed to be changed hugely with future updates (if that ever comes, that is), according to devs quite a while ago. (seeds as liquid type item and such, iirc.)
-
LadyV
- Posts: 3113
- Joined: Wed Jan 25, 2012 2:34 am
Re: New Sacks
MagicManICT wrote:There is absolutely no need for any more storage items in the game. If you do it right, you can already have a carry inventory of 56: Base inventory (4x4) + Backpack (4x6) + 2x Traveller's Sack (6x8) + Merchant Robe (7x8). If you're farming and using seedbags, that's potentially multiplied by 9!
As far as in-house storage goes... no, no more is needed. If you are hoarding that much junk, build more houses, build more cupboards, or maybe QUIT HOARDING!! Most of what you mention there should just be replanted as fast as you harvest it, like tree seeds. For food items: craft the foods you want as they take less space. Yes, you'll still need room to store some supplies, but do you realize how many cupboards can be placed in a Timber House with a cellar?
There are some realism arguments that are fine to bring up: Using real life solutions as a basis for concepts in a game or using real objects as a model of how something should function in a game. However, it should never dictate the actual workings and constraints in a game unless your ultimate goal is to create a simulation.
I think you misunderstand my desire. So much of the game is focused on building permanent structures and walling your self in. An investment into a traveller's sack requires wax and lots of leather so you either settle some place long enough to gather it or carry it all around. My desire is to see both a container that does not use a hand slot and a container that allows movement in the game.
I don't want hoards of cupboards and timber houses. I want the option to travel without having to make a permanent camp. Tents and bedrolls could easily have been mentioned with my suggestion but they have already been suggested.
-
LadyV
- Posts: 3113
- Joined: Wed Jan 25, 2012 2:34 am
Re: New Sacks
I had not seen that. I'm curious what they have in mind however.Tonkyhonk wrote:as for sacks for crops, it might be a waste of time to suggest since farming system is supposed to be changed hugely with future updates (if that ever comes, that is), according to devs quite a while ago. (seeds as liquid type item and such, iirc.)
-
painhertz
- Posts: 6185
- Joined: Sat Jan 22, 2011 2:07 am
- Website: Http://www.noneyafuckinbusyness.com
- Yahoo Messenger: chaosovum
- Location: Louisiana
Re: New Sacks
the game has cow drawn wagons if you want to travel with all of your shit.
"I shall PERSONALLY witness for you at the shiny, chrome gates of Valhalla!"
-
MagicManICT
- Posts: 18435
- Joined: Tue Aug 17, 2010 1:47 am
Re: New Sacks
I stand corrected, then! However, that doesn't change the fact that the game doesn't need more container types.LadyV wrote:I think you misunderstand my desire. So much of the game is focused on building permanent structures and walling your self in. An investment into a traveller's sack requires wax and lots of leather so you either settle some place long enough to gather it or carry it all around. My desire is to see both a container that does not use a hand slot and a container that allows movement in the game.
Pain is right in that there are wagons and carts for you to haul chests and stuff around in. While this isn't a simulation and you get yelled at by some assholes for saying "realism", it is "realism" that limits how much we can carry at once.
There are many of us that would like to see the benefits of a more nomadic lifestyle. It was done with somewhat of a success in w3, but since then, things just don't seem to work for it. The biggest deterrent is the prevalence of theft and vandalism and little to no way of penalizing it. The biggest penalty is the heavy reliance on farming and raising livestock (of course, good trading can make up for this). Otherwise, there's absolutely nothing stopping you from doing this now. Just trade with villages in your area.
Opinions expressed in this statement are the authors alone and in no way reflect on the game development values of the actual developers.
-
LadyV
- Posts: 3113
- Joined: Wed Jan 25, 2012 2:34 am
Re: New Sacks
I agree you can use carts and wagons. Theft is a problem as you said. It was my intention to add a mid level bag earlier in the game that can log out with you. Yes nomadic is the idea I was going for. Always pinned to the same spot can get boring.MagicManICT wrote:I stand corrected, then! However, that doesn't change the fact that the game doesn't need more container types.
Pain is right in that there are wagons and carts for you to haul chests and stuff around in. While this isn't a simulation and you get yelled at by some assholes for saying "realism", it is "realism" that limits how much we can carry at once.
There are many of us that would like to see the benefits of a more nomadic lifestyle. It was done with somewhat of a success in w3, but since then, things just don't seem to work for it. The biggest deterrent is the prevalence of theft and vandalism and little to no way of penalizing it. The biggest penalty is the heavy reliance on farming and raising livestock (of course, good trading can make up for this). Otherwise, there's absolutely nothing stopping you from doing this now. Just trade with villages in your area.
My question is why is adding more items even if different variations of the same general concept bad? I mean custominzation of how you play and player variety keep things interesting.
-
MagicManICT
- Posts: 18435
- Joined: Tue Aug 17, 2010 1:47 am
Re: New Sacks
Variations on identical items is just bad, in my opinion. It just causes balance issues, creates headaches for the players, and is difficult to implement. This is a game ran by two guys in their spare time (which they don't have much of right now). It's one thing when it's a commercial project and you are paying artists and programmers to create them and you can clearly see the visual impact it has. However, this is a 2D interface with a 3rd person isometric view and the characters are only about 24 pixels in size (just a rough guess). There's only so much you can do with that.LadyV wrote: My question is why is adding more items even if different variations of the same general concept bad? I mean custominzation of how you play and player variety keep things interesting.
Opinions expressed in this statement are the authors alone and in no way reflect on the game development values of the actual developers.
-
LadyV
- Posts: 3113
- Joined: Wed Jan 25, 2012 2:34 am
Re: New Sacks
I agree two people and time does limit input. I still like my idea but I can understand it being difficult. Thank you for your replies.MagicManICT wrote: Variations on identical items is just bad, in my opinion. It just causes balance issues, creates headaches for the players, and is difficult to implement. This is a game ran by two guys in their spare time (which they don't have much of right now). It's one thing when it's a commercial project and you are paying artists and programmers to create them and you can clearly see the visual impact it has. However, this is a 2D interface with a 3rd person isometric view and the characters are only about 24 pixels in size (just a rough guess). There's only so much you can do with that.