Wildfires

[ArubaroBeefalo]

5 minutes ago, Majestix said:

I completely disagree with this. I found disease to be completely ignorable: I did not make berry bush farms, I used twiggy trees and gecko farms for basic resources, and I only planted stone fruit trees from new sapplings I would find.

I also think that disease was a necessary balancing mechanic. Now we are back to gigantic berry bush farms, made only more ridiculous with the introduction of stone fruit. This really makes a mockery of "uncompromising wilderness survival".

It was a necessary mechanic but broken for decoration (losing non renewables is lame)

Idk why they did erase it instead of making a cure with the new weed salve

4 minutes ago, gaymime said:

um, what game are you playing, coz' noone was stopped from making gigantic berry farms as far back as 2012....

Because people disable disease

[Majestix]

2 minutes ago, ArubaroBeefalo said:

It was a necessary mechanic but broken for decoration (losing non renewables is lame)

But just like in the case of wildfires, players who wanted to build a mega base with berry bushes as decoration could just turn off disease in the settings. I don't see why it had to be removed from the game for everybody. 

[ArubaroBeefalo]

1 minute ago, Majestix said:

But just like in the case of wildfires, players who wanted to build a mega base with berry bushes as decoration could just turn off disease in the settings. I don't see why it had to be removed from the game for everybody. 

I can make a huge base with wildfire on without worry because flingo, oasis and caves exist but disease only had shoveling as counter

 

On topic, i dont think wildfires are a bad mechanic, ok the world burns but that means you need to be preprare before it comes or risk resources if you want something from the surface

Is a mechanic that makes the player evaluate what risks want to take

And in the same way that seems to be forcing you to go underground, winter forces you to dont expend time underground

[wigfrids hat]

8 minutes ago, ArubaroBeefalo said:

people disable disease

disease was added in 2016 and has been more-or-less unwanted since. there are plenty of other things that would do well to have a toggleable option that aren't a literal resource drain with no redeeming feature outside of encouraging more grinding. if you want the game to be harder then you have loads of options outside of clinging on to a vestigial gimmick that clearly did not sit well with the community. since klei clearly didnt want to sink resources into turning this hobbled gimmick into something viable then turning it off seems like a good idea. it isn't like they scrubbed it from the game and anyone who plays pc can still make a mod to put it back in or commission a coder on steam to make a mod adding it back in(though considering 0 of the 12 disease-related mods are for adding it back in i doubt it is much in demand)

 

as for fires though it does incentivize people to still use up their down feathers even when they dont have access to horns

[ArubaroBeefalo]

10 minutes ago, gaymime said:

disease was added in 2016 and has been more-or-less unwanted since. there are plenty of other things that would do well to have a toggleable option that aren't a literal resource drain with no redeeming feature outside of encouraging more grinding. if you want the game to be harder then you have loads of options outside of clinging on to a vestigial gimmick that clearly did not sit well with the community. since klei clearly didnt want to sink resources into turning this hobbled gimmick into something viable then turning it off seems like a good idea. it isn't like they scrubbed it from the game and anyone who plays pc can still make a mod to put it back in or commission a coder on steam to make a mod adding it back in(though considering 0 of the 12 disease-related mods are for adding it back in i doubt it is much in demand)

 

as for fires though it does incentivize people to still use up their down feathers even when they dont have access to horns

People just wanted a cure not to shovel every plant every in game year. That could come with the new weeds

The mechanic was good to counter safe plant farms like berry and grass farms that can be harvest safely forever

Wasnt a bad mechanic but bad execution

It has even less sense to remove it when you have world editing, they could put it off by default

Isnt about making the game harder is about coherence

[AlternateMew]

Wildfires are fine.

My opinion seems to match the opinions of many in this thread. Disease was flat out cruel. The only counters to disease were to spend half your time digging up and replanting your grass/bushes, or to never transplant them, ever.

Wildfires can be countered. If something irreplaceable catches fire, you have a chance to save it. You can also protect said items with a fling-o-matic If you don't want to take that risk, there's a whole biome that specifically prevents them. And for people who just hate that overall, it is toggleable in worldgen.

Disease was so bad that I actually opted to turn it off. That is the only setting I changed from default worldgen. For context, I've got a 500+ day world with zero fling-o-matics, and wildfire is just a thing to keep an eye on. It hasn't stopped me from building anything. Disease, on the other hand, would have stopped me from replanting any berry bushes, because I like to go nomad and could easily come back to a field full of berry bushes dying in my face, taunting me because there's no saving them at that point.

 

[Mike23Ua]

So here is something I bet that even KLEI themselves did not think about before the removal of disease, I NEVER turned this off.. I always kept it on and even though I did not understand it as a SURFACE Mechanic (Because Wildfires are a thing that exists that destroys all in its path) I DID see it as the CAVES alternative to Wildfires, you couldn’t have Wildfires inside caves but you could TOTALLY turn on Disease and almost simulate the same level of destruction.

So for me Disease = Cave version Wildfire mechanic. 
 

And while it wasn’t a flawless concept- it still (at least in that regard) served a purpose.

I am genuinely scared for this franchises future, if Klei removes the features that players find too bothersome they will effectively kill the uncompromising wilderness survival game I was hoping it would be.

I mean- Can’t they just add dangerous risky (highly experimental) stuff to the game with it turned OFF by default and for the players like myself who actually WANT that chaos happening we can opt to toggle it on for our worlds?

Im not talking about JUST cave disease spread or surface wildfires, I mean other features people have been wanting for awhile now like landslides, earthquakes, floods, etc- AKA WILDERNESS Challenges that force the player to have to adapt to whatever worldly hazard is happening.

[Yuuko]

The irony of arguing about disease (bad) and wildfires (good) is that they are both very similar systems.  You can see wildfires if you have a clear view of your base and are a very responsible and vigilant player.  Similarly you can catch disease very easily because you receive a notice on harvest and only need to replant the diseased crop.  You can build flingos to put out fires around you adding a heavy resource toll to both base building and upkeep, you can also add the upkeep of digging your plants every 30 days.  They are also both horribly binary systems where most players simply avoid the feature entirely by basing in oasis or caves, and using kelp, leafy meats, bunnyman / pigman farms, and maximizing on Wicker for spam harvesting grass / twigs.  They both have the option to just turn them off and while many have with disease I think many have not with wildfires because it is easier to access the binary where it simply doesn't happen - simply basing in oasis and caves.

When disease first came out you just had to plant on the right turf.  Match these and disease wouldn't be a thing in your game.  If they left this on the arguments about "base in oasis/caves" would be identical to "plant on deciduous turf."  Its not about difficulty, nothing about either of these systems is hard, you just do something and the system is completely bypassed.  The two are extremely similar in this way and I think it makes them both trash.  I mean really - if your basic response to X mechanic is playing in a restrictive way to completely avoid X mechanic there is probably a problem with X mechanic to begin with...

I keep seeing people suggest "turn it off in worldgen settings" and I think these people believe this is a debate about game difficulty.  It is feedback on the game pointing to an area that is not fun, and it has little to do with whether or not it is challenging.  I've been playing this game for years, from before summer and wildfires were even a thing, and I've never turned off wildfires in any of my worlds and I access pretty much every area of the game in my play.  I rarely lose things to wildfire or disease because I do the X thing that completely avoids them.  Its not hard, but its also not any fun.

Compare wildfires and disease to rain - when it rains in you get wet, while wet you get colder possibly freezing, and while holding wet items you lose sanity.  There are some awesome gears that let you avoid getting wet but these compete with slots for backpacks and armor.  You play through rain by either making the tradeoff to avoid it possibly restricting your inventory or armor capacity for the duration OR you play through the rain, getting wet, maybe wearing some % protection but not full, taking the sanity loss and warming yourself to avoid freezing.  This is an involved system that the player experiences which is challenging and good.  Wildfire and disease are not.

[Fuffles]

I geniuently hope they remove wildfires at some point, Summer is always the season where I lose the will to play the game because Wildfires will destroy everything I do. Its one of those things where the player is punished for just existing and its not preventable unless you build flingos everwhere which cost gears and have fuel maintenance. Replacing it with something else would be nice tho.

[wkjdfx]

1 hour ago, Shosuko said:

I keep seeing people suggest "turn it off in worldgen settings" and I think these people believe this is a debate about game difficulty.  It is feedback on the game pointing to an area that is not fun, and it has little to do with whether or not it is challenging.

I stopped replying in this thread when "turning off wildfire" is all I get from the discussion. When people are pointing out game mechanic flaws that leads to repetitive but not essentially challenging gameplay, some people will refuse to understand the arguments and simplify them into proposal to lower game difficulty.

It is important to understand that coming up with a solution that solves a problem in long-term and doing repetitive work that mitigates a problem in short-term are very different. In the case of disease, replacing grass tufts with geckos that are immune to disease is a challenging solution that solves the problem in long-term, and replanting grass tufts every year is a tedious solution that solves the problem in short-term.

Most of the people arguing against wildfire want a wildfire rework that does not require either a short-term solution that requires flingo refule constantly or a long-term solution that confines the player in oasis and cave during summer. They are not asking for a wildfire removal that just completely kill the mechanic, which they actually enjoy in most regards.

I'm trying to be polite here, but I genuinely want to call out on some people that just refuse to listen and keep saying "hur dur if you want an easier game why not just turn it off".

[Mike23Ua]

Yeah I’m gonna avoid quoting any of that and just point out that I used disease in my game saves as a way of having a caves variation of the wildfires mechanic- They both served pretty much the same exact purpose (almost unavoidable annihilation of lots of resources and the inevitable end to your survival odds) But That right there is my counter argument

I say “turn it off” because some people don’t like/don’t want it.. but what about those of us who DID like and didn’t want it removed? Why is our say on the matter being ignored in favor of “make things easier?”

As I’ve stressed time and time again I play my worlds where weather seasons are random, you can’t just base in the Oasis or in caves during summer because summer is never TRULY Over..

What about people who play the game this way? Do we just remove features because the majority of casuals complain about them? Why can’t the simple solution be to have those features toggled OFF by default world settings and for those of us who still want/enjoy them, we can toggle them back ON?

Im genuinely not understanding the entire removal of disease because there should legitimately be different MODES for the game-

if you want to build a mega base for 50,000 days go ahead do it- but maybe do it in a MODE that does not have FEATURES specifically designed to bring your survival worlds to their inevitable & abrupt end?

This coincidentally happens to be why 100% and I’m completely against the thought of adding X problem to the game that has Y permanent solution to that same problem..

(I’m hoping the removal of disease is only temporary while they work on making a better improved version of it, and maybe reserve it exclusively for a harder mode where people actually want to see something happen that forces their amount of days survived to mean something.. because one way or another your world has a death date.)

I’m also hoping they NEVER remove summer wildfires. I would however like a way of fireproofing my boat so I can sail in summer without having my boat spontaneously combust, thanks  

[Yuuko]

1 hour ago, Mike23Ua said:

Yeah I’m gonna avoid quoting any of that and just point out that I used disease in my game saves as a way of having a caves variation of the wildfires mechanic- They both served pretty much the same exact purpose (almost unavoidable annihilation of lots of resources and the inevitable end to your survival odds) But That right there is my counter argument

Unavoidable annihilation of lots of resources and inevitable end to your survival*
*unless you did something simple like base in oasis / caves / didn't relocate plants effected by disease in which case both systems are completely irrelevant, completely avoided, zero-resource consuming systems that are mostly just annoying so why aren't we switching this out for something that is actually interesting, interactive, and challenging? lol

[Well-met]

how about make it so only trees can smolder?

23 hours ago, Majestix said:

I completely disagree with this. I found disease to be completely ignorable: I did not make berry bush farms, I used twiggy trees and gecko farms for basic resources, and I only planted stone fruit trees from new sapplings I would find.

I also think that disease was a necessary balancing mechanic. Now we are back to gigantic berry bush farms, made only more ridiculous with the introduction of stone fruit. This really makes a mockery of "uncompromising wilderness survival".

i like you