suggestion-discussion

[hybrid gull]

the wandering bosses suggestion makes no sense, that's all I'm gonna say

the suggestion aims to remove a core mechanic of the game, and that doesn't sound like something the devs will ever like (I wouldn't if I were them)

[lament zinc]

Imagine:

You are entering the mountains for the first time, turn around a large boulder and boom there's Moder sitting in front of you, 10 meters away.
She sees you and starts to chase you down, eventually killing you because you ran out of stamina.

Same can happen with Eikthyr, the Elder, the Queen and Fader.
Only Yagluth could be avoided because the plains is the only biome where you can see further ahead than 5 meters due to there being no items to obstruct that view.

[hybrid gull]

on the contrary: what would be the benefits of having them roam the biome? Why should they do that?

[lament zinc]

To me it feels more like adding an RPG mechanic to a game that isn't an RPG.

[oak fulcrum]

sunds fun actually XD but yeah maybe as a modifier it wouldn't have to be a vanilla valheim dificulty

[languid ibex]

Roaming bosses is just awkward for gameplay

[stark furnace]

🤔

[karmic canyon]

I think roaming bosses would be really cool but just does not fit with the game

[stone citrus]

trolls abominations golems and the sort
usually you'd avoid them early on
except the super pro gamers

[karmic canyon]

Yeah like those are sort of mini bosses and they are roaming

[hybrid gull]

with how rare the first two are, relatively, I wouldn't waste any chance I get to take one down tbh 😂

[karmic canyon]

I find both all the time especially trolls

[arctic wharf]

I have always, always, always wanted a game that is both an open world survival but with monster hunter style large enemies that just more naturally roam the world (more as just a part of the world and less of the games primary focus).

[hybrid gull]

it's not that I don't find them, it's just that whenever I'm really looking for them they never pop up anywhere, so I just switched to "Imma explore and take down whatever stands in my path" instead

[arctic wharf]

Valheim though.... velheim is not the game for it I think.
We basically have mini bosses in the form of occasional big enemies like the troll.

[granite geyser]

world modifiers are not the excuse so anything "should be added"

some things clearly don't work regardless. roaming bosses being one of them

[unreal breach]

Cookins seems terrible right now, my friend cooks for 3 people for 50+ hours, still below lvl30, and she's not dying very often, her other skills are around lvl50

[snow stone]

I'm confused why I immediately got thumbs down on my idea to make the black metal chest, which is supposed to be an upgrade to the reinforced chest.. an upgrade to the reinforced chest

[hybrid gull]

because it doesn't take much to decide whether you, me, or anyone else likes an idea?

[snow stone]

Well I'm not like against him or anything for having his opinion, I'm just curious of why he doesn't like the idea

[hybrid gull]

I personally also find the suggestion kinda pointless, since I'm used to black metal chests having that size for that kind of inventory...

or rather, each chest is progressively bigger to show their increased inventory, so...

[snow stone]

Well yes but when it comes to storage the reinforced chest is just far more efficient. More item space less floor space, so out of curiosity what makes you like the black metal chest over the reinforced chest? The model? Themes? I'm just curious because I do personally like the appearance of the black metal chest more than the reinforced chest

[hybrid gull]

I never said I prefer the black metal chest...

I said I'm used to it having that size for the invetory it provides

[snow stone]

Ok then

[hybrid gull]

am I using it often? No, I just use it mainly for decoration or for some far away place in my base where I don't need a large amount of inventory space

my storage system is either made up of normal chests or reinforced ones

[snow stone]

Ah ok, I can see that for that scenario

[hybrid gull]

on the contrary, if they were to resize the black metal chest, there wouldn't be much point in any other chest at all...

[snow stone]

Well yes that's kind of the point, it's an upgrade. For example there's no reason to use the Flint axe if you have the black metal ax

[hybrid gull]

uh, the upgrade part is something you came up with, though?

does the game ever tell you it's an upgrade?

[snow stone]

In pretty much the same way the higher tier weapons tell you there an upgrade, which they don't on paper but very clearly are meant to replace the ones before them

[hybrid gull]

actual upgrades would "eat up" the previous stage, leaving you with the new, upgraded version of the item

[snow stone]

Actually that gives an interesting idea, maybe having the ability to upgrade each chest manually after placing it, probably wouldn't add to the immersion but is something interesting to think about

[hybrid gull]

I do believe the definition of "upgrade" should be, uh... "defined" here

because each single weapon does have upgrades, up to lv4

but I wouldn't really call the iron sword an upgrade to the bronze sword, since I'm literally using another weapon

it's an overall improvement, sure, but not an upgrade of my original sword

which is what I meant by "the game doesn't tell you it's an upgrade"

[snow stone]

"the using of better materials to create an identical thing except better in every way and meant to replace the original item"

As in not comparing bronze sword level 1 to bronze sword level 4, but comparing the bronze sword to the silver sword

[hybrid gull]

just chalk it up us having different views on the word "upgrade", then

a black metal chest is not an upgrade of the reinforced one

[stone citrus]

what a pointless argument

[snow stone]

I wasn't really trying to make it an argument, I was just curious why he disliked the change idea

[stone citrus]

🤨

[snow stone]

I believe you're thinking of the word "reinforcement". "Upgrade" is a shorthand that most people use to just mean "better". But reinforcing your weapon/tool through whatever workstation is more of a reinforcement to the item rather than an upgrade to that item

[hybrid gull]

yeah, uh, sure

[lament zinc]

Personally I think the most useful use of the BM chest is to store all your trophies and some spare clothing in.

That way the chest is able to use its looks, the somewhat better storage capacity and it won't cause problems because it's larger.

But that's just ihmo.

[snow stone]

Yeah as it is I'd say it works fine as like a trophy chest, although I have no clue about the personal chest

[stiff stag]

The proportionate amount of space needed for the added slots roughly evens out with the other options, so it's overall not really an upgrade. A black metal chest is great if you want to access a bunch of stuff all from one place, compared to dividing it up between 3 normal chests, but in terms of slots provided to space taken, there's not much benefit picking any one chest over another.

A sidegrade is a more appropriate term, kind of like the blast furnace and smelter relationship.

[subtle depot]

Imo the black metal chest is better because the materials used to make it are much more renewable. One less iron sinkhole to deal with.

[signal anvil]

The word "grade" comes from the Latin gradus, meaning "step, stride, or rank". In English, it has been used to mean "a degree or level of quality or rank". In other words yes it’s an upgrade

[rocky pine]

#suggestions message have this been suggested? i was trying to find for similar suggestions but couldnt find any, "similar messages" included other meanings for "slide", "sliding" or "track"

[viral kraken]

First time I’ve seen it, personally I think it’s a good one

[karmic canyon]

Yeah idk why there’s a recycle

[granite geyser]

@smoky pier

#screenshots message

[languid ibex]

Maybe I am missing something here, can you not just make more room for the chests?

[arctic wharf]

I have been around here and seen it all, yet the door suggestion seems like a new one to me.

You usually just see the desire for large gates and drawbridges

[snow stone]

More so the reinforced chest is just more space efficient, since it has more storage space for the amout of floor space it takes up

[arctic wharf]

Don't worry about the reactions really.

[languid ibex]

I think Smiffe just misunderstood the idea tbh

[arctic wharf]

I didn't even see who put the reaction

[languid ibex]

Okay but the BM chest is still storing more, if that's appealing enough you will just make more room for it no?

[snow stone]

The black metal chest stores more items per chest, but since it is so much bigger, it is more efficient to use reinforced chests since you will have more items storage for the same amount of floor space

You can fit more reinforced chests in the same amount of space you can fit less black metal chests

[languid ibex]

One the space is made, it's permanent, in most cases you might save a small amount of building material to be slightly more space efficient.

[arctic wharf]

I have seen a few breakdowns and why everyone suggests avoiding the BM chest.
Its size increase just does not merit the inventory size increase.

I might use them only rarely when I know I plan to have just one chest somewhere.

[languid ibex]

I mean, if you really break it down, you're saving very little in terms of materials to make the space needed.

[snow stone]

That is if you even have the space

Also it costs more to make the black metal chests

[stark furnace]

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/q-PWx41XxFY Somethin like this

[languid ibex]

Well considering you can build to your heart's content, the space is never locked.

[snow stone]

Yes i can build along a line infinitely... But that doesn't mean I want a line of chests just protruding out of my house, and I also don't want to completely remake my house just to fit those chests

[languid ibex]

Yeah, they're better for space, but my point is no one is ever really out of space.

[snow stone]

Walls

[stark furnace]

bold assumption

Making aesthetically pleasing builds, sometimes you are very much limited on space

[languid ibex]

Unless someone has a structure the size of valheim map I guess

Aesthetics is often the opposite direction of efficient though

[stark furnace]

🤔 not necessarily

in valheim skilled builders make them go hand in hand

[languid ibex]

Well exactly, it'd just take a skilled builder to consider the space they'd need.

The materials and time needed to utilize BM chests wouldn't be very different.

[stark furnace]

but you're utilizing an objectively worse option

Which feels bad

[languid ibex]

It stores more for a slightly larger setup, in the end that'd be more handy for mass storage

[stark furnace]

Example?

[languid ibex]

If I need a large amount of items, I could get more from accessing one BM than a reinforced chest.

Less jumping around for mass items

[stark furnace]

Why not go for 48 slots vs 32 then

[languid ibex]

Say I need to refill torches for a very large base and I need resin

[stark furnace]

That extra click isn't that big of a hassle

[languid ibex]

Because I can just hit taken all once and be on my way

Well neither is an extra width or two for flooring right

[stark furnace]

🤔 pretty sure 24*50 resin is gonna be more than enough

That's literally 200 sconces refilled

[languid ibex]

You're missing the point

[stark furnace]

vs 266

[languid ibex]

Don't get crossed up on the logic of the scenario 😅

[stark furnace]

?

[languid ibex]

More storage spaces = less storages accessed inherently

Build to fit, and nothing ultimately is lost but initial time spent and a bit more material.

[stark furnace]

the thing is

the build to fit just doesn't make sense here

Because 2 reinforced makes 48 and takes up same space as blackmetal chest which provides 32

[languid ibex]

I don't see why not in a game with such building freedom.

Right, but you're accessing two chests to benefit.

[stark furnace]

And in the example you provided the logic of that just doesn't hold up

[languid ibex]

Why's that?

[stark furnace]

200 sconces vs 267

And mind the fact that clicking on an extra chest takes literally 2 seconds

[languid ibex]

Yeah you missed the point there.

[stark furnace]

Then explain it

[languid ibex]

I did

[stark furnace]

Because what it sounds like is that you're saving on 2 clicks for the downside of losing 16 slots

and that just isn't a good explanation because of that ^

[languid ibex]

You have those slots, they're just not as compact

The space needed is bigger but you get more per access.

[stark furnace]

That's not true though

[languid ibex]

It's factually true.

[stark furnace]

You can fit two reinforced chests in the same space 😂

[languid ibex]

BM has more slots. More per access.

[stark furnace]

More per access is a shit metric for a chest, If it means being less efficient in storage slots

[languid ibex]

It's not in a game with infinite space.

Borderline infinite rather.

[stark furnace]

Ye lemme just build giant warehouses, storage problem solved 😎

It's an odd arguement

[languid ibex]

People do this anyways

Just add a bit of width and up your ease of access.

[stark furnace]

If you're gonna go the infinite space route then why ever bother with higher tier chests, and not just go wood

[languid ibex]

Most times I have used this storage method, I have half the supplies in one chest, and the rest in another. When I consider the space a BM chest needs, it just allows me to put most things together for easier visuals and less chests accessed.

[languid ibex]

This.. I am telling you it's less accessed. That'd be the opposite direction of my point

[stark furnace]

The less access thing just never makes any sense in any context what so ever

I can confidently say this as someone who has done large builds with literal thousands of wood, core wood, stone, resin, etc

[languid ibex]

I just gave you context, half my supplies are split, where more slots gives me easier visuals to truly consider what I have within one inventory.

[stark furnace]

Way too fixated on "ease of access" when iron chests provide basically the same utility because you can never properly utilized the 32 slot bonus vs 24

[languid ibex]

I only have to E on one chest

[languid ibex]

It's not a fixation, it is just not as different as most would imply because you dont really need to run out of space with enough foresight.

[stark furnace]

imo the best support for black metal chests would be the fact they don't cost fine wood and iron lol

[languid ibex]

That's the obvious point people make, I am just advocating that space efficiency is a bit of a non issue in a game with as much freedom as Valheim

[stark furnace]

It's the most obvious point but it's the most sound one

[languid ibex]

I am not going to say you're wrong, but I can only assume you can't see where I am coming from with the point I am making.

[stark furnace]

I can see it, but the point just isn't logically there for me

Like it's really grasping at straws

[languid ibex]

It's pretty basic tbh, more storage per chest is just that, and space efficiency is only as valuable as you see fit. As someone who doesn't mind building, the point doesn't register.

[stark furnace]

I just don't see the qol

Like sure it's 32 slots but is it really that hard to click one more time and get 16 more?

Like the oppurtunity cost of 1 click is like meh

[languid ibex]

Rather than accessing 2 chests to locate a trophy, I access one and move on. Make my bait and it's just less flicking through chests.

[stark furnace]

See for me and organized inventory system solves that problem

And then I have the benefit of both efficiency with storage and with clicks

[languid ibex]

Yeah this isn't getting through I guess

[stark furnace]

No it is I see what you're sayin

[languid ibex]

You're suggesting having more space taken to be further organized to avoid that. Why not just have it all in one place and ditch the additional need for that organization?

[stark furnace]

It's not more space taken though

It's the exact same identical space

[languid ibex]

It is, because ultimately you'll carry that organization logic through, where the boxes that are used to keep everything easily identifiable could be used for something else entirely

[stark furnace]

Yea I guess this isn't getting through

[languid ibex]

If you have 5 boxes in 1 space, and 3 or 4 are used for say, biome specific trophies, you're underutilized in your slots inherently

[stark furnace]

That's not inherently true

[languid ibex]

Where 2 BM chests on top of eachother easily.hold every trophy

[stark furnace]

If you're good you can maximize all chest storage and just take advantage of that 48 vs 32

Where 4 reinforced chests on top of eachother easily hold ever trophy too, and you can organize them just fine

[languid ibex]

But then you're flicking through to see what is where

[stark furnace]

Not if you have indicators or just remember lol

[languid ibex]

My original point

I suppose but you need neither with more slots

[languid ibex]

Right that's where I said using 4 to keep organized is hardly different space wise than just utilizing larger chests

[stark furnace]

Except you can hold more, which is inherently better

[languid ibex]

But in the case of trophies, one of the more abundant categories, it'd be overkill

[stark furnace]

Then you can squeeze other things in if you truly desire

Like puke berries, coins, whatever

which saves on space

[languid ibex]

Well that's just it, sacrifice a degree of organization for the space, not exactly different than BM chests issue.

[stark furnace]

But you're sacrificing the same amount of organization for just more slots compared to bm

In fact maybe even less if you plan right

[languid ibex]

That's not what I meant

[stark furnace]

I mean in this you apply an amount of disorder by introducing new things into the container, but since the containers are more separated and distinct the discorder naturally decreases

[languid ibex]

It's becoming difficult to type on my phone in the sauna, and I feel like I am hearing the same arguments, so we just don't agree and that's okay.

[stark furnace]

Great

[languid ibex]

Just getting home and was curious how different the increments could truly be, but the same space = the same amount of total slots with less chests on the BM side.

It's more compact on the height side of things as well.

[stark furnace]

Except the chests on the left have extra room left over that you adjust for and build one extra 2m floor for

[languid ibex]

Both have room on the left of the chests

[stark furnace]

Aight word that's incredibly hard to see with that angle provided

i think your placement isn't as aggressive as it can be

15 iron chests = 360, 10 bm = 320

Mind that I even made the iron chests unoptimal in this case, be a % better if extended by 1 floor over

[languid ibex]

My example is just as overlapped as that video you'd sent, and assuming that most people wouldn't want chests clipped into eachother to keep from accessing the wrong ones by accident.

[stark furnace]

the chests are all 0.9m (for reference blackmetal chests in this example are roughly 1.1-1.2) ish in width here, even when compressed

and it's easy to see where they're divided imo

[languid ibex]

Still, I think this difference isn't as huge as outlined, and I didn't even set out to prove it was this little of a difference tbh, just how much additional space would be needed for the same slot count.

[stark furnace]

But they don't reach the same slot count

One is inherently better than the other

[languid ibex]

It's interesting to see imo, and even with 15 iron squeezed, you'd just need 1 more BM to virtually make up for the 40 slot difference.

[stark furnace]

that's not the case tho, if you add the 1 bm here you add 3 more iron chests

[languid ibex]

I'm not saying you'd need 3 more slots of iron, I'm saying if you want the same amoutnt of slots afforded by 15 iron chests, it'd just take 1 more BM.

[stark furnace]

i didn't say you need 3 more slots of iron

i'm saying you could fit 3 (72 vs 32 😂 )more slots of iron instead of 1 bm chest here

[languid ibex]

You just said but you could just add 3 more iron, but I'm talking about slot count.

[rose swan]

Fools. You’re all failing to see how superior the personal chest is.

[languid ibex]

15 iron chests squeezed = 360, 11Bm = 352, with only one more floor width necessary for virtually the same amount of slots with less chests to access.

[stark furnace]

But it's not 15 iron chests here, it's 18, Same space taken up

[languid ibex]

Oh I didn't count, you'd mentioned 15 and 10 directly after.

[stark furnace]

It's 15 in the old scenario, it's now 18 if you're adding 1 to the 10

[languid ibex]

Yeah you're failing to see my point.

[stark furnace]

I'm really not, I'm pointing out the inefficiencies and rather engage with them you think I don't see your point

[languid ibex]

BM is only 2M(slgihtly less) additional for the same amount of slots

If the difference is that little, it's really about what you like.

[stark furnace]

But you can fit 2 or 3 more reinforced chests in that new 2m space

So why are you adjusting parameters for only one side of the equations?

[languid ibex]

Right, but you only need x amount of slots.

[stark furnace]

It's manipulating and cherry picking data at it's best

[languid ibex]

Both are within the same range to acheive space wise, one isn't extremely better

[stark furnace]

heh

432 vs 352

[languid ibex]

Especially true if you aren't squeezing

It's not what I'm comparing though.

[stark furnace]

Both are within the same range to acheive space wise, one isn't extremely better

[languid ibex]

I'm comparing space needed

[stark furnace]

They are the exact same space, EXACT same space

[languid ibex]

Yes, 1-2 floor sizes.

[stark furnace]

352 > 432 🤔

[languid ibex]

I don't know how this is so difficult to comprehend.

[stark furnace]

I comprehend it, the logic just isn't there on your end

Once again basically shrugging me off as if I don't know what I'm talking about when I do 😂

[languid ibex]

10x10 house, basement has 360 slots and iron chests. 10x11 house, basement has 353 slots and BM chests.

The amount of slots you'd need in this case would only need 1 more width

[stark furnace]

so why not fit more reinforced chests in if you're gonna be spending that extra space anyways

you see what I'm saying?

[languid ibex]

Because you don't want to flick in and out of chests and you want to see inventories clearer.

[stark furnace]

It's literally 3 more things to click (at best)

[languid ibex]

Right, and it's 3 less. It adds up.

[stark furnace]

So you'd sacrifice 80 slots to save maybe 3 seconds

[languid ibex]

One time addition of walls and floors, or permanent addition of more chests to deal with.

[stark furnace]

And mind you how hard is it to keep track of where things are

[languid ibex]

I think it's just fine if you're saving time and the difference isn't vast.

[stark furnace]

🤔 tbh i don't really think you save any time of any value

If you wanna save on time there's much more fat that you can chop off

[languid ibex]

I felt much less cluttered when I switched to BM chests, and my setup isn't even space efficient

[stark furnace]

Aight if you wanna go subjective then whatever

[languid ibex]

I could keep all mob drops in 1 chest, and have my runoff in a little cubby underneath

[stark furnace]

But with proper play and planning, reinforced chests are inherently better

[languid ibex]

You said anything of value, but how you feel is valuable

[stark furnace]

where'd i say that

[languid ibex]

Being able to see and manage inventories faster is just nice

[languid ibex]

any time of any value, and I value that time because I feel less cluttered

[stark furnace]

I said time of value, not anything of value

[languid ibex]

But value is subjective

[stark furnace]

Time of value meaning saving on time

[languid ibex]

It's why the barter system existed

[stark furnace]

Sorry speedrunning term, has nothing to do with emotions

[languid ibex]

Well as a speedrunner you should see value in accessing less to achieve the same result.

[stark furnace]

Uh

Yea see here's where you memorize and locate stuff faster rather than access each thing each time you bank shit

I wouldn't go down this route if I were you

[languid ibex]

Why's that?

[stark furnace]

Because that point "Well as a speedrunner you should see value in accessing less to achieve the same result." is pretty stupid in that context

[languid ibex]

It's really not, speedrunning can come down to milleseconds, and menu skips can be huge.

[stark furnace]

Any speedrunner will tell you that they memorize where everything is and don't access all of their chests over and over

[languid ibex]

Yeah, I never said that, I said access chests less.

[stark furnace]

The amount of chests is irrelevant

[languid ibex]

Even if you know where everything is, it's inevitable you'll be accessing more chests with more chests to access.

[stark furnace]

That's just not true

[languid ibex]

So some chests sit empty?

[stark furnace]

no?

[languid ibex]

So if every chest has a use, and you would have more of them, you'd be accessing more chests correct?

[stark furnace]

no

It's the same amount of interactions

[languid ibex]

I don't follow here.

[stark furnace]

Yea which is why I advised you to not go down this

[languid ibex]

Because you have no real back up to this point or?

[stark furnace]

Because your points are illogical

[languid ibex]

More chests = more chests accessed. That's just how it's going to go.

[stark furnace]

And it's like having a convo with someone about thermodynamics when they haven't even taken chemistry 1

[stark furnace]

no that's just not true in any case

If you're good 1 interaction = 1 interaction regardless of how many chests there are

[languid ibex]

It's really not because I've 8 years in university for computer science and game design, and this is just basic usage terminology.

[stark furnace]

Damn

Failing to see how 1 interaction = 1 interaction to access regardless of how many chests there are

[languid ibex]

Because it's incremental, and you won't always have control over what needs accessing.

[stark furnace]

heh

[languid ibex]

You're supposing that you'll only have 1 type of thing to put away each visit.

[stark furnace]

You always have complete agency and control over what needs accessing though lmao

If you're efficiently banking yea you're only have 1 type of thing to put away each visit

See that's where being in comp sci for 8 years doesn't help, you actually have to be good at playing the video game

[languid ibex]

Okay, but that assumes how people would be playing.

[stark furnace]

This is literally in speedrunning context

[languid ibex]

This is surrounding general usage.

[stark furnace]

Adjusting the goal posts 😂

[languid ibex]

Ah I see where you got switched up.

[stark furnace]

Nah I ain't got switched up you moved the goalposts and now pretended i'm the issue

[languid ibex]

The chests is the point, the speedrunner comment was to perhaps shake some time saved logic loose.

[stark furnace]

Even in broader use, the 32 vs 24 slot difference makes very literally time difference in banking

It all just comes down to planning what goes into your chests accordingly, that's what saves time, not the amount of chests accessed

[languid ibex]

But the same can be said for space saved.
That's been the whole point I've been making.

[stark furnace]

And I'm saying that you can bank very efficiently with 24 and 32 doesn't make a difference and actively harms yourself by losing out on efficiency

[languid ibex]

The chest access point was raised when you questioned why anyone would use them, and I gave examples alongside reasoning with my own experience.

[stark furnace]

And they're all mute (the examples)

[languid ibex]

They're not, because you're agreeing it saves time, and didn't dispute that the saved space isn't so extreme that it should be only approach.

You just don't value it.

[stark furnace]

One approach is objectively better than the other

[languid ibex]

I think objectively is flexible here, considering the same space in my example netted the same slots, and even saved space vertically.

[stark furnace]

Your example was cherry picked data to fit your narrative

In a logical optimized example one clearly out performs the other (80 slot difference for same space)

[languid ibex]

I threw it together in 3 minutes, nothing cherry picked, just a happy accident.

Even then, it's only by ~2M

Brother you cannot still be confused on that 🙁

[stark furnace]

It's illogical

[languid ibex]

+1 floor = the same slot count you would have with 15 iron chests

[stark furnace]

+1 floor means you can add more reinforced chests in that same exact space

[languid ibex]

Is it more space saved? Sure, but you never run out of space, and you get to access less chests.

[stark furnace]

So you're always at a net negative

[languid ibex]

But you wouldn't need to if you only need ~360 slots

[stark furnace]

then you can fit something else

in the reinforced design

[languid ibex]

Sure, expand the whole building, get excited about having more space.

It's not a big deal, and you don't need to commit to any standard in chest choices.

[stark furnace]

So I can have my same slots as the blackmetal, but also have a ferment

And you tell me one isn't better than the other 🤣

[languid ibex]

Sure, but you can do that no matter what, because you have the freedom to do so.

If it were +5 floor spaces, I'd be crossed up a bit.

But it's +1 per 15 squeezed iron chests... that's a LOT.

Stacked vertically, insane storage already.

[stark furnace]

But the claim one isn't better than the other is just false

[languid ibex]

Wall to wall, you can't use that much without ignoring the obliterator.

I never said that, I said it's not as extreme as some people make it out to be, and there are benefits to accessing less chests.

[stark furnace]

it's +1 per 2.5

[languid ibex]

If you want the same amount of slots, I've said that about 8 times now.

[stark furnace]

But it's not the same amount of slots, iron will always be greater no matter what, even if you want to somehow even it out iron will always have some form of advantage

[languid ibex]

Such a minimal advantage it's virtually pointless to mention it.

[stark furnace]

It's not minimal

Being able to squeeze more into a space has intensive value in both aesthetics and mechanics

[languid ibex]

You save 1 floor space every 15 chests?

In a game with limitless building potential, that's minimal.

[stark furnace]

Many builds have dimension restrictions to make them look pretty, that difference adds up

[feral void]

btw guys

you are chatting here for already 2 hours and 40 minutes straight,
what a stamina 🤣

[languid ibex]

That's fair, but in that same logic, this would clip through in a short ceiling basement. So that can be said for BM chests as well.

[stark furnace]

Not a good example

[languid ibex]

You mentioned dimension restrictions, short basement space is very much a thing.

[stark furnace]

You can squeeze them into a 2m h and have no issues with clipping

[languid ibex]

Hmm, let me try

This is directly under the floor before texture clipping, and I can't place underneath, am I missing a method to this?

[stark furnace]

think out side of the box

give me one sec i'll give the demo

With room to spare too

[languid ibex]

Are you having to angle underneath the chest?

[stark furnace]

Do top layer first, adust top layer such that you're pleased with height, then remove floor (add placement floor if needed), then you can place bottom row, then insert the orginal deleted flooring back in using q/e or the snap point1-4

And the bottom chest will not clip through the original floor

So no basement/2nd story concerns

[languid ibex]

Ah I see now, well that is handy to be certain. I have never had the need to do that but if I ever do I hope I recall that trick.

To be clear I never wanted to imply one is better than the other, I was only advocating that the differences aren't extreme, and the stigma surrounding BM chests is a little unwarranted. Sure there's points against it, but there's also points for it, however you might personally see the value behind either.

In testing just how vast the differences were, I came to see just how much less they were than even I originally thought, and that was surprising even to me(the BM chest advocate ).

[stark furnace]

🤔 I mean I'd love to see a buff to BM chests

In a game with vertical progression you'd hope the new and cool thing wouldn't be at tier with same old thing

[languid ibex]

I'd love for the next chest advancement to be the same or similar in slot amount, but more compact tbh. It seems like the next natural step.

[snow stone]

Huh ... I apparently started a massive war...

[languid ibex]

I think we just had a misunderstanding where eachother were coming from, I never meant to imply one was better when returning with a screenshot to compare the two, but I think it came across that way in hindsight.

I totally agree that chest advancement shouldn't result in such a similar storage result from the previous.

[subtle depot]

the black metal chest has one spatial advantage
you can stack 5 of them on top of each other without making them difficult to access from ground level

you can access the 5th with iron too, but its inconvenient because you have to squeese yourself up against the chests

and at that point you can also access the 6th black metal chest by raising the floor 0.25 meters

[sonic musk]

The suggestion to make the Ashlands have MORE enemies and fighting is ridiculous. If your suggestion was as you suggested you wouldn't be able to travel 5 feet without a new spawn of 10 enemies to slow you down (which basically already happens).

I cannot possibly fathom someone getting completely overrun and trampled by Charred every 15 seconds and thinking 'You know, this needs to be worse."🙂 👍

[peak bronze]

Both pressed F5 to put setkey staminarate 0.

[granite geyser]

#suggestions message

I fail to understand why they would add a change for a mode that's completely outside of the SP/co-op nature of the game

[light fractal]

I fail to understand what they wrote.

[lament zinc]

#suggestions message and it will be good / useful for......??

[mellow crater]

Fun ?
I would say that a diving emote would be fun.

[stiff stag]

#suggestions message

Reposting your own same suggestion is not allowed
@ivory stump ^
The only time reposting your own suggestion is justifiable is if the original was posted before the hack awhile back, since the previous post would be inaccessible in that context.

[crimson dock]

If not a grausten golem atleast some other feature for renewable cores

[stiff stag]

#suggestions message
So just another generic "do more" or "develop the game" type "suggestion" with no detail, elaboration, or actual idea present.

[quartz totem]

But when someone does elaborate or adds details, many here say it is too convoluted. So it is either black or white kewk.

Yeah, the stonecutter could be used as a "secondary" workbench to the forge/black forge, allowing the player "evolve" their weapons into different paths.
Obsidian adds more general damage.
Leather scraps/pelts/hides (depending of the tier of the weapon) adds more durability to that weapon or tool. etc etc

[languid ibex]

Being convoluted is rarely an issue tbh, you could even search that term in this channel and 4/12 messages are yours. 😛

[quartz totem]

hehehe I know hehehe

[stiff stag]

Not to mention whether it's convoluted or not, that's a problem of the person suggesting the idea, not the general idea itself (for instance there are plenty of examples of a given idea being handled really well by some people and terribly by others), and it's fair to criticize such a thing just as much as it is to criticize no actual idea being present.

[stiff stag]

None of those makes sense for a stonecutter though, as the job of a stonecutter is to cut stone. Those things would fit the artisan table better, however making upgrades in that way doesn't really fit valheim to begin with, so it's a moot point.

[quartz totem]

I was just giving an example other than just the original post of "do that to it"(period).
And I have learned that english is too literal when it comes to wording hehe.

[quartz totem]

I agree with you. Two people sometimes say the veery same thing but the way it was said makes one suggestion stands above the other just because of the way the words were organized and chosen. xD

[stiff stag]

The wording can definitely affect things, as can the execution of the idea.

[quartz totem]

Not crafting in the stonecutter, but I feel some stone and grausten statues in-game of some mobs and maybe items would be really nice. Currently, we only have some sculptured in wood, that raven a wolf... (dont remember the name)

[ivory stump]

My error. The old suggestion is still there. Should I delete the new one? #suggestions message

[zenith sand]

this would be interesting to see, but maybe in black metal instead of bronze, since a plow being in bronze age is too powerful

[hybrid gull]

pretty sure there's not just one mod for that exact purpose already

I just don't think it will ever be implemented in any way because of how everything else works: it's unrealistic to have any tool that let's you plant more than one thing at once. I don't think vikings had any way to automate farming, but once we get to mistlands there might be some magical tool that might help with that...?

even then I don't see it happening tbh

[languid ibex]

I wanted a Plantmancer Staff for that, where you plant about 8 seeds in front of you. It'd be nice to have some uses for eitr outside of combat, I can't seem to get through all my eitr food. 😛

The staff could use the dead raiser animation, but instead plants pop into place in front of you.

[hybrid gull]

#suggestions message
the current ratio is actually very generous: a quick wikipedia search will tell you bronze is 88% copper and 12% tin, so if we wanted to remain true to that, you'd need 7 copper bars for each tin you use on average.
If there's an issue in all this, is the quantity of bronze you get out of it: using 3 bars to create just 1 has always felt quite wrong, even more so when considering their respective weights. I wouldn't have many qualms if the base recipe for bronze was 5 coppers + 1 tin = 5 bronze bars...

it's closer to reality and increases the copper's value in the recipe

[languid ibex]

Copper is harder to acquire than Tin is just not true as well.

[hybrid gull]

I can agree it's easier to end up with a surplus of tin, but that's only because of the lack of recipes using it

and depending on what kind of island the black forest is sitting on, you might only get one big copper node and an endless coast of tin...

still, the issue is in the recipes rather than the availability of resources, I believe

[hybrid gull]

actually, I wouldn't even mind if the current ratio is kept. Just give me two bronze bars if I'm using two copper bars...

I hardly use any braziers or even any building piece that requires bronze nails because of how costly (time-wise) it is to get enough copper: even if you're really unlucky, a full node gives you at least 3 full stacks of copper, which translates to 45 bronze bars, which translates to 9 braziers 😂
Using a 1/9th of an entire node just to build a tiny brazier sounds quite ridiculous

no wonder I'm lighting my base with wooden torches instead...

[lusty trout]

Once you get to Mistlands copper becomes a throw away item.

[subtle depot]

Just don't look into the realism of things in this game please.
If you do, then everything falls apart.
Like how you have to spend 600 weight units worth of metal to make a twohanded sword that weighs 4

That said, i would not mind if all metal crafting recipes were cut in half

[mellow pawn]

I would dare to argue that realism is completely meaningless point when talking about a game like Valheim. That kind of thinking would make some sense if the game tried to be a simulation of the real world.

I also think the ratio is accounted for in the recipes, most things crafted from bronze cost less metal than ones with other metals. Brazier is quite expensive to build, but that would be easy to fix directly

Maybe braziers costing only 3 bronze to built would be more reasonable?

[languid ibex]

There's a difference between emulating realism and designing a limitation system. Nothing falls apart when building structures that protect from rain, and it's also a designed limitation for workbenches to emphasize needing a base. Doing this for a workbench isn't necessary in real life, but protecting from the elements is. It's just a degree of communication from developers as to what is decidedly important. Using realism is great for communicating things to real people.

It's silly to say there's a threshold where realism completely falls out of relevance, even in realistic simulation games there are elements you can point to that aren't realistic.

[subtle depot]

Indeed
Good gameplay will always be more important than realism

Realism for realism's sake is pointless.
Which is why messing with the tin to copper ratio on the grounds of realism is pointless.

[languid ibex]

Haha don't do that thing where you agree but you didn't take my point in fully cmon

Realism informed the copper tin ratio, even if it's not closely followed

[peak bronze]

Repairing weapons, armor and tools costs nothing, so it kinda makes up the need for metals for crafting.

[languid ibex]

Also, just up the resource rate if you feel that way, the amount of metal used in crafts is already really generous.

[mellow pawn]

Do you think the ratio should be more realistic?

[subtle depot]

I already do lol.
What im saying is i would prefer not having to and stuff being cheaper instead

[languid ibex]

Personally no, I think the balance is great where it is.

[languid ibex]

Ah well, you don't have to tbf

To me everything feels incredibly cheap, so I can't help there

I've also just played a lot of games like Ark/SCUM, where most things are about double the cost, so I might just have more patience for it.

[subtle depot]

It was fine back in 2021 when plains was the final biome,
The game could deal with the inflated playtime that the grind provided. Now its too much of a chore. Too much other stuff to do

[languid ibex]

This just sounds like 'there's too much to do, because there's too much to do.'

Seems a bit self imposed, and you might benefit from playing a different way if you're hampering your own enjoyment by taking on too much.

I personally find my way around these issues by progressing with as little as I can, and circling back for mass material gathering with tools 1 or 2 biomes ahead of where they're intended to be farmed.

[dark wyvern]

A lot of people just skip bronze armor after a first playthrough, not worth it.

[viral kraken]

Troll armour until Fenris set for me, might throw on the abomination piece for poison and pierce protection in the swamp, but typically just run troll

[subtle depot]

Problem is I'm not good enough in a fight to play any more risky/bare bones equipment than i already do.
Never was any good with parrying in any game, so I am mainly relying on high damage hits to stagger enemies

[viral kraken]

What about dodging?

They added the “perfect” dodge mechanic now

It apparently costs no stamina

[subtle depot]

Thats my secondary defense, after not letting the enemy get near me in the first place.
And no, it only reduces cost, perfect parries are free, perfect dodges are 50% refunded

[languid ibex]

Fair enough, it is described as a brutal survival game after all. I don't think the work it takes to relieve some of the difficulty, being even easier/cheaper plays into that very well.

[elder summit]

not sure why there's such a vehement disagreement with making bonemass have more options for weapons, it's not like making slash weapons usable against him trivializes his fight.

[hybrid gull]

it's a giant blob of gelatin and mixed bones, I don't think it visually makes sense for it to be neutral to slash damage imo

[elder summit]

well, if realism takes precedence over game mechanics there's a lot of things that start to fall apart

[hybrid gull]

I don't think it's a matter of realism here

[stiff stag]

Weaknesses based on observable traits is already a normal and established thing, not like bonemass is some exception.

[elder summit]

bears and loxes are both big furry beasts, so they'd have consistent weaknesses, right?
yet for bears they resist all physical except slash, and lox resist all physical except pierce.

[hybrid gull]

also, his forsaken power is literally being a bulky tank, which would then make little sense to keep as is because he's now neutral to slash

[elder summit]

so, we just prevent all melees that aren't maces from functioning against the area's boss?

[hybrid gull]

his whole identity is being a tank, and you're trying to take that away...

[elder summit]

having one weapon archetype deal 1.5x damage while every other melee on-tier is doing 0.5x defeats the point of having melee variety

why try out all these different melees you get at swamp tier when the mace is the only one that's going to be relevant

[hybrid gull]

why are you so stuck on bonemass specifically? It's not like the whole game revolves around using a mace, just this one particular boss which is unique

[random monolith]

I haven't used a mace for bonemass in a while

[hybrid gull]

wait, let me complain about not being able to easily defeat bosses with my bare fists, that's very bad balancing

since I can use my fists, as a game mechanic it should be viable!!!!

[elder summit]

hm, almost like there's an unarmed archetype for that

[random monolith]

I agree with you but thats a strawman argument

[hybrid gull]

let's make the first boss slower, so we can punch him more easily

[elder summit]

that got a large expansion this update, actually

[hybrid gull]

so I guess the fists archetype has no problem with any boss, that's great to know

[elder summit]

you're acting like I've asked for bonemass to take 50x damage from slash weapons cause he hurts my feewings

[hybrid gull]

this whole thing just sounds like a "git gud" moment tbh

this boss has one characteristic and you want to take him down with something else besides a mace more easily...

[elder summit]

I have zero problem defeating bonemass, he isn't hard. He's just tedious, and pointlessly restrictive with your weapon choices

[hybrid gull]

what do you fight Eykthir with?

don't you feel restricted that only the bow and the spear are viable options?

[elder summit]

whatever the hell I want usually, been messing around with all sorts of stuff

nope, cause I've used the bear paws on him to great effect, and axes

[stark furnace]

bow and spear are not the only viable options against eik lol

[hybrid gull]

I mean, sure, he's just the first boss, you can even go kiss him in the face

but my point is that bow and spear are probably the intended approach the devs thought of for the boss, much like bonemass

[random monolith]

a bold claim

[elder summit]

nowhere in his design is it implied he favors bows and spears. he has zero resistances or weaknesses

bows are inherently easier to use because they are a ranged option, which is why I didn't comment on bonemass having a VERY RESISTANT modifier to them

[hybrid gull]

because you don't have like a tutorial that kind of points you in the direction that you should use a bow to hunt deers, and lo and behold, you get a giant deer to take down as the boss...

[elder summit]

cool, so anyways I hunt deer with knives, what now

[stiff stag]

The entire point of resistances is to make certain damage types less viable in some situations, pretty open and shut case here. You just don't like that a boss resists the damage type of the weapons you want to use, which is purely a personal problem.

[elder summit]

weapons I want to use being quite literally every other melee option in the swamp

iron sledge & mace are the only on-tier blunt melees

slash would make the iron sword, axe, and battleaxe all usable against bonemass, which at the very least makes it so you can use more than half of the options

[hybrid gull]

and remind me why using more of the available options is important?

[elder summit]

the mace is still the most effective, like it always was. you are still incentivized to use a mace. all that has changes is you are allowed to use other melee archetypes if you want to

[elder summit]

because trying new weapons and getting to use a variety of items is fun

[hybrid gull]

that argument could be applied to every single other mob in the game

I wanna use my sword against Golems, please fix

[elder summit]

golems are a rare elite enemy that are entirely optional to hunt down

and you can still brute force them if you're good at parrying

[hybrid gull]

bonemass is optional as well, since you can find silver in other ways

[elder summit]

yes, but by that logic every boss is optional

[hybrid gull]

you make a very good point

[elder summit]

you can get the krom without fighting a single boss, guess it should be classified as a pre-boss weapon. progression skipping is a thing, but it shouldn't be treated like the norm

and for reference, a weapon that does 60 blunt damage will deal 4x the damage of a 60 slash weapon when fighting bonemass.

because the slash weapon would be doing 30 compared to the blunt's 120

[stiff stag]

Yeah, that's basic math with how a resistance and weakness compare. Literally the same thing with any other enemy that has a weakness to one damage type and resistance to another.

[elder summit]

yeah, and it's crazy that of all on-tier weaponry there are only two weapons that get that buff. honestly, what might be the bigger issue here isn't resistances, but skills being too specific

because a 1h sword and a 1h mace play near-identically minus the damage typing, but use different skills

might be better to just have generalized 1h melee vs. 2h melee skills, so your XP can carry over between weapon types

[stiff stag]

If I train with a sword it doesn't make me more skilled with a mace, and vice versa.

[elder summit]

and thankfully this is a game, not the real world. plus, training with a melee weapon in general would give you some basic fundamentals that can be carried over across other weapons

[stiff stag]

And thankfully what I described is how this game was designed to work, not how you think it should.

[elder summit]

oh, didn't know you're a dev, that's cool

[stiff stag]

Don't need to be a dev to use my eyes and literally see how the game was designed to work.

Guess I need to be a dev to know that bonemass was designed to be resistant to slash damage too 😂

[late sleet]

what lmao
if you hit enemies with a weapon repeatedly
your muscles will get bigger and your hand-eye coordination will get better regardless of shape

magic is already consolidated into a couple skill bars, granted it is introduced much later in the game

[elder summit]

exactly, and magic is some of the most fun I've had because I get weapon diversity

I can actually use all the different staves and spells I get because they do different things while scaling from the same stats

even stuff like embers vs fracturing, where they seem similar but end up being completely different in practice

[late sleet]

tbh a neat thing they could do, without actually deleting half the skills from the game - make gaining skill in one melee weapon also gain skill in all unlocked melee weapon skills (at 1/2 or 1/3 rate)
it would motivate you to try out a bunch of different weapons to unlock the skill and then help with leveling/maintaining without forcing you to use that weapon for everything

would also be more realistic to the "transferable hand-eye coord and muscle gain" thing
meanwhile archery is a whole different set of muscles and hand-eye coord

yeah magic is cool because it's already got as many different types as melee since each stave does its own thing

[elder summit]

absolutely. one of my biggest problems with melee skills currently is that you get pigeon-holed into using maybe one or two weapon types early on ahem maces, and then get stuck in those melees because of the skill difference

which is not to say I dislike maces. I like them a lot. It's just irritating that it can be so difficult to properly utilize the full variety of melee weapons due to skills & damage typing

[late sleet]

I would argue the root of the problem is skill scaling more than damage types - it fundamentally pushes people to stick the weapon they leveled first, because the cost to switch off is so high - basically starting over from scratch.

Out of thin air, a harsh punishment is created for an choice players should be rewarded for: branching out and trying new things.

[molten bloom]

exactly... and yet people still parrot the same old point that weapon gaps are meant to encourage using a variety of weapon types - despite the fact that not all weapon types have significant weapon gaps (clubs/swords) and other existing systems (like the skill system) actively incentivize the opposite

either fill the weapon gaps or consolidate the melee skills

[languid ibex]

The cost of switching isn't high because you hardly benefit from skill to begin with.

[molten bloom]

I completely disagree - and even if that were true it's not a good argument - if the system is esssentially useless why include it in the first place?

[languid ibex]

I never said essentially useless, I said hardly benefit from a skill to begin with.

[molten bloom]

that's the same thing reworded

how is it useful if you hardly benefit lol

[languid ibex]

It's really not, because you don't really feel a weapon's skill difference until level 30-50.

[molten bloom]

okay well good thing you get to and beyond those levels then?

[languid ibex]

Right, and even then it's typically stamina you'd benefit from, which can be managed by being more careful.

[molten bloom]

If I use atgeirs the whole game and now am level 65 with atgeirs, then I get to ashlands which has no atgeir for no reason so I switch to swords which I have a level of 0 in... you think I'm not going to notice a significant difference?

[languid ibex]

I just said you'd see a benefit in stamina mostly, are you just not reading what I'm saying or?

This can be mitigated and made up for during skill loss periods easily with tasty mead.

[molten bloom]

Regardless, there is an issue here. Because either the skill system hardly matters, which is bad because it is the primary punishment for dying. Or they do matter and the existence of weapon gaps makes certain playstyles objectively superior and limits player choice

[languid ibex]

Certain playstyles are objectively superior though, that's no secret.

[molten bloom]

You are just ignoring the problem though? Just because you can mitigate a glaring issue doesn't mean it doesn't exist

[languid ibex]

What's the problem? You want perfection functionality from absolutely every combat option?

[molten bloom]

I already explained the issue

[languid ibex]

Could you at least link to it/

[molten bloom]

And don't exaggerrate my point please... I'm not chasing "perfect" functionality in anything because that is ridiculous. But if weapon gaps are supposedly in the game to encourage player choice then why are swords and clubs magically exempt from this? As well as the fact that this actively clashes with the skill system as discussed earlier. Yes you can mitigate issues, but that doesn't mean they don't exist. They either should fill the weapon gaps or consolidate the melee skills to make it less of a problem.

the swords are especially funny... no knives or atgeirs in the ashlands... but THREE different swords lol

[languid ibex]

They exist even less now because you can train them up on a training dummy all you like with no risk tbh
I'm only speaking to the skill switching issue that I mentioned, I didn't read much more than that.

[molten bloom]

Like I said, you can mitigate the issue - but it's still there

[languid ibex]

What's the issue though? You want skills to be earned without earning them or?

[molten bloom]

what? I just said they either need to fill weapon gaps or consolidate melee skills

[languid ibex]

Why?

[molten bloom]

bruh

[late sleet]

the cost of switching gets more severe the more you level your main weapon
so it traps players into an "mace playthrough" or a "bow playthrough"

saying the benefit isn't significant is a hilariously delusional claim btw
even at 33 skill that's +50% dmg and -10% stam, which is multiple biomes worth of damage
if you go past that the scaling gets completely broken, if you grind bow in a slow playthrough you might *unironically outDPS someone with low Clubs against bonemass *

[molten bloom]

I just spend the last 10 minutes saying why 😭

[languid ibex]

33 skill can be trained up to in less than an hour

That has to be a joke 😛

[late sleet]

so what does this mean? to begin with meaning skill levels 1-10?

[molten bloom]

What's the joke? So are weapon gaps mixed with dedicated weapon-based skill leveling a problem or not?

[languid ibex]

Absolutely no one is trapped, and damage balances are considered even at level 0 skill because of weapon gaps.

Just because it isn't addressed in the most basic way to understand, doesn't mean it isn't.

[molten bloom]

Because if it is actually somehow a good system - you should be taking issue with the fact that sword and clubs are not adherent to this "system"

[languid ibex]

That's why magic staves can still do insane damage at level 0, and be used very reasonably where stamina/eitr is concerned.

Damage levels aren't difficult to utilize when they're introduced, and the fact that it gets easier isn't indicative that it isn't easy to utilize at level 0.

Play how you like, you're not trapped by a skills system that is built to be balanced alongside armor/weapons/forsaken powers/meads/trinkets/food

[late sleet]

it means the cost to try out a new weapon is at least an hour of swinging at TWIG, or it's gonna feel weak
ie. a severe punishment that discourages players from trying new things
that's why players are trapped, because requiring an hour of TWIG left-clicking to make each weapon feel balanced is a terrible mechanic

[molten bloom]

That's just really silly lol. So you can choose to go swords the whole game and have a distinct advanatage because the devs decided to put a sword in every biome (sometimes multiple) but if you want to use a variety of weapons (the apparent purpose of this system) then you will be at a great disadvantage unless you do a bunch of menial grinding? How is this something that should be encouraged? You are confusing the technical ability to mitigate a bad system with the system not being bad. It's an easy fix so that players don't feel locked into certain playstyles

[languid ibex]

It is far from a main aspect that would warrant overhauls like filling weaponry gaps or changing how skills level up.

[languid ibex]

That's just if you want to acheive what you'd suggested was a huge downside, but would only take the same amount of time you'd use to tame two animals 😛

[late sleet]

armor/forsaken/meads/trinkets/food have zero bearing on why the skills system is problematic

[molten bloom]

all you are saying is the problem doesn't matter that much - but it is still a problem

[languid ibex]

Alright well you just made me certain you've no clue why the balance between all of them needs to be struck, and personally don't need to take your opinion on this very seriously.

If skills were to outshine every aspect, you'd just train those up and leave every other element behind with no feelings otherwise.

[molten bloom]

wow, good thing no one is saying that

[late sleet]

I assume the skills were introduced to try and reward players for practicing with a specific weapon, but has been overtuned to the point of locking players in. That is why we have emergent behaviors like "this is gonna be my battleaxe playthrough"

[languid ibex]

The problem can be solved in multiple ways, even passively by just-- switching weapons. You still do more than enough to progress.

[molten bloom]

that doesn't solve the problem at all, and I think you are intentionally ignoring it

[languid ibex]

Nah sorry you're just ignoring the solutions because you want it to be easier.

[molten bloom]

You gave no solution except for in game mitigations to an issue I brought up that essentially amounts to menial grinding

If that's your idea of good game design I have nothing further to add

[languid ibex]

When a solution is quite literally as easy as just switching weapons without massive effect against the player, but all you can reiterate is that it's still a problem, it's just hard to see any point you're making.

[molten bloom]

what exactly would be the downside of filling weapon gaps?

[languid ibex]

The downside is that there is an intention in weapon design, and going out of their way to fulfill some player's confusing cries for help only takes away from development time.

[molten bloom]

It does have a massive effect, and you can swtich weapons but it necessitates grinding. Or you can just use the weapon types that circumvent this system - therein lies the clear issue... do you think the grand majority of players are going to willingly choose to grind?

[molten bloom]

what is this intention??

[languid ibex]

The grinding is just playing the game as is, and it will accrue skill.

[molten bloom]

and why are certain weapon types excluded from it?

[late sleet]

You are offering solutions to "completing the game" not "making the game better"
This is a very frequent fallacy made by vocal players on the server.

Everyone here can easily complete the game.

[molten bloom]

this is just pure delusion at this point

[molten bloom]

or you could stick to the one weapon type and get even farther ahead... is the issue really this hard to comprehend

[languid ibex]

The intention is being laid out in front of you, drip feeding weapon types and keeping things interesting. Magic staves are introduced in the Mistlands, if that's no indicative enough for you, I'm not sure anything would be.

[molten bloom]

good thing nobody mentioned magic - I'm talking about melee weapons that are all introduced basically simultaneously

[languid ibex]

Weapon introduction is weapon introduction.

[molten bloom]

cool, still waiting to hear why it makes sense that swords are in every biome but atgeirs, knives, etc. are not - and how exactly this doesn't interact with the skill system to specifically "main" certain weapon types which is supposedly the opposite of what the system is supposed to do

[languid ibex]

Yeah I'm going to bow out, this is far from a discussion and more of an entrenched opinion growing stronger.

[late sleet]

There is a massive effect against the player. The new weapon starts off 50% worse than the one the player was using.
So every weapon except the one you started with will feel bad, unless you're willing to put in hours of skill grinding.
This discourages players from experiencing the full set of available weapons because they feel terrible on first use.

It's a pretty simple problem tbh, its the solutions that are complex.

[molten bloom]

because you aren't really honestly engaging in the discussion, you are just pretending the glaring issue doesn't exist because you can grind to mitigate it

[languid ibex]

Glaring to you, but you're speaking to someone who doesn't see it the same way at all.

Meaning that's already not a universal truth in the few people discussing it.

[stark furnace]

Honestly hope a 1.1 or even 1.0 does an audit on the skills system

[languid ibex]

Skills for some things need to be altered, but weapons are pretty forgiving in that aspect.

[late sleet]

I think there's a common line of thinking that any dev time spent improving the problems most complained-about will drastically delay 1.0 release
So any time any complaints arise, which is daily, they are met with dismissive attitudes by these players who've been cooped up in here for 5 years who hope that shouting down the complaints will make 1.0 come sooner

[languid ibex]

Miker you just like to boil every discussion down to that same point without adding much else though. People persistently speaking here are just passionate.

[late sleet]

For me personally, I've waited 5 years and I'm fine waiting as long as necessary for devs to cook.
Remaining clunk can generally be solved by mods, but it would be better if incorporated into the base game.

[languid ibex]

Being reductive of points being made and generalizing discussions isn't moving anything along.

[late sleet]

I am passionate. That's why I empathize with and validate other players who want to see the game improved.
I don't dismiss their suggestions.

[languid ibex]

Also, I will mention you are just speaking to community members, and pointing that out is just stating the obvious. Becoming frustrated by someone's opinion enough to say they've been cooped up here for 5 years or however you frame it is just more of a self report than anything.

[late sleet]

Calling out the most common fallacy used on this server to dismiss player's suggestions is not reductive.
Calling out those who act condescending and alienate passionate new players is something I feel obligated to do, in order to keep talking about Valheim with cool people here.
Since you're not talking about Valheim I'm gonna disengage. o7

[languid ibex]

I personally empathize with developers, it's easy to lose sight of how much work goes into a game, and fail to consider that they're people struggling with daily lives as well. Passionately suggesting something is one thing, but becoming upset in the discussion channel serves no one. Having developed many games myself, I'll definitely admit there's bias where trying my best to see what's clearly intentional, and what ideas might skew that intention or development time.

--but again, I'm just a community member and you don't have to agree with what I say in the slightest.

[late sleet]

I agree, devs likely have a ton on their plate. I strongly believe it's not my place to suggest how they use their time.
I will instead happily yap all day about valheim's pain points, severity and impact on player experience, and potential solutions.
If a dev finds something I wrote helpful then that's awesome

[stark furnace]

Players are great at finding what feels good and what feels bad

They're not so good at suggesting solutions

[languid ibex]

Absolutely, but when the game has measurable success, it becomes tricky to mess with what works. I think the system that allows for consistency in some weapons, and niche usage in others is going to appeal to different players, but can easily cause this confusion when looked at as a whole.

Swords being an option for the consistent usage and skill growth to satisfy those who would want to play that way is just an option at the end of the day. Not necessarily a gauge for what's missing in other weaponry.

[late sleet]

I can't just complain all day!

[smoky coyote]

If you have so much free time you could just make a mod for valheim yourself that will fix all your problems for you

[stark furnace]

I guess that's a good way to stone wall any discourse

[languid ibex]

Ah yes the ol' do it yourself

[late sleet]

lmao I already do this
or at least I do the balancing math and a wizard who doesn't even play does all the mod dev
but ideally the base game would feel good to play

[mighty grove]

My thoughts on the subject is that I've never really thought much about the skills impacting my DPS, I always carry around a sword, spear, and mace - not that I use the sword very much - because to me combat is far more about not dying than killing other things, so the skill system remains fine as it is

[elder summit]

skills make a massive difference in DPS

141% damage at max, and 33% less stamina usage.

Obviously, these bonuses aren't that strong for a large part of the game, but they build over time, and the further you go the more you'll notice the difference between weapons of the same tier.

[late sleet]

its magnified even more by breakpoints and stagger thresholds
being able to sneak oneshot a drake or fuling is a huge difference from not oneshotting
chainstunning a troll, abom, golem, lox etc vs not chainstunning

[mighty grove]

Yeah I get that they're really good, but they aren't necessary, you can still play perfectly fine using a weapon you don't have a high skill in, like I just took down a 2-star fuling with a silver sword that I have 13 skill in, would it have been easier with my spear that has 47 skill? Absolutely, but its a survival crafter not a I obliterate every enemy in every situation crafter

But far more importantly, you gain access to every type of weapon bar staves by the black forest, so your skills aren't that high and you can choose to start using different weapons with minimal penalties

[late sleet]

this has never been about what's "necessary", the game isn't that hard
it's about how the skills system should probably not incentivize players to pick one weapon type in BF and ignore the rest until Mistlands

[stiff stag]

That's a choice you make that you're blaming on the game, I see no actual issue here.

[late sleet]

No choice is being made and no blame has been laid.
The skills system creates incentives and I'm explaining to the audience how it works and why it's problematic. You are free to disagree.

[mighty grove]

You can choose to use multiple weapon types before that, I mostly went with spears because I like them the most, but then I hit swamps and it encouraged me to choose another weapon type because of how many enemies resist pierce, this is a good thing, it was the game being designed in a way to encourage players to diversify while still relatively early, if you choose to ignore that lesson until you get to the point at which there is a significant difference made by skills, that's on the player, the game already incentivised players to diversify

Yes it does create an incentive, but it also incentives having multiple damage types through the resistance system which the player encounters immediately, and given there's only 3 types of physical damage it's not hard to run with two weapon types so that you're covered on most bases

[late sleet]

I believe this discussion got started because a player started off with Clubs and had no reason to diversify till after Bonemass
I don't think anyone wants to remove skill scaling entirely, just make the scaling less huge
For reference, the difference between 0 and 33 skill is 50%, which is bigger than the buffs from Yag, trinket, and Bear/Vile armor multiplied together
like
that's a lot of incentive to stand in front of TWIG with your m1 taped down for an hour

-# and that's before getting into bows, which scale about 4x harder than that

[coral shoal]

Man if getting Dyrnwyn ends up being an achievement and it doesn't automatically pop it bc I already own it ill be so upset

[stone citrus]

Maybe 10 people made it to 100 in any skill 🙀

Imagine if Skyrim was like that 🤢

It would just be unfortunate if that's the final version of the skill system, that's what we'll have to deal with
Max level 15 blood magic naturally

[coral shoal]

I really dont want to start over when 1.0 comes around lol

[subtle depot]

A bit of perspective I learned when I was a dev for a small racing game.
I was responsible for designing how the cars behaved, how fast they were, how good they cornered, and how easy it was to fuck up, spin out and crash.
So, it was essentially balancing and difficulty tuning.

However, at that time, I was also good enough at racing games to be at world record pace in the ones i was good at, I even set a few wr's on the courses that specifically suited the aspects I was especially good at.
What this ended up doing was to essentially make me blind to a whole host of issues that most people would have, because i could just overcome those issues with pure skill almost subconsciously.
and herein lies the issue.
When you are too good at your own game, you will inevitably make it a lot harder than you might have intended.

Thus, switching your weapon type in the middle of a playthrough might be fine if you are really good at the game.
But if you are more average, its a harsh penalty that will keep you set in your weapon.
Personally, I would not go into the mistlands with a weapon i have less than 50 levels in.

[stone citrus]

#suggestions message
Another thing I've been thinking of which would be more functional but less interesting is having it be
One handed weapons skill
Two handed weapons skills
Ranged skill
Magic skill

Would be waaaay more functional than whatever we have right now which locks you into one weapon type

It won't get rid of the sad reality of dumping your level 55 clubs to start using magic

[stiff pier]

I think that the skills as is are not a problem, I like bashing the TWIG to earn the high levels, plus if you take your time with the game and not speedrun it you actually gain a lot of levels on the weapons you are using

I reached lvl 80 on my swords skill when I made it the first time in the Ashlands and did not use the TWIG for that

Also, I had 70 skill level on clubs and polearms on top of that

I am in the BF right now and my fists skill and spears skill are lvl 30 already and I still have tin mining to do

The process of earning the skill level of your weapon is fantastic imo

[late sleet]

frostner all the way through Fader trust

[stone citrus]

The process of earning the skill level is fun yes
That's not really the point

But since you enjoy it, it would be interesting if you'd timelapse woodcutting to 100
"You don't need 100" - I won't accept this argument

[languid ibex]

Pointing out it's ridiculous to focus a skill to level 100 isn't much against the system, especially one of the easier skills to passively level up(woodcutting). You'd make more sense mentioning Swimming or Fishing, which do need some help to be fair. Not accepting that level 100 isn't necessary is perfectly fine, but it's just a condition of skills likely instilled by other games. Valheim just doesn't require you to max out a skill, the experience thresholds are insane after level 80, but at that point you've definitely acquired more than enough knowledge/gear/equipment to make your journey that much easier. You don't need to accept that argument, but it is how most people will experience the game, and we rarely see complaints surrounding skills not helping something along enough(besides fishing).

[stone citrus]

I just wish to know what's expected 🤔 but I guess it always just boils down to not needing it
Vestigial system

No one needs a better skill system
It's just there

[languid ibex]

Skills inform a playthrough and provide benefits, but not enough to ignore other systems.

You'll still want mead/forsaken powers/good weapons/better armor/trinkets/etc.

[stone citrus]

It's such an okayish mediocre system in some parts like run and jump
Borderline garbage in the other skills

But really all I wish to know is what is expected from a normal playthrough
And what should you expect to reach in a good playthrough

60-70?
I only reached 70 jump from building for hours and hours

If they'll settle on this, fine whatever

[languid ibex]

Each character is unique to a degree wherein they've maybe done more swimming, or used certain things more, so the playthrough makes them feel slightly different. In that way you're still going to improve, but not to a degree where skills become a main focus in any sense.

[stone citrus]

So a person who loves shields and tanks all day
What should he expect

Level 45
And if he's a good player
Maybe level 40

[languid ibex]

To become naturally stronger.

[languid ibex]

Welp, that's if they don't die as well. A player can bottom out consistently without enough care for staying alive, and skills being a death penalty but also ultimately unimportant to progression is great for all types of players.

[stone citrus]

Unimportant
I like that

[languid ibex]

It's true, skills focus can come down to, 'I like big number-- number big now' in caveman terms.

[stone citrus]

I still stand by and believe that a normal playthrough should naturally be close to 100 in the things you do

You don't have to be a super diehard
You don't have to be painfully good
And you don't have to be immortal to achieve

[languid ibex]

Scales should do a 0-10 skill level only challenge run 😄

[stone citrus]

You should be by the time you reach deepnorth
High 80s

Impossible if you're a mage because half the game you had no access

[languid ibex]

I hit 100 on run and jump before I finish Mistlands on most runs to be fair, a bit more focus on other things could probably net 100, but I like to mix it up. The weapon variety at that point is just more fun than leveling skills.

[stone citrus]

I hit 70 in clubs but I was grinding it
Lost it all in ashlands

Grinding it mind you
Like mindlessly waiting for mobs to spawn

[languid ibex]

70 is typically where you stop feeling skills influence stamina/damage anyways.

[stone citrus]

Because it takes too long

[languid ibex]

Yeah

Also the increases beyond that point are minimal.

You mostly feel the increases from levels 30-70

[stone citrus]

Imagine getting blood magic beyond 30 even
Aye aye aye what a nightmare

There's just so much to change

[languid ibex]

That's balanced for being introduced late though, as are most weapons with progression gaps.

[stone citrus]

What do you mean

[languid ibex]

The damage scale accounts for naturally being low leveled.

[stone citrus]

But you can still grind it out

[languid ibex]

Absolutely, but that's indicative that it isn't expected of the player.

[stone citrus]

Is that actually true
They made blood magic more powerful to account for it being introduced late and has no levels ?

Levels increase power, lowers eitr cost, and HP cost I think

And stronger barriers

[languid ibex]

It's quite true in terms of usage compared to other weaponry, the eitr/stamina/hp is static enough to be utilized immediately without skills.

[stone citrus]

I'm not talking observation
I'm asking of that's how they did it
That's their design philosophy

Also by design
Expected to be very low level?

[languid ibex]

I mean, I am unsure of direct quotes, but the perception is clear enough. Countless mentions of this by players solidifies that feeling.

[stone citrus]

🤔 wow, I dislike the skill system even more now

Skill system running on pure hope and ambition

[languid ibex]

It's because you want it to be as other games make it ultimately. If this were the only game you'd played with a skill system, you might feel other games put too much emphasis on it.

It's a refreshing take on skills in my opinion, and it'd be easy to take the route many people insist it should take.

[stone citrus]

Maybe 🤔 so I have to get used to seeing skills like swimming sitting at 10/100
And block at 40/100
And woodcutting maybe at 40/100 as well, unless I'm using a billion wood, then it should be 50/100

[stone citrus]

Not really
Souls games have level 99 cap
What did they do, soft caps and hard caps

[languid ibex]

That high of a skill still offers plenty to a player, but a black metal axe + skill might cost one less swing on the toughest of trees ultimately.

[languid ibex]

Right, but that's comparing apples and oranges ultimately.

[stone citrus]

I'm comparing systems, not games entirely 🤔 it's fine

[languid ibex]

Right, but still how the games utilize that system is entirely different.

[stone citrus]

So I can't use it as an example

[languid ibex]

Oh you can, but it just informs your bias for how you think it should be, where Valheim has complex usage balances to account for. Stamina meads still need their niche, Berserkir meads should still feel useful, Eikthyr's power should still feel like a nice utility, etc.

[stone citrus]

But I like doing exactly what skill is to level it up individually
Like in the elder scrolls, you get better for using the skill more
My points still being that I believe 100 should be more achievable, whether it's by people who grind till their fingers fall or by normal players. And I'd rather have the normal player reach it with a little more effort
Skills pseudo lock you out of other builds or weapons as a new player. No one wants to start over with a new item
And late introduction to magic

Should you really go all the way to deep north and still have low skill levels? Gitgud?

It's just something to think about

In the end I do agree, it doesn't really matter

I think it'll end up being just that
A vestigial system

[languid ibex]

I can definitely understand the want for 100 to be easier to achieve, and I'd be all for allowing the player to hit 100 before going to the mountains, but knocking down the benefits of it slightly. That just doesn't seem the be the design choice, and the developers opted into 100 feeling very difficult to reach. This can also inform a massive sense of accomplishment, so I can't knock that either.

As many players have mentioned though, there are some skills that aren't balanced in this current system and could use an exp gained rebalancing.

[stone citrus]

The only other option is for the game to be much longer

[languid ibex]

To be fair the game can take as long as you want, some people are on 1k+ hours and only just started heading to Ashlands.

The exploration side of things opens up so many avenues, I spent maybe 80 hours setting up an ideal berry portal chain, first I needed to locate abundant berry patches, mark them, travel back to them with portal materials, set up small safe enclosures for the portals, etc.

[peak bronze]

Crossbows being one of those.

[forest plank]

#suggestions message Bronze is an alloy that consists mainly of copper (about 90%) and tin (about 10%).

minimum 60% has to be Copper to get Bronze

[languid ibex]

Valheim isn't a 1:1 representation of reality, it's just informed by it.

Besides, the Tin Ore icon is mostly rock, who's to say just how much tin it results in.

[forest plank]

I think the 2:1 Ratio is good and should not be touched. the Copper age is nothing compared to the Iron you need in valheim, it is perfect as it is

[round onyx]

crossbows also just suck upgrading them gives so little damage it never will end up mattering

it’s literally like a 1% damage buff for arby and less for ripper

(most melees get like 4% on the low end, and most bows are at like 8-10%)

[subtle depot]

upgrading a flint axe gives like 50% increased damage

[round onyx]

yea but that’s earlygame numbers, within the endgame stuff the other weapons is the numbers i listed

ignoring the staff of the wild getting a 100% damage buff per level

[stark furnace]

doesn't staff of wild really only get affected by elemental magic tho, Like the vine dmg comes from elemental magic skill, the hit comes from the upgrade

[subtle depot]

the staff of fracturing also has insane upgrade scaling

[round onyx]

yea the magic scaling tends to scale way higher, for same reason

[round onyx]

i have no idea, the menu damage is what i’m referring to, if the actual vine damage is different i’m unaware of that

[stark furnace]

ye the blunt is +20d for every upgrade, but upgrading the staff does not affect the vines dmg itself

[round onyx]

ah

[lusty trout]

Copper/bronze age lasts like 15 minutes, then you get crazy amounts in Mistlands. I'm not sure why people are making a huge issue of it?

[viral kraken]

Enough to refine into a full tin bar

[lament zinc]

Because the other "issues" that are discussed each month on repeat are already discussed for this month.

The copper / tin ratio was the only one that wasn't done in September and October, afaik.

[late sleet]

staff of wild scales insanely hard with skill, at 100 skill its absolutely bonkers even compared with other staves

[late sleet]

the discussions will continue until morale improves

[late sleet]

nah even my bow feels noticeably crappier anytime i drop into the 80s or 70s
and that's the one that allegedly doesn't scale

[stiff stag]

What Omni is talking about is diminishing returns. The feeling from dying and losing skill levels is a separate matter from the feeling while gaining levels.

[ashen tinsel]

I thought it was more sustained vines per level now, as in multiplying damage output of vines per staff upgrade.

I'd love to see a reload speed buff for crossbows in the same vein since we already see upgrades that change multiple aspects.

[hushed ledge]

It's already there just hold E

[sick breach]

I think they want to be able to consolidate stacks of items that are already in a chest. EG if you had a chest where every slot contained 10 resin, you could press a button and they would immediately be consolidated into 2 slots of 50 and 30 respectively.

Still, i dont see the point. It only occurs when you arent in the habit of ctrl clicking or holding E to storeitems into your chests, so why would you take advantage of a new button for storage management. Its easy enough to resolve by ctrl clicking every non full stack into your inventory, then opening the chest while holding E.

[lament zinc]

I wonder how many people actually know that you move an entire stack from your inventory in a chest - or vice versa - when holding [ctrl] and clicking at it.

When you do that, smaller stacks won't appear; unless you use [shift] + click to get a small amount from it.

[sick breach]

There are a lot of storage shortcuts people usually havent found out about. Every new server i join i get to enlighten at least 3 people with shift+craft for mass crafting.

[lament zinc]

It's possible people don't know about the [ctrl]+click option, simply because they started playing after holding [E] was added for dropping stacks in a chest or thought the old way was removed.

[languid ibex]

@junior finch It'd be neat to have as an option if you could say, tag the portal to use a specific image. If you typed Meadows Beefarm, the portal would still only link to the term "Beefarm" but show a generic Meadows biome within the portal when nearby. I really enjoy this idea. 👍

[junior finch]

Generic images would certainly make it less taxing on servers.

[languid ibex]

Yeah it could even be based on the biome the connected portal is in.

[late sleet]

the gap between 75 and 100 skill is the same regardless of how you got there. You might notice it less when leveling up because the change is gradual, but that's not the "feel" I'm talking about.

[junior finch]

I think it was in one of the patchnotes somewhere wayback... but yes, I get your point.

[late sleet]

I agree, this is a really neat idea. It may be technically infeasible to do more than a generic image/biome viewport, but regardless I'd also suggest playing a bit of the appropriate biome music over the whirring portal noise

It should be possible to determine the biome of the portal on the other side automatically 👀

[cursive forge]

or just yk, label the portal

[late sleet]

way cooler if it autodetects tho
unfortunately you wouldn't be able to prank your buddy with a "Black Forest" portal that dumps you one-way in Ashlands

[sick breach]

Could just make the portal name appear when looking through the portal, not just at it. Easier to scan througha series of portals that way.

[late sleet]

oh absolutely agree
might have to change the way hover text works tho

[sick breach]

I mean right now if the player gets close enough to the portal and their cursor is over the portal hitbox the tooltip appears. Just need to make the hitbox extend across the opening.

[cursive forge]

None issue tbh, just seems like a bloat suggestion for something that works fine.

[languid ibex]

@smoky coyote Excellent idea, some banger suggestions today

[peak bronze]

Although duplicates for armor pieces haven't been a thing not long after Bog Witch update.

[languid ibex]

Right but is crafting skill returning anything?

[peak bronze]

No it's not. Only affects to possibility to gain extras for non equipment items like nails, arrows, bombs, summoning items (Sealbreaker, bells) etc.

[hybrid gull]

just like farming and cooking work as well

[peak bronze]

And slightly faster crafting time.

[languid ibex]

Yeah, I think it'd be nice if it were return a random material or two.

[hybrid gull]

I believe it also reduces hammer stamina usage

[peak bronze]

True, that too.

[languid ibex]

If the idea is that you're so good a crafting you can make things work with less items, not that you're actually duplicating anything.

[hybrid gull]

which I'd argue doesn't really matter unless you use the hammer while going around for whatever reason

[peak bronze]

Understandable.

The duplication of armor pieces was quite fun non intented feature while it lasted.

Some even managed to craft duplicate Dyrnwyn.

[smoky coyote]

Thank you very much

[chrome matrix]

Why the dislikes on krom/slayer buff 🙁

[hushed ledge]

I never used krom/slayer

[fluid barn]

Oh someone already suggested adding customisable hotbar keybinds, weird that it's not a feature
Hopefully there's a mod for that at least (?)

[eternal storm]

Didn't vote against but I don't think a suggestion with 0 reasons why the change should happen is much of a chance of being liked.

[late sleet]

MTP already removed with the latest update
its secondary is pretty damn good

[stark furnace]

Just needs to give more than 1 adrenaline

[late sleet]

tbh the only thing I'd ask for is the hitboxes still feel weird but maybe I'm just not used to it

[chrome matrix]

Hit box feels small. Needs an update.

[stiff pier]

The hit boxes are much better now

[lofty wave]

What’s weird about them?

[rocky pine]

#suggestions message

it is complex imo to have some sort of first pov in Valheim, the entire game would need to be modified to somehow balance gameplay for both POVs

probably instead of that adding a new tab for more customization for the 3rd person view in the settings menu could be more achievable without having to perform major changes into the game

[hybrid gull]

I'd say the issue isn't really the camera itself, since as far as I'm aware, that's just an object you can give coordinates to and it will do its job no matter where it is.
The problem is how the combat system has been built: the "attack where you aim" thing would be a problem if other mobs could hit you in some way you can't, but every entity in the world is constrained the same way, so I don't think it's an issue (and the Call to Arms update kind of mitigated that already for the spear and such).
As for the "getting lost in building" part, I have no idea what that means. You can just really zoom in your camera and it be won't much different from a first POV camera imo.

[late sleet]

sometimes my sword will pass through an enemy but no hitreg 🤷‍♂️

[lofty wave]

Sometimes it can look like that when another enemy is closer to you because sword hitboxes don’t hit through objects like battleaxe primary can, or is there any other situation where you notice this?

[mellow crater]

#suggestions message sure, a stealth armor would indeed be incredible. Maybe adding it as light armor in Black Forest ?

More seriously, I don’t get your point. Have you ever used troll armor ?

[languid ibex]

Can't say I've seen this happen, do you have any clips handy?

[ashen tinsel]

I know there's a long standing issue where if you hit 2+ targets at different distances (ie. tip and hilt impacts) with swords the further ones may not register. If the closest target is a wall it may look like MTP still.

[lofty wave]

They'd need to be at a similar angle too, not just different distances. The shapecasts used in a sword hitbox intentionally only register the closest object instead of all objects hit.

[late sleet]

oh yeah that's probably my issue with it
I was testing MTP removal and was struggling to actually hit multiple targets when battleaxe had no such problem

why intentionally though, that's wack

[ashen tinsel]

Dunno if theres a lore reason we can hit enemies directly through walls with battleaxes n such, but not swords. Always felt a bit arbitrary to me. 2H swords should at least if its to control player power when using shields.

[stiff stag]

Hitting enemies through walls in general isn't intended.

[lofty wave]

Why is there a variable on attacks that allows it?

[hybrid gull]

@round wigeon have you actually played up to the plains at least? You most definitely don't want such a big variety of food either, because there's already quite plenty, all easily farmable.
The suggestion as a whole sounds like you want to turn Valheim into Stardew Valley, which will 100% not happen.

[late sleet]

demolisher and staff of embers be like

[stiff stag]

What do you mean a variable that allows it? Attacking through walls in games generally is due to bugs in collision detection or hitboxes clipping through, allowing you to damage enemies when a solid structure is in the way. It's likely only "allowed" because it's not always an easy problem to solve, not because they actually mean for it to be there.

[lofty wave]

Some attacks in valheim such as battleaxe primary and polearm secondary, and various enemy attacks are specifically flagged to hit through walls.

The variable in their data that allows this is called hitThroughWalls, it can’t be an accident

[hybrid gull]

I'll still argue that unless you physically destroy what's between you and an enemy (or vice versa), damage should not go through walls (it's fine if it gets through other entities, though)

sure, it makes for a nice cheese mechanic when you're perhaps underprepared for a certain dungeon, but on the opposite it lets enemies like log trolls hit you when inside a fircking stone tower, which makes no sense

even more so if the tower is completely sealed and the enemy doesn't even have eye contact with you (or vice versa)

[languid ibex]

I think it's more of a middle ground solution, because there are cases where a troll that size would just obliterate the structure, but instead the danger is presented in a different way.

[hybrid gull]

I mean, if he's capable of demolishing an entire building with a single swing I don't mind receiving damage as well

[languid ibex]

A similar thing for considering what can hit through walls can be said, where weapons like a battleaxe or atgeir could in theory cleave through a gap.

[languid ibex]

Well that's just it, there's no way to measure that in terms of structural integrity.

[hybrid gull]

idk that much about programming, but can't the game check if the last object the log had contact with is still intact or not?

[languid ibex]

So it's the middle ground solution, emulate that same feeling without complex damage depending on structures.

[hybrid gull]

if it is, then no damage is dealt further

[languid ibex]

Absolutely, what Blob mentioned above is that it's intentional in some cases, meaning it's likely to emulate a feeling.

Trolls presenting little danger and being deflected so easily might've been tested and decided against because it has less strain on the player's awareness.

[hybrid gull]

my specific example doesn't seem that intended, though... I can understand that the impact of a sledge hammer can create waves in the ground that damage nearby creatures, but logs phasing through walls??

it doesn't have anything to do with whether it's easy or hard to avoid their attack either, because that's subjective

[languid ibex]

I'm just saying it's meant to be that way so the danger presented is more on par with the threat level they'd like.

[hybrid gull]

then give trolls extra damage against buildings so they more easily destroy everything instead lol

[languid ibex]

That's not the same thing at all though.

[hybrid gull]

if the aim is to make players believe "there isn't much you can do against trolls", I believe giving them extra damage against buildings helps that image better than making them physics-defying by bypassing walls

[languid ibex]

I've lost you somewhere 😛

[lofty wave]

Having your buildings destroyed faster than they are now might feel too punishing though

[languid ibex]

Hitting through walls = higher threat level. The intention isn't to have them crashing everything down.

[hybrid gull]

you're missing the point, clearly

[languid ibex]

I'm just explaining why it is the way it is, I'm not attempting to agree with what you're saying.

[hybrid gull]

I konw the intention isn't to make them destroy stuff

I was just presenting a potential solution to the "trolls may not be as dangerous otherwise" if the bypassing-walls mechanic was removed

[languid ibex]

There's just, no solution needed, it's not broken.

[hybrid gull]

it most definitely is, so let's just agree that we disagree

[languid ibex]

As was said above, there's a specific variable in the code written to have it work that specific way.

[stiff stag]

Alright, I was unaware that was a thing. Just assumed it was a bug/unintended as is the usual case. Thanks for the info.

[hybrid gull]

well, some damage types would make sense to pass through walls: poison, perhaps fire, and basically stuff that actually gets through, not physical stuff. Different approach to entities, since a sword could potentially slice more than one enemy, the shockwave of a sledge hammer does propagate in all directions no matter how many entities there are, and so on...

[lofty wave]

It's disabled on most attacks so the developers are already only using it in places where they think it's appropriate

[hybrid gull]

just because the variable is in the code it doesn't mean you can use it as justification either: it might have been a bad idea to use it, maybe?

[lofty wave]

I was just pointing out that it's something the developers chose to add, not a bug that was never meant to exist

[hybrid gull]

I'd really love to hear the reason behind troll log attacks getting through everything, then

maybe there is a good reason and I can't think of it

[languid ibex]

If you fight a Troll where they live, you can't just duck behind a tree and survive everything.

[hybrid gull]

uh, sure, I don't mind that?

[languid ibex]

There's your reason.

[hybrid gull]

the word "everything" doesn't mean "just trees"

[languid ibex]

Unless you want the developers to define collisions for every little thing, wall typically is interchangeable with impassable collision object in code.

[hybrid gull]

sounds like lazy coding, then

[languid ibex]

So in collision terms, tree = wall, wall = wall.

[hybrid gull]

is it that hard to create a passableWall variable or whatever?

[lofty wave]

Attacks that dont hit through walls still have some objects they can pass through, such as other characters on a friendly faction/group

[languid ibex]

Yeah I just don't think it's what they want to do, because it changes very little, and Trolls pose hardly any threat.

[hybrid gull]

so we're justifying it with more lazyness, sure

[languid ibex]

For an indie development team, saying they're lazy is pretty reductive.

[lofty wave]

It's laziness because the devs aren't making the game work exactly as you want it to?

[hybrid gull]

that's not where the discussion should be going

and it's not that I want the game to be how I want it to: most of the stuff in the game is physics-based, but the troll decided he's above the rules of physics and phases through stuff with his log

[languid ibex]

Okay, but in that same line of thinking, the log should be doing far more than registering some floating damage numbers.

[hybrid gull]

and as far as reasons go, you both haven't provided anything conclusive besides "that's just how it is"

[languid ibex]

It's a middle ground where emulating threat comes into play.

[hybrid gull]

sure, the log should perhaps break at some point, or whatever a log does when it hits a bunch of rocks. If you want a middle ground, you simply check if the rocks crumbled and let the damage pass through, otherwise you don't

no need to change animations or anything, just don't let damage through intact objects

if you're feeling fancy, you can even code it that the total damage gets reduced by the destroyed object and stuff like that

[lofty wave]

All boss melee attacks hit through walls too so it's something the developers like to use to make attacks more threatening, probably to avoid players finding a way of cheesing the fight by hiding behind an indestructible or very strong object

[hybrid gull]

could always give each boss the power to inhibit certain things instead of letting physical attacks through, much like how you can't build near vendors or other special places

like a magical barrier that doesn't let you escape and doesn't allow building, or idk

[lofty wave]

Many boss spawn locations are already indestructible objects to hide behind, so you don't need to build anything anyway

[languid ibex]

This is a solid point

[hybrid gull]

sounds like not-very-thought-out behavior that could definitely be refined with the experience they've got with the game in the years

[eternal storm]

Maybe there's some overthinking going on here because to me it seems that all damage sources ignore obstacles unless such obstacles are specifically intended as targets (like trees), and that's probably because it's much easier for machines than emulating all collisions all the times. It's not a matter of game design, just of performances on an already pretty heavy game.

[hybrid gull]

not really, since players still find ways to cheese them, if they really want to, but sure...

[languid ibex]

Putting out preventative measures is still a good thing

[hybrid gull]

I'm reading you can cheese The Queen, and a good portion of the early bosses can just be shot from a safe distance anyway, if you really want to get it done easily

if they really cared about cheesing, they would have fixed as much as possible all those cheesing methods, like the one for Moder under her altar

[languid ibex]

You might want to take a closer look, all damage sources are not ignoring obstacles.

[eternal storm]

Ok, what does that mean?

[random monolith]

Depending on the attack it wouldn’t be too hard to make them collide with their surroundings, however then your AI has to be smart enough to avoid that kind of thing for their attack to not be ruined and thus making the game way easier

[languid ibex]

This just sounds like, 'if they really cared this indie studio would make it perfect'

[hybrid gull]

uh, no?

[languid ibex]

So you understand that they just won't be able to fix everything?

[hybrid gull]

they could have simply added some sort of "regeneration" to the terrain when Moder is summoned to prevent cheesing, that would sound more like they don't want people to cheese it

apparently the way to cheese the queen is through walls again, so why not make those completely block everything instead?

[languid ibex]

Uh.. that'd be a great way to have players fall through the world.

[hybrid gull]

lesson learned once you experience it, I guess

at least the message is clear in that case: don't do it

or, if you want to be fair, force spawn the player back to a certain location after the regeneration

[eternal storm]

The only time I recall someone from IG talking about cheesing they said it doesn't matter much to them if players want to cheese. And we were talking about a much glaring "problem" i.e. players being able to get indestructible barriers from early game (raising terrain with hoe and stones).

[random monolith]

You want to punish players for preparing the terrain around them for a boss fight?

[languid ibex]

Some cheese is likely allowed to be fair, but I can see where running behind things to always stay safe would just get stale.

[hybrid gull]

I mean, the raised terrain looks like an oversight as well. Sure, it make sense you can't damage it from above, but from the side... it's also pretty boring to fight using raised terrain anyway, so I guess that comes down to player preference in the end

I'd still think it would be fair to keep the boss area intact, if you want players to go through a certain kind of challenge

[languid ibex]

Many players claim they couldn't progress without it(terrain walls), and that they're just not good enough. In that sense, I'm glad there's an option I suppose.

[hybrid gull]

otherwise you're just spending a few minutes of your life clicking a button instead

I mean, why playing the game at all then?

[languid ibex]

I'm just glad they do.

[eternal storm]

I meant the cheese part: raised terrain is cheap and effective af compared to any other walls available to players until late game, the point being IG is ok with it, not because it's raised terrain, but because they're ok with some cheese in general. Not my take.

[languid ibex]

The more the merrier.

[hybrid gull]

pretty sure the difficulty curve isn't much of an issue, since there are many souls game enjoyers

[lusty trout]

#suggestions message. clearly you haven't played the game very long. We have bread.

[languid ibex]

I only mentioned it because you said it was an oversight and pretty boring.

[hybrid gull]

I wasn't even discussing raised terrain in the first place, but here we are

[languid ibex]

Hitting through walls is hitting through walls ultimately. Terrain or not.

[hybrid gull]

I also want my punches to phase through wooden walls, plz thx

[eternal storm]

So, do we agree the problem doesn't depend on design, on the devs' laziness, on balance, or on cheese? Because I don't see much of an argument here, aside from you not liking it. I don't like it either, but dislike alone won't do much.

[languid ibex]

Unfortunately they don't get the variable

[hybrid gull]

I wouldn't be sure about the first two/three things you listed, you know...

we don't know the code, nor how simple (or not) it is

[eternal storm]

I'm not sure on your take either because it's just opinions with no real facts behind them.

[languid ibex]

Yikes, I can only assume you've never worked on a project as large as Valheim, otherwise you wouldn't infer they're just being lazy.

[hybrid gull]

you don't have to assume if you've read what I wrote so far

[languid ibex]

Right, so why speak negatively about something you've little experience with personally.

The amount of work it'd take to reorient collision definitions to specific objects would be immense.

[sick breach]

#suggestions message

You may want to unbundle your suggestion into smaller, discrete suggestions, otherwise you wont get support unless voter is 100% onboard with everything in the suggestion.

There is definitely a lot in your suggestion that shows you haven't completed the game, i would highly recommend completing first before suggesting additions as you dont know if your ideas already exist.

Also also, your suggestions amount to "here are real viking things, put them in valheim", when you should also consider whether their addition necessarily makes the game more enjoyable to play.

[hybrid gull]

that sounds more like a "shut up" just because I have no experience in the field. But would that mean I could talk if I was more experienced?

[languid ibex]

That just means maybe less derogatory statements when nothing you're saying you can be certain is even possible.

[eternal storm]

Specifically, do you know how collision works in games, and how much it would impact on Valheim performances if done "right"? I don't, I'm just guessing it's not trivial.

[hybrid gull]

and I'm pretty sure I have never really implied there should be a "perfect" collision system at all

but sure, I know nothing, so I'll shut up

[eternal storm]

... but that is what the game would need to stop troll logs from phasing through walls.

[languid ibex]

The impact on performance could scale depending on collisions interacting with eachother, and whether or not they operate off of parent functions, but a great point nonetheless.

[sick breach]

We have terrain collision detection for the players, mobs, arrows, the terrain mesh clearly has a physical hitbox. Moder's ice crystals will hit terrain and stop. Wouldnt you just need to have attacks register on collision with terrain and reduce damage/ disable weapon hitbox so nothing gets hit?

[random monolith]

I would simply run the animation until it collides with something, and if it does enough damage to instantly destroy what it hits then keep going

[languid ibex]

You may have missed the first part of the discussion, where passing through objects is intentional.

[random monolith]

I’m just saying what I’d do under the assumption we wanted things to not pass through

[languid ibex]

Colliding with objects is the global functionality, where passing through objects requires a variable to be set in the code.

[lofty wave]

Most attacks already do that. Some are intentionally able to hit through walls.

(Sorry for the very late reply I was just confirming that terrain is included as a 'wall')

[sick breach]

I literally just scrolled up and caught that, nvm. Yeah i guess you cant have troll log attacks get blocked by ground, if their horizontal swing clips some nearby hill first theyd almost never do damage.

[lofty wave]

That's not how it works. If the hill isn't in front of the target it won't block that target from being hit.

[languid ibex]

Yeah I was going to mention that would cause a LOT of problems if it were calculated in that way.

[lofty wave]

Melee hitboxes check areas with 4 degree angle offsets, the hill would need to be closer in all of the areas that also contain the target being blocked

[arctic wharf]

Actually think having a soft pity system like that is a pretty simple way to reduce frustration with the lower drop rate materials 🫡

I might make it a little bit more intensive though, like 10% + 2% for every kill that did not drop said item (reset on drop).
Bit simpler to implement I might imagine, with a simple check.

Chance for bear trophy = 10% + (bear trophy drop rate modifier).

If bear dropped trophy = true
Then, set (bear trophy drop rate multiplier) = 0
Else, set (bear trophy drop rate multipler) = (bear trophy drop rate multiplier) + 2

[light fractal]

Would this add a counter per monsters per items for every characters?

[lofty wave]

It could be counted on the world, not the character

Otherwise if you’re playing in a group the drop rate will remain low unless a single player is killing all the creatures of a specific type

[arctic wharf]

It makes more sense to be kept track of per player imo though, otherwise it's quite the benefit for multiplayer while also opening up some awkward interactions.

Imagine a friend building the chance up to about 30% and then it drops for you at that rate (easier drop for you), then resetting to 10% (harder drop for your friend).
Have to remember not everyone is always only adventuring in a group in multiplayer.

And it most definitely would have a unique counter per item, with only select items that have rather low drop rates benefitting (usually trophies).

As decided by the devs.

[peak bronze]

#suggestions message @languid ibex FYI, MeadHasty is the item ID for Ratatosk mead. You might want to think for another name.
Idea sounds cool however.

[hybrid gull]

Savage Mead, because Beserker is already (kind of) in use

[languid ibex]

Eh, I'm not exactly naming it, it's just a way to communicate that it's similar to Tasty Mead in it's execution anyways.

Also if it sounds cool, can I get a Joelkkii upvote? 👀 😁

[peak bronze]

Few things considering. Duration? Would some else drawback fit other than reduced regen?

Surely Berserkir mead has weaknesses but it could be something else than that.

[languid ibex]

My thinking was, it would be appropriately paired with Tasty Mead, and if you do that, you're -100% Health Regen.

Tasty mead is 10 seconds, +100% Stamina Regen, -50% Health Regen.

I don't want to assume how much attack speed bonus would be applied, just that one could be.

If I had to decide, I would say +35% Attack Speed

[lusty trout]

Bad luck mitigation never works properly.

[languid ibex]

Based on?

[lusty trout]

Every other game with it enabled. RuneScape is a classic example.

[languid ibex]

Of what though? Can you point to anything specific?

[peak bronze]

Ah, I misread the suggestion as you said there the duration for 10 seconds.

[languid ibex]

Not to worry 🫡

[stiff stag]

#suggestions message I think the way it's done currently is fine, what should change instead is the character limit since that's what restricts it due to the formatting taking up multiple characters to use.

[languid ibex]

If you're curious about this image, it pertains to this suggestion: #suggestions message 👍

[orchid matrix]

anyone else suggested having blunt damage fist weapons? starting in the swamp so we can defeat bonemmas without a mace, and getting an upgrade on mistlands when the Vile weapon falls in utility

[peak bronze]

I'd recall some kind of blunt fist weapon suggested at some point.

[hybrid gull]

is there a specific reason why every item in the game has a different stack size?

[random monolith]

Balancing

[hybrid gull]

uh... but then why is there a weight limit? What is the stack size even "balancing"?

[lofty wave]

For example, they don't want you carrying 50 health meads in one slot but not by making them super heavy?

[stark furnace]

well then why not just limit the amount of hp meads per slot oh wait 🔮

[sick breach]

Or the ability to carry a reasonable amount of arrows without occupying all your slots.

[hybrid gull]

leaving the reason why I shouldn't go around with 50 meads in my pocket aside, the limited space in the inventory AND the weight limit looks strict enough

[sick breach]

Like what is the actual complaint regarding different stack sizes?

[hybrid gull]

people have been complaining about invetory slots not being enough, and I've been told even the devs want to do something about it, but changing the stack size sounds like a pretty basic and efficient solution

[languid ibex]

The cases where you run out of slots for multiple stacks of items is far more rare than just running into too many different items.

I could see a case being made for bundling specific things, like loose thistle could be bundled from 2 stacks into 1 near a workbench, and taken apart at another.

[sick breach]

I feel like inventory is very close to the sweet spot of sufficient while still asking players to be picky about what they take. I think a single permanent upgrade of 4 extra slots, unlocked in the lategame, would be perfect.

Like what this incredibly smart and handsome poster suggested:

#suggestions message

[quartz totem]

I still stand on the fact we need a UI change for all traders to have a somewhat "solution" to this extra slots too. Like a real side-quest requiring some items and trophies to give each(?) trader and the final reward is the extra + 4 slots total. MAYBE +2 new slots in plains and +2 in ashlands? dunno. Maybe all +4 already in mistlands? how knows. But I think it needs progression just like the game already is; not simply "buy this and get +4 slots".

[languid ibex]

This logic is partially why I did my recent shared slot suggestion, it's essentially +1 slot and could easily be locked behind progression points.

[lament zinc]

@smoky coyote Just continue playing the game and you will encounter plenty of "new" mobs in the meadows (at night) to fulfill your wishes.

[smoky coyote]

I already got to Ashlands

I know what you talking about but I mean add new mobs that way whenever you progress and explore more, you encounter more mobs

[peak bronze]

Meadows is meant to be more tutorial like biome without too hard enemies. Although you can encounter draugr villages in meadows further from center.

[smoky coyote]

That's exactly what I'm talking about, it would be cool to see more mobs in meadows

[tawdry plank]

Unless something changed recently, you do not gain xp for shooting birds as they are not creatures but objects
#suggestions message

[ashen tinsel]

#suggestions message @little flax There is already a leash in game.

||Harpoon, made from stuff on the ocean||

[little flax]

@ashen tinsel yeah... I just learned to make it work on my tamed boars I need to turn on pvp, which is a little weird if you ask me. But I'd still like an animal cage or something for those long distances or to keep them from jumping off my boat

[rocky pine]

bad rng imo #suggestions message
ive killed 7 bears ish and droped me a trophy

[hybrid gull]

I also killed like... 3 or 4 viles and I got the trophy, while I had to clear out almost 10 caves to get a cultist trophy...

[lofty field]

Well it's no problem if your lucky (roughly 50% of players are going to get the trophy within the first 7 kills), but if your unlucky your missing out on an armor set, possibly without even knowing. Roughly 4 out of 100 players will kill 30 bears without seeing a trophy. While that may sound low, that's a non-negligible amount of players that are very likely to have moved on to the next biome by that point

[lament zinc]

There's also a guaranteed drop from a rug at Haldor's place. Available at any new started world.
So those who complain about not getting a trophy might have a look over there first.

Also: when people start to hunt down bears only to get the trophy, it may feel like RNG is against them.
Similar to when you look for your keys and can't find them, but the moment you don't need them it's the first thing you see.

[late sleet]

stealing Haldor's rug is an insane mechanic to ask of the casual player 🤣
it really should just be 20% so newbies get to experience the content before they outgrow it

[lofty field]

The haldor thing is good to know (wish I'd known about that), but ultimately doesn't resolve the issue. Very rare drops were fine or even cool when they were just decorations, but now they are used in relevant recipes (trinkets)..

[late sleet]

shit are troll trophies even used for anything besides whatever's the opposite of decoration

[peak bronze]

Fishing bait and Trollstav.

[late sleet]

LMAO i forgot about both

[peak bronze]

They have 50% chance to drop but trolls are rarer spawns than bears.

[late sleet]

not by a factor of 5 i think?

[lofty field]

Random spawns are rarer, but don't forget the one-time spawns in/before troll caves

[peak bronze]

Yeah, those are not always guaranteed tho.

[lofty field]

Plus by the time you need the trophy for the trollstav, you'll have plenty from the raids alone

[worldly palm]

Hey all. What server do you recommend for learning newbies who want to play with others? Play alone is a bit boring.

[peak bronze]

You can try find one in https://discord.com/channels/391142601740517377/1024264966712340510 👍
Note that most servers are hosted by players, there are no public servers like in MMO games (as Valheim is not MMO game).

[robust ermine]

The fishing hat is too easy to get and the upgrades of the hat aren't any additional fishing bonus anyway so you dont even have to upgrade it. The quality number of the fish should play a role in creation and upgrade of the hat. The fishing stat should increase with upgrade

[stiff stag]

Atgeirs and spears are 2 separate kinds of weapons, whereas a one handed axe and 2 handed axe for example are still both axes. You also don't need atgeirs to take on trolls.

[pale oasis]

Never needed polearms for trolls. Spears are just fine.

[random monolith]

@lean stream wdym elder power isn't any good???

Is does more than just woodcutting and it already has bonus regen

[languid ibex]

Yeah.. Elder is pretty awesome now, I feel like they haven't even realized it was changed.

[eternal storm]

I'd like to discuss an idea for extended inventory that it's not just "add more slots".

👜 It would be a late game accessory that instead of extending the overall payload, opens a new window with a large inventory that can only hold a few kilos worth of items, so basically it's not meant for accumulating big stuff in large quantities, but to collect a large variety of small stuff.
This additional inventory weight would be the sum of the items included in it, up to its weight limit.
Possible recipe would be something post-Moder, because the inventory becomes an issue only after that.

So you can either get more stuff with the belt, or carry lot of different things with the... pouch?
I'd like to see what's wrong with this idea before posting this.

[stone citrus]

Definitely like that if done right
Problems being it's late game
-and I don't see an issue in "add more slots" if it's a random number, it can change to a bigger random number

Weight management is the only fun part
Inventory "management" isn't

[stiff pier]

The weight management with the belt at 450 is the sweet spot in my opinion. The issue are the inventory slots only in the Ashlands. I would argue that prior to Ashlands, even in the Mistlands the inventory slots are fine. You do not need your Hoe, pickaxe and axe all the time in your inventory

[stiff pier]

In the Plains when you raid villages where the "problem" is you can put the items you get in the chests at the villages and then transport them to your home with your portals and your cart/boat

[languid ibex]

My main issue with that is window clutter, where you could now have 3 inventories viewable when opening a chest, taking up over half the screen space. Another issue is stack management, where stacks of items would likely need to be manually combined, as that's already the case with the main inventory unless all slots are already full. Ultimately I'd like something a bit more streamlined, and there are ways to achieve this without just adding a new window. If the bag were to utilize the same inventory window, but operate as a new 'tab' or 'page' within the existing inventory, that would be far better imo.

[hybrid gull]

#suggestions message
just so you know: I got a golem trophy before the fenring trophy, although it's true golems are more common compared to them, the golems' spawn rate seems to counter-balance the lower drop rate. Also, if you have plains food and black metal shield you can definitely kill them with two parries (can confirm it works on Hard, not sure about Very Hard)

just make sure you're not parrying their overhead smash or the big horizontal swipe (depending on which variant you're fighting), since that deals a bit too much damage on Hard

[languid ibex]

@vague echo it seems a bit early to suggest the weather conditions and balancing around them, maybe wait until it's released.

I have a feeling they have their own ideas for that. 😂

[stiff stag]

I don't believe something like that is even open to suggestion, just as the boss for the biome is not up to the players to decide on, or various other core aspects of the game.

[languid ibex]

I mean, it would amount to feedback in this case, which is why it's a bit early imo. Perhaps the weather will need fine tuning for the masses, we just can't know yet.

[eternal storm]

Fair enough, but without its own window the idea of using it for small things only goes out of the... window, at that's like 99% of the idea.