Tree, more trees and environmental damage

[Laremere]

It would be nice that trees would fall to the opposite direct that you were chopping it at, so you can control the direction of the fall. Additionally, the tree segments check if they will hit anything on the way down. If they do hit something, they do damage to it, if the damage doesn't destroy the object, the tree segment is destroyed and it spawns a bunch of randomly spread wood blocks.

Tree trunks could take environmental damage, after two hits the tree trunk is destroyed, leaving room for future trees to grow. You could do that idea you had for how they respawn with looking to see if a tree is near and looking to see if a tree isn't to close then spawning a sapling if before the new map reset you plug variables into a simulator and get back what the tree density that the effect would create, so that the new map has said tree densities. Additionally, if there isn't any tree remotely close, the tree tile could change to something different.

Hemlocks: As they grow instead of radiating forest, they radiate dirt. The dirt should turn back when not near a hemlock. Hemlocks would create hemlock groves, which I totally love.

Lastly, with environmental damage, why not have it "damage" only things that have their origin on the tile? This would mean even kilns would be "hit" the same amount as say, baskets. More importantly this would solve the problem of things being hit more often if they are off-grid.

Edit: I forgot: Buildings damage: When a house takes enough damage, it no longer protects the things inside (say, a hole in the roof), so things start taking damage inside the house. The cellar could flood becoming a low water tile with no chance of fishing. When all the things in the house are destroyed, the house could go through it's final steps of being destroyed. This also applies to destroying it by hand, you have to empty it before you can do the final hits to end it. When you repair it enough to stop it damaging things inside, then you can take a bucket to the cellar and empty it with say ten buckets full of water before things in there stop taking environmental damage.

[Pacho]

Sounds like a great idea (on all points) and has my support!

[Peter]

Actually, I like a lot of that. I don't think that falling trees should necessarily cause damage, but everything else in there sounds great. I might add that perhaps rotting stumps should either make the tile they're on into forest, or produce a sapling, giving you a choice as to tear up the stump and get some wood immediately, or leave it to get more later.

[kobnach]

I'd definitely appreciate the ability to control the direction of falling trees - or disentangle logs from whichever tree they fell on. I'm tired of waiting for a sapling to grow full size in order to harvest its full size neighbour.

[niltrias]

Controlling the fall of trees would be cool, but also to a certain extent falling trees being trapped by neighboring trees also makes sense. I dunno how many people here have spent a lot of time felling trees, but if you do it wrong it can get fouled in the branches of a neighboring tree. At that point, you cant do much about it. If you were to try to cut it again, it could backslide or buck, sending chainsaw (or in this case, axe) into your face and possibly crushing your lower body. Climbing the second tree to free the first is too dangerous, because the act of climbing can knock the fallen tree clear, and even if you are on the far side of the trunk, the branches can swat you off the tree.
Those are called "widowmakers" by loggers, at least where Im from. If we are going to be able to control fall angle, I think there could be some fun in making a control failure an option. Definitely would make experienced woodsmen more valuable to a community.

[jorb]

Controlling the fall of trees would be cool, but also to a certain extent falling trees being trapped by neighboring trees also makes sense. I dunno how many people here have spent a lot of time felling trees, but if you do it wrong it can get fouled in the branches of a neighboring tree. At that point, you cant do much about it. If you were to try to cut it again, it could backslide or buck, sending chainsaw (or in this case, axe) into your face and possibly crushing your lower body. Climbing the second tree to free the first is too dangerous, because the act of climbing can knock the fallen tree clear, and even if you are on the far side of the trunk, the branches can swat you off the tree.
Those are called "widowmakers" by loggers, at least where Im from. If we are going to be able to control fall angle, I think there could be some fun in making a control failure an option. Definitely would make experienced woodsmen more valuable to a community.

This. My grandfather worked as a logger. I never had a chance to see it myself, but my dad once told me he could take down rows of trees by chopping them about half-way through, and then felling just one tree to create a domino effect. I think our representation could use some trivial physics for fun effects like these. With or without that, It would be nice if logs didn't get permanently and irrevocably stuck in other objects, though.

[sabinati]

It would be nice if logs didn't get permanently and irrevocably stuck in other objects, though.

only part of this thread that matters

[Jackard]

It would be nice if logs didn't get permanently and irrevocably stuck in other objects, though.

only part of this thread that matters

[jorb]

While I can certainly appreciate the no-bullshit-attitudes of some of our players and forumites, it is well worth remembering that no game gets built without a little bit of dreaming.

[Pumpkin]

...possibly crushing your lower body..."widowmakers"...

only part of this thread that matters