Brightshade infestations are prone to getting incredibly repetitive and uninteresting.

[Mike23Ua]

If every problem has a permanent solution, don’t you just end up back at square root #1 of nothing in the game challenging you?

Regardless of the Sandbox tag that may or may not be applied to DST, In my experience with the franchise there’s always been things that to the best of my limited knowledge: you can’t prevent and only exist to screw you over.

For example the strong winds in hamlet blowing any loose resources clean off the edge of the map and out of the world forever, to add to that, if you store your valuables in a storage chest a cute little pog might rummage through it tossing it all over the ground to again- Be blown off the edge of the map.

You can’t go feed an angry ant a tasty rock to prevent its destructive world wide smashing behavior- it just is what it is.. right?

So let’s stop pretending like the Sandbox aspect is the only experience that matters, it’s not..

And more importantly Klei has been doing extensive changes to world Gen settings that don’t just let you pick more or less of something but also: CHANGES ITS BEHAVIOR.

An example of this is setting Nightmare creatures to TONS making them move faster and deal more damage (that was mentioned in some older patch note right??) My point is there should be a have your cake and eat it too moment-

The Megabase Builders/Peaceful Sea fishing players got what they wanted when Pirate Raids were Nerfed into being a non-threat you have to go out of your way to actively search for.

But what would’ve happened if Klei would’ve reworked their BEHAVIOR upon selecting to have them appear More or Less Often?

Your mad that rifts can harm your structures, but the reality of things is anyone can snag up the Terrarium, And then the game plays literal Spin the Bottle to decide who it wants to spawn in on, and  EoT/ToT Destroy structures.

But why not have your cake and eat it too? Rifts = Destructive/Non-Destructive.
If they can change the behavior of Nightmare creatures set to TONS they can change the behavior of other things set to More or Less.

And that’s been my whole argument all along.

[lowercase skye]

31 minutes ago, Mike23Ua said:

In my experience with the franchise there’s always been things that to the best of my limited knowledge: you can’t prevent and only exist to screw you over.

For example the strong winds in hamlet blowing any loose resources clean off the edge of the map and out of the world forever, to add to that, if you store your valuables in a storage chest a cute little pog might rummage through it tossing it all over the ground to again- Be blown off the edge of the map.

I get what you're saying but I want to note Pogs are probably one of the most preventable threats in Don't Starve. The game provides several methods to stop them from taking your stuff and does literally nothing to stop you from just killing them. They barely even fight back.

[Mysterious box]

My main issue is that your base should be a part of your survival and in turn should be a valid target for the world to attack with late game threats by default I'm not saying there shouldn't be a way to fight back per say but I feel like it should be a challenge to keep your base in working order as this isn't a change forced on us. I'm not saying mega bases should be ignored but I don't like the idea that we have to hold content back for it or place them on content islands even more so when there's settings to remove this aspect there for people who truly don't want it.

1 hour ago, Copyafriend said:

Frankly klei IS afraid of making big changes, and I hate that.

No Kiel isn't allowed to make big changes is more like it how do you make big meaningful endgame content that doesn't offend megabases, ocean bases, and people who want content that engages more with people who want more active threats? It's easy to say ah well they can just figure it out but it seems impossible to me because at the end of the day someone's gonna leave unsatisfied if you try to do all at once without leaning on the settings.

 

1 hour ago, Copyafriend said:

Imagine if in terraria the final boss that you got the endgame loot from destroyed every block he passed through? People would never fight him on their basebuilding world, they would just go into a different world for it, thats not an option here.

Explain to me why it can't be a option here? Why is there even a option to disable content if not to remove content that might disrupt your desired play experience?

1 hour ago, Copyafriend said:

Give us some new seasonal effects, flooding during spring, an actually interesting summer, new dangers in autumn 2. and make them activate during the second year. But don't just randomly destroy the hardcore players bases because you're salty that you're no longer dying before the first winter. the game cant stay challenging forever, and ruining another players fun isn't going to fix it.

So we're to expect something interesting to be added that will mix up survival to be added to the game but in a way that will have zero consequences to how people build their mega bases while not making the game less approachable to newcomers? I don't know it just seems really unrealistically to even imagine. It feels like we're saying Kiel don't touch the early game or the late game in a meaningful way but also do something big and unexpected.

1 hour ago, Copyafriend said:

We have to straddle the line, because whether the "tags" call DST a basebuilding game or not. It very much is a basebuilding game, and honestly 99% of progress in this game isn't gathering weapons and armor and healing, its making the buildings like crockpots, and building a pig farm for helmets, and making a hound trap to deal with hounds. The boss fights are something to work towards, but if you're not rushing bosses, all you're doing is building a base and staying alive.

Correct but boss rushes shouldn't be all there is to survival when your not base building no? Why should the survival aspect only be a factor if you choose to make it one? Don't get me wrong I'm not saying all new content should make bases implode but I feel like late game content making your base less safe is definitely a direction that should be explored more.

[maxwell_winters]

2 hours ago, Copyafriend said:

snip

No one is saying the rifts are perfect the way they are. I agree with most points you said about way too high HP of plants and no reliable way of containing them. Recently, Klei seems to be stuck in a loop with survival content. They implement an interesting feature which is way too busted in the early stages of beta, people complain (mostly reasonably but some overreact) that it's too much. However, instead of fine-tuning it, Klei just nerfs the feature into the ground or completely removes it. That's why people got so defensive of their survival play style. They don't want it to happen again.

2 hours ago, Copyafriend said:

its making the buildings like crockpots, and building a pig farm for helmets, and making a hound trap to deal with hounds.

The essential structures can fit in 2 flingos. 3 if you throw the spider farm into the mix. Combined with the fact that the rifts seem to avoid player structures, it means your essentials are safe. As for decorations... well, if you worry about your decor in a survival game more than about keeping yourself alive, either you need to get your priorities straight or there is something fundamentally wrong with survival mechanics.

Quote

flooding during spring

Megabasers will complain it severely limits the selection of turfs they can use,

[goblinball]

56 minutes ago, Mysterious box said:

Explain to me why it can't be an option here? Why is there even an option to disable content if not to remove content that might disrupt your desired play experience?

Because then the player is missing out on content, and that’s not fun. 

[Mike23Ua]

16 minutes ago, goblinball said:

Because then the player is missing out on content, and that’s not fun. 

But.. people disable wildfires & (used to disable disease) & they’re are (or were rather..) a core part of the game aren’t they? Things were suppose to spontaneously burst into flames, rabbits were intended to cook alive. We can’t simply just ignore the fact that there’s more destructive content. Players are “Missing out on Content” when Klei nerfs it to the point you need to fire a Hostile flare and force it to spawn because people complained Pirate Raids ruined their peaceful fishing trip.

And yes maybe some things are wayyyy off in balance such as the health of the pirate monkeys, the amount of monkeys that attack, how frequently they steal, or how frequently they raided you.

Maybe things are “off” on the new beta Content with how much health the invading rift mobs have or how they can gather in swarms..

But if your already going to turn off features like Wildfires & Disease, why not just turn off more destructive content at the same time?

Im really confused by most these posts…

People want to be able to interact with the New content without needing to turn it off, HOWEVER they also want it to be less Threatening and have a permanent solution (such as a turf the mobs are scared to cross over) making it a “Temporary” threat.

At that point…. Why not just toggle it off? Why does EVERYTHING need to be less destructive or have some sort of permanent solution to its threat?

People complained about wildfires- Klei releases giant trees that prevents their dangers. People complained about Pirate Raids- Klei makes them near non-existent unless you force them to spawn with a flare or are actively searching for them.

People complain about the new Beta stuffs and well.. I just don’t want great new concepts scrapped because people were upset with the game changing. 
What’s currently in beta is teased as only being the “first” of more to come- So I’m almost 90% certain that ONLY dealing with these Brightshade plants won’t be the only things popping out of these rifts.

We May (in a future update) see other types of threats or useful resources spewing out these rifts.

People are judging the rifts off the only things that spawn from them currently- which isn’t fair considering the frequency of dealing with the current rift creatures may reduce drastically once newer mobs or threats are added into the equation.

[Copyafriend]

2 hours ago, maxwell_winters said:

well, if you worry about your decor in a survival game more than about keeping yourself alive, either you need to get your priorities straight or there is something fundamentally wrong with survival mechanics.

alright I'm gonna say it because honestly 9/10ths of the people arguing against my main points have said a variation of this.

NO. Its actually NOT REALLY okay to destroy a players base without them being able to defend against it. It's one thing when your base in "the forest" gets raided by cannibals and they bust some stuff up. it'd be a whole different story if they just lit your base on fire as their first attack. You can't "Defend" against the portal. you can't DO or affect ANYTHING about it. It's great if it DOES try to avoid your base or player built structures, but yeah, if I spend a dozen hours making a beautiful statue garden in this game, I expect the game to not just randomly destroy it to seemingly spite me. if I get some big warning alarm "invader portal here, come fight annoying lunar things or lose a chunk of your base" Then yeah I can maybe swing that, but its still an annoyance.

 

Look I get they CAN do this, there nothing ACTUALLY stopping them. But its a **** move. Honestly, in your apparently infinite time playing survival games, how often is your home base actually actively destroyed without there being a struggle to defend it. Like how many games do you know of where an earthquake just shows up, destroys a small block of your housing, then **** off without a warning or any way to stop it. I don't recall any except in a challenge map of a settlement game from like the 2000s. It's because its not fun or interesting game mechanics, its a pipe to my ******* shins just because.

 

And I don't wanna hear "uuhhh the games dangers can be avoided" of course they can EVERY SURVIVAL GAME IS LIKE THIS. You can play raft and just grow food and sit on your base and eat it, and you'll probably never die, you can do the same thing in the raft, the forest, grounded, valheim, minecraft, project zomboid. Name ONE where the main gameplay loop isnt "Have safe base where you make things, and go out into more dangerous area and get materials to bring back to base to make more things" and I will be SHOCKED. It's like some of you have never heard of basic game concepts like "don't randomly screw over the player" and "players dont like the game ******* with their progress" and most importantly "if they lose make them earn the loss" Like.. hello?

 

And yeah it may well dodge player structures, but most of my main point still stands. it's random and irritating and STILL DOESNT REALLY FUNCTION AS A "SURVIVAL MECHANIC"

"uhhh its coming for your resources lol" it spawns enemies if resources are nearby, it's literally a moving lootbox, being vaguely connected to me having resources doesn't make it a survival mechanic, it fits in more with a ******* destiny alert, come kill the things that spawned !!!HERE!!! for loot guys!

[Mysterious box]

2 hours ago, goblinball said:

Because then the player is missing out on content, and that’s not fun. 

But the flipside of that is depriving the other players of content that might appeal to them it's basically treating it as only the feelings of one side matters why should one side be deprived so that the other shouldn't have to use a toggle?

[Copyafriend]

15 minutes ago, Mysterious box said:

But the flipside of that is depriving the other players of content that might appeal to them it's basically treating it as only the feelings of one side matters why should one side be deprived so that the other shouldn't have to use a toggle?

Why cant the default be that it doesn’t and you can turn ON the option for it to destroy stuff?

If you think its a dumb point, realize its the one you’re making.

I think being able to disable it should be allowed obviously but i also have always firmly believed that a game should not need to have its settings altered to be enjoyable. Personally i think wildfires need to go because they’re random and just encourages basesitting aka boring asf times. I love the withering of summer but i mean theres no point in having an empty wasteland aboveground if i cant explore it without it randomly burning down. I mean i could put out the fire… if i saw it. Which i might not. So wildfires typically go off, not because i cant handle wildfires, but because they contribute nothing to the enjoyment of the actual game and instead actively contribute to making the game worse.

 

kinda like a random base shattering portal that MIGHT or MIGHT NOT be able to spawn in and shatter a whole chunk of resources and time spent with no warning.
 

i think you do have a valid point about not depriving people of enjoyable mechanics being as important as people being able to opt out of certain content. But i’m going to ask you a question, and i want you to be really truly honest about this, not funny, not having a gatcha moment, its really just genuine curiosity here.

 

would you actually consider it showing up in your patch of berrybushes uprooting half and infesting the other half fun to deal with? Just as an example. I mean imagine you already have all the related loot and you dont have ANY active need for the related loot. I mean its obviously nice to be conveniently close but you dont reallly need it. like a treeguard when you have stacks of living logs.

 

is that… fun to deal with? Does it sound like an interesting challenge that you need to be creative to solve? Or is it kind of tedious to kill them and wait for the portal to leave so you can replant the uprooted berry bushes. 
 

like genuinely curious, because it sounds like literally torture to me. I mean like id rather deal with two hound waves back to bacl because at least its back to business as usual after instead of having to wait for this eyesore to leave me base so i can fix it.

 

 

[goblinball]

2 hours ago, Mike23Ua said:

But.. people disable wildfires & (used to disable disease)

There’s a difference between a mechanic that does nothing other than be a nuisance and offer no new gameplay experiences (other than panic and frustration) and an entire content update worth of content. It’s not the player’s job to quality-control a game and cut out any unfun or disruptive stuff, that’s klei’s job (to an extent).

 

1 hour ago, Mysterious box said:

But the flipside of that is depriving the other players of content that might appeal to them it's basically treating it as only the feelings of one side matters why should one side be deprived so that the other shouldn't have to use a toggle?

Or what if you could just have content that appeases both sides? It’s not like that’s the thing ppl have been arguing for this entire thread…

No one’s asking for “the flipside” of this scenario, you just made that up. 

[Mysterious box]

1 hour ago, Copyafriend said:

alright I'm gonna say it because honestly 9/10ths of the people arguing against my main points have said a variation of this.

NO. Its actually NOT REALLY okay to destroy a players base without them being able to defend against it. It's one thing when your base in "the forest" gets raided by cannibals and they bust some stuff up. it'd be a whole different story if they just lit your base on fire as their first attack. You can't "Defend" against the portal. you can't DO or affect ANYTHING about it. It's great if it DOES try to avoid your base or player built structures, but yeah, if I spend a dozen hours making a beautiful statue garden in this game, I expect the game to not just randomly destroy it to seemingly spite me. if I get some big warning alarm "invader portal here, come fight annoying lunar things or lose a chunk of your base" Then yeah I can maybe swing that, but its still an annoyance.

 

Look I get they CAN do this, there nothing ACTUALLY stopping them. But its a **** move. Honestly, in your apparently infinite time playing survival games, how often is your home base actually actively destroyed without there being a struggle to defend it. Like how many games do you know of where an earthquake just shows up, destroys a small block of your housing, then **** off without a warning or any way to stop it. I don't recall any except in a challenge map of a settlement game from like the 2000s. It's because its not fun or interesting game mechanics, its a pipe to my ******* shins just because.

 

And I don't wanna hear "uuhhh the games dangers can be avoided" of course they can EVERY SURVIVAL GAME IS LIKE THIS. You can play raft and just grow food and sit on your base and eat it, and you'll probably never die, you can do the same thing in the raft, the forest, grounded, valheim, minecraft, project zomboid. Name ONE where the main gameplay loop isnt "Have safe base where you make things, and go out into more dangerous area and get materials to bring back to base to make more things" and I will be SHOCKED. It's like some of you have never heard of basic game concepts like "don't randomly screw over the player" and "players dont like the game ******* with their progress" and most importantly "if they lose make them earn the loss" Like.. hello

Except noones arguing that you should have no way to defend against it just that our bases shouldn't be magically protected by it or passively protected by the infestation of our plants your operating on the assumption that someone's arguing that the update is in a completely perfect state with no need for tweaks if they don't like the idea of infestation of plants not targeting resources. How does resources in a base shouldn't be safe from the new mob translate to 'we believe all bases should burn' and if you feel that bases should magically be protected from any all content then we may as well remove lightning, wildfires, and antlion earthquakes from the game so as not to disrupt the base building experience heck why not just make player structures unbreakable or burnable too while we're at it I mean why should you have to risk anything happening to you base under any circumstance. And no this isn't me saying that the portal uprooting turf and what not is ok.

1 hour ago, Copyafriend said:

"uhhh its coming for your resources lol" it spawns enemies if resources are nearby, it's literally a moving lootbox, being vaguely connected to me having resources doesn't make it a survival mechanic, it fits in more with a ******* destiny alert, come kill the things that spawned !!!HERE!!! for loot guys!

Then beyond weather and maintaining your stats what counts as a survival mechanic in the game to you? seasons are just put on the funny hat, darkness is just use something that makes light break it down into individual parts and no mechanic really means much in terms of survival.

47 minutes ago, Copyafriend said:

Why cant the default be that it doesn’t and you can turn ON the option for it to destroy stuff?

Honestly I suggested Kiel do different game modes in the past for content since there's obviously going to be a divide on these sorts of things and the answer that came up is why waste time developing content that's off by default not my answer but the answer I seemed to receive.

 

50 minutes ago, Copyafriend said:

would you actually consider it showing up in your patch of berrybushes uprooting half and infesting the other half fun to deal with? Just as an example. I mean imagine you already have all the related loot and you dont have ANY active need for the related loot. I mean its obviously nice to be conveniently close but you dont reallly need it. like a treeguard when you have stacks of living logs.

 

is that… fun to deal with? Does it sound like an interesting challenge that you need to be creative to solve? Or is it kind of tedious to kill them and wait for the portal to leave so you can replant the uprooted berry bushes. 
 

like genuinely curious, because it sounds like literally torture to me. I mean like id rather deal with two hound waves back to bacl because at least its back to business as usual after instead of having to wait for this eyesore to leave me base so i can fix it.

Take this question and insert various mechanics in the game and guess what your gonna get different answers from different people because what they find interesting or engaging is going to different so regardless of how this question is answered the end result doesn't matter that being said I'll repeat that as far as I know noone is saying the update is in a perfect state at the current time but if the mobs that infested the berrybushes in this scenario became easier to deal with while not being too easy would you still hate their infestation as a mechanic? It doesn't need to be removed this now or push it through with no changes at all you know?

10 minutes ago, goblinball said:

There’s a difference between a mechanic that does nothing other than be a nuisance and offer no new gameplay experiences (other than panic and frustration)

So this isn't new? There's another place in the game where there are mobs who possess resources?

 

11 minutes ago, goblinball said:

Or what if you could just have content that appeases both sides? It’s not like that’s the thing ppl have been arguing for this entire thread…

No one’s asking for “the flipside” of this scenario, you just made that up. 

Yep this keeps being said but again one side wants content that engages with the player directly like this and the other side wants content to do the opposite the only way your making inoffensive content is by ignoring the former and making content the way it's always been by shoving it off somewhere waiting to be discovered looted and forgotten. Sure we'll be 'happy' with new content but one side is clearly being prioritized in this scenario it just comes off as sorry we can't do this because status quo of base building demands normalcy. Why should the game be so limited in how new content can effect the experience even more so when those changes are completely optional like stop and think about it for a second if you stop the possession mechanic this update becomes nothing more than what most other content updates have been get the best of the new tools then forget it exists and move on yea numbers need tweaked alot on the new mobs and the destruction the portal causes specifically needs to be looked at but when those are inevitably tweaked is the idea that a new mob might create new dangers in a new way so egregious that noone should ever even have the privilege to experience it? Call me crazy but layering new threats like these are exactly how I feel the game could spice up things up when it comes to surviving.

[Wonz]

Fighting itself at core should be fun. Currently we hold F for X amount of hits and run out of range and repeat. If I had to point a game where I'd be sad about enemies dying too fast because fighting is good I'd point at vindictus. Implementing what they have would be probably impossible but I'm saying it's worth to have a look at something that works and try to yoink some aspects like dodging flurry of boss' attacks is fun. Bosses now attack really slow and dodging here is only wanda and wortox thing while for wortox is uncomfortable and not desired.

So enemies attack slow and mostly with just 1 attack +lots of walking back and forth= boring. Imaigne if deerclops was attacking so fast you had time to stuff only 2 hits but you had some sort of actual iframe dodge like in dark souls.  

Just game where you fight a lot will benefit greatly from better fighting system. If there's ever update expanding on it it will be greatest update of all time.  

[maxwell_winters]

6 hours ago, Copyafriend said:

Its actually NOT REALLY okay to destroy a players base without them being able to defend against it.

I said the update is not perfect and there should be a way to contain the infestation. I did not say it should destroy your "garden" without a way to prevent it.

[Copyafriend]

6 hours ago, Mysterious box said:

Yep this keeps being said but again one side wants content that engages with the player directly like this and the other side wants content to do the opposite the only way your making inoffensive content is by ignoring the former and making content the way it's always been by shoving it off somewhere waiting to be discovered looted and forgotten.

Okay but no one is saying new content cant come attack you. I’m saying its typical of survival games to allow a player to have a safe haven, but there’s nothing stopping klei from making this actually work. Honestly there’s almost no such thing as a defensive structure in this game, walls are a myth unless you’re penning something in. So just make it nondestructive. Its not really “attacking me” by uprooting my berry bushes its just pissing me off. Its not a massive challenge if it destroys my vegetable scales full of giant crops, i just now have to replace that.

same with statues, and decorations, i doubt you believe destroying those are an interesting challenge for me to overcome, but i spent real time on that so it shouldn’t be randomly smashed without me being able to stop it (because i cant) atm at least

 

my pointt ive been trying to make is that people have been arguing this as a survival mechanic and honestly destroying the base does nothing as far as the danger from this event goes, but thats peoples main problem with it. **** let it in the base and do its thing but it doesnt damage the base. 
 

6 hours ago, Mysterious box said:

Except noones arguing that you should have no way to defend against it just that our bases shouldn't be magically protected by it or passively protected by the infestation of our plants

But no one is worried about the plants spawning in the base, yeah thats annoying, but thats not the problem. The problem is people have bases and spent hundreds of hours on them, and allowing the rift to be destructive is a huge middle finger to a not insignificant part of ones playerbase.

 

its antlions earthquakes without the appeasing of antlion, its wildfires without ice flingos, lightning without rods. Its **** design and thats the whole problem i have with it.

 

i mean if you’re NOT arguing that it should be allowed to destroy our base, what IS it thats being argued here?

it honestly feels like we’re all kind of arguing past eachother here, so lets maybe try this again.

 

i like survival mechanics, but to me, destroying the base without a chance to stop it shouldn’t be allowed because there is a significant part of the playerbase who play the game to make large bases, and i respect the effort they put into it. I like the gameplay mechanics themselves, but i just dont see the destructive component being integral to the actual challenge of the event. So to me at least, it feels like there should be measures possibly given to players to either stop the rift from spawning, or to prevent it from spawning near or inside the base. Alternatively i would like if the rift event could be nondestructive, as destroying what is likely aesthetic elements, doesnt improve the challenge of the event, and contributes nothing to the overall fun of the game.

[maxwell_winters]

13 minutes ago, Copyafriend said:

its antlions earthquakes without the appeasing of antlion, its wildfires without ice flingos, lightning without rods. Its **** design and thats the whole problem i have with it.

I repeat for the third time, the plants should get their "lightning rod". Rifts should avoid player structures if they don't do it already (people who know coding say they already do, but it's not certain). We do no support the inevitable destruction of your base when you can do nothing but watch and cry. The argument here is against the sentiment that your base should be a safe haven with no threats happening to it.

[Mysterious box]

47 minutes ago, Copyafriend said:

But no one is worried about the plants spawning in the base, yeah thats annoying, but thats not the problem. The problem is people have bases and spent hundreds of hours on them, and allowing the rift to be destructive is a huge middle finger to a not insignificant part of ones playerbase.

The Opening statement of this thread doesn't even mention the rift damage it reads like the very mechanic of bush possession should be removed.

'Initially, it seems cool to be jumped on by a fresh new mob, but what about the fifth time? The fourty-sixth time? Brightmare wave on your decor berry bushes #331 on day 2481?

As things stand, this beta makes it seem like killing CC is some form of griefing, by causing an incredibly tedious-to-kill mob to spawn randomly on your decorative berry bushes or twig/grass farms. There's 0 way to prevent them, 0 precaution measures possible on the surface and it's just a forever annoyance. That they require specific crafts in order to not be even more annoying to kill is another nail in the coffin.
None of the new crafts or the enlightened crown are worth this and they still wouldn't be if they were buffed. This is just a garbage mechanic, at least add a way around it so it isn't just a permanent anti-qol in return for a handful of awful crafts and an aggressively unpopular crown, a punishment for a tedious journey.

I don't feel like killing CC at all like this, the "progression" seems more like putting on clown makeup and taking up a new hobby of pulling weeds constantly. It will get boring so fast.
This wouldn't be so terrible if you could protect your plants/builds from it in some way, or if it wasn't a """reward""" at the end of a long journey of tasks that were mostly unrewarding to begin with. Congrats, you did all that! Now deal with new annoying mobs that spawn semi-randomly.'

The idea that this part of the update needs to go away is what I've been against sorry if I wasn't clear enough on that.

47 minutes ago, Copyafriend said:

i mean if you’re NOT arguing that it should be allowed to destroy our base, what IS it thats being argued here?

it honestly feels like we’re all kind of arguing past eachother here, so lets maybe try this again.

Honestly as I understood it I thought we were arguing that the new mob was destructive to mega basing which looking back over some of the thread some do seem to think this but others were focusing on the rift itself so I guess noone was on the same page. 

 

47 minutes ago, Copyafriend said:

Okay but no one is saying new content cant come attack you. I’m saying its typical of survival games to allow a player to have a safe haven, but there’s nothing stopping klei from making this actually work. Honestly there’s almost no such thing as a defensive structure in this game, walls are a myth unless you’re penning something in. So just make it nondestructive. Its not really “attacking me” by uprooting my berry bushes its just pissing me off. Its not a massive challenge if it destroys my vegetable scales full of giant crops, i just now have to replace that.

I was saying I like the way the plant possession mechanic works as it attacks your base in a new way that being disabling your resources which is what I said I wanted more of.

 

But if we're talking about the rift specifically so long they stop it from uprooting and what not I wouldn't mind it spawning on base so long as we also get a more permanent solution to the mobs spawned by it also I'd like if rather than a set area the infection at it's peak covers the entire biome it corrupts while having more effects on each biome.

23 minutes ago, maxwell_winters said:

the plants should get their "lightning rod"

Personally I don't think there should be a passive way to protect your main plants from the possession mechanic aside from dealing with it yourself as I feel it devalues the mechanic but on the other hand they definitely shouldn't be as strong as they currently are and the amount of danger they present in groups should be looked at.(possibly even prevent them from forming in groups in the first place)

Edit: Thinking more on it you probably meant a lightning rod that would make a section of crops more likely to get targeting by the possession? In that case I do agree as it would give a certain level of control without completely removing the threat from base.

[maxwell_winters]

6 minutes ago, Mysterious box said:

they definitely shouldn't be as strong as they currently are and the amount of danger they present in groups should be looked at.

They should either:

• Have the same health but spawn in lesser numbers. In that case, I'd prefer a "lighting rod"
• Have the same spawn rate but lower health. I think it's more fitting thematically for plant infestation.

Them spawning way too close to each other is also an issue because it can only be handled with Brightshade Bomb. But you need a husk to craft it, so you're stuck in a circle of needing to kill more of them in order to kill the ones who spawned close to each other. I hope the next patch will not only add an infused moon shard to the recipe but also decrease the amount of husks you need. In that case, I'd consider it a buff instead of a nerf like people here believe to be.

[Mysterious box]

25 minutes ago, maxwell_winters said:

Rifts should avoid player structures if they don't do it already (people who know coding say they already do, but it's not certain). We do no support the inevitable destruction of your base when you can do nothing but watch and cry.

Actually I imagine what's happening is mega bases don't always use structures to decorate so I think the rift is checking for structures sees there are none and proceeds to uproot non structure designs but I think this could probably be fixed by it somehow not uprooting anything when it spawns I don't know how hard that'd be to code in though as I feel like this wasn't the intended function of the rift.

[MondayNight]

23 hours ago, Maxil20 said:

Megabasers

With my assertion am not trying to invalidate the "mega-base" concept, but am pointing at it to not be the reason why KLei shouldn't take more bold approaches regarding late-game Survival challenges in progression context. Of course for a challenge to be firstly entertaining means one has tools at one's disposal to counter it in a fun, engaging and rewarding manner. If possible in more than 1 way to deal with said challenge(s). Be it herbicide/pesticide, sealing magic, lunar rod disrupter, etc - perhaps such builds available via special mini-quests or from Moon Orb post CC take-down. And, of course, having WorldGen options for mentioned elements, including turning off - to be true to the "your world, your rules" game's motto. Yes, DST in-game evolution road for survivors is one from scarcity to bountifulness/"horn of plenty". Rewards. Still, road can have plenty "bumps" for Survival engagement, mandatory ones like DC & Hounds. Can be turned off, but I believe most people by now agree DST has a lot done for its Sandbox facet and almost nothing for the Survival side. Time for a change (with settings/tuning too), as stated.

Spoiler

As for irl game hours played - mine:

Some of my Steam friends:

And an acquaintance that's also moderating certain DST communities:

None of them builds mega-bases, at most regular-size camps spanning 2-3 default in-game screens. They usually play challenge runs, specific speed runs or purely for socializing purpose. I myself nowadays have a semi-nomad relaxed play-style on Endless pubs (moderated community servers) and my most developed camps, decorated, look more-or-less like this, size-wise too:

* vanilla KLei-like pub design, Ruins:

* modded community server design, Ruins still:

I and said friends are also skin collectors, buying many of the packs KLei releases or using spools from in-game drops. We're players from way back, in original DST Beta's 2015. And all of us fancy, by this time in DST's life, some good Survival-oriented content that doesn't invalidate base-building - as shown, I for one like very much game's Sandbox base-design. Middle-of-road approach.

 

[Maxil20]

1 hour ago, MostMerryTomcat said:

Snip

I see! I guess it was simply a misunderstanding on my part. I understand what you mean now better, and it’s perfectly reasonable. I definitely feel once they are tuned I’ll be a lot less wary. I do like the concept of new challenges, provided they are done well, and I do hope it continues to expand in unique, but still engaging ways.

(Also impressive players/bases! They are pretty neat to see : ) )

[sudoku]

I think klei is moving in the right direction and hopefully this signals more of an emphasis on survival content. Mega Basing is a niche playstyle that most have adopted because they have beaten every other challenge in the game and are left with nothing substantial to do. They are super passionate because most people would have already quit with the lack of content, however mega basers should realize that there playstyle is in direct odds with adding more survival gameplay because it is extending the point at which endgame is reached. 

Klei has catered to mega basers for WAY WAY too long by putting out small secular pieces of content that doesnt tie together and becomes lacklustre due to its optional nature. 

Imagine if Klei had been developing seasons while listening to mega basers, or deerclops, or any of the other survival challenges that have existed since ROG when the focus was still on developing a SURVIVAL game. 

Please do not sacrifice survival challenges or mechanics that provide actual gameplay for megabase decorating.

[Stonetribe]

Alright disclaimer, I haven't played the beta and haven't even ever beat CC, so I'm in no way qualified to give an opinion as to whether or not this is a balanced update or not. However, I just wanted to say that I'll be disappointed if this ends up being pirate raids 2.0, being an awesome and fun concept meant to shake things up that's held back by terrible implementation.

[00petar00]

I don't understand how is the "survival" part of this update any fun to do on repeat? It can be completely ignored, there are better food sources, this just punishes you for doing the quest and killing CC and you won't be able to decorate your base with plants. 

I completely agree with OP, 1000 health plants that also have vines that you have to kill first and their damage reduction isn't fun and it will be even worse then a hound wave if we don't have a way to stop them from spawning.

I don't know what to say about players that think hound waves are much of a challenge instead of a repeated annoyance that you have to deal with, there's no risk if you have the knowledge and if you are prepared, you can always run from them too. The most annoying thing about hound waves/frog rain/seasonal boss spawns is that it stops me from ever going afk on a public server and I am just encouraged to play on my own so that I can pause.

At the very least there should be another building in the new forge crafting tab that will stop portals from appearing in a wide range maybe even cover the whole biome so that you don't have to spam them like lightning rods everywhere, it can just be more expensive to build if it has really high range.

There's a silver lining here, if it stays like this at least cave bases will be more popular, I would love to see more people build in caves and this may just force them to join the ancients.

[goatt]

I believe it will not.

There is a max limit on the number of Brightshades that can exist in one world. Once the max is reached, no more gestalts will spawn. That means, after killing the annoying ones, you can leave the rest of them untreated and they will not bother you.

[Notecja]

On 4/9/2023 at 2:02 AM, Evelo said:

I'm telling ye, just have a world setting option to disable the destructive nature of the portals. If you want the destruction, keep it on. If you don't turn it off.

I wanted to suggest something similar, like for people who like survival to give setting for "hardcore" behaviour of these things... and likely can be applied to more than one thing. Like lunar storms too (personaly I am more into less destructive experience. My bases are art.)