In defense of the boulders

[Malfario]

I like them, i love them as decor items, and farming them exclusivly from antlion is painfull, a pasive suply of rocks and flint easy to colect when you are basing on the caves is actually very nice, and i really like them as a more difficult version of the earthquakes not because they do more dmg but because they block certain parts of the area where you are moving adding a duable extra challenge to everyday encounters.

My only real big problem with this is that they destroy structures but i think this could be solved quite easily simply by giving the boulders a check so they cant fall on top of structures.

I feel like this mechanic has gotten a lot of hate and i dont like the logic of, its bad-can not be good-erase it.

Giving that the beta is done for us the players to provide feedback i think a better aproach is to give ways in which this boulders earthquakes can be more interesting. For me they are good enough counting on the fact they end up not destroying bases, but i really like the idea of them droping dreadstone if a rift is at max stage or if they fell during the nightmare phase.

Maybe they could drop different materials depending on the biome, thulecite boulders when on the ruins, fossil boulder when on the rocky biome, boulder with overgrown mushrooms which we can harvest fro mush tree seeds on the fungal byomes and a long etc.

[Captain_Rage]

Some sort of support structure could be implemented that would stop destructive debris from falling from the ceiling in a limited area, akin to real support beams in tunnels and mines.

[Malfario]

11 hours ago, Captain_Rage said:

Some sort of support structure could be implemented that would stop destructive debris from falling from the ceiling in a limited area, akin to real support beams in tunnels and mines.

i ve been thinking of this for months now and now with this update really feels like it could be implemented.

My idea is for it to have three tiers, the basic one, made of wood, gets damgaed over time but provides protection from overheat and raining (not lighting) if placed on the surface, and boulders and acide rain on the caves(again eventually breakes).

Then the moonglass/Pure brilliance/moonrock one, this has the added benefit of been transparent so sun light can go thro it and be placed on top of crops, sort of the green house ceiling. Protects from boulders but not from rain, again is meant fron green houses, they canalice the water to spread it on top of crops. And it willl be on pair with the lunar theme as moon creatures are interested in plant life.

And finally the dradstone one, that offers complete protection against all mentioned threats infinitely, but youg et a pasive sanity drain when under it.

[ADM]

48 minutes ago, Captain_Rage said:

Some sort of support structure could be implemented that would stop destructive debris from falling from the ceiling in a limited area, akin to real support beams in tunnels and mines.

I've been elaborating a bunch on this concept which I think would do just awesomely well for protection, how we build in caves, and making better uses of the environment  :

So far I do like how those boulders could spice our time down here... and our approche with them... but that last thing is currently not approchable in any sort of control which I think justify properly all the people concern with their addition.

[Evelo]

I'm crazy in that I liked the whole destruction of bases. I liked it with the rifts from the previous update and I like it with the boulders in this update.

This is a survival, bases shouldn't be free from harm of the world.

[Mysterious box]

50 minutes ago, Evelo said:

I'm crazy in that I liked the whole destruction of bases. I liked it with the rifts from the previous update and I like it with the boulders in this update.

This is a survival, bases shouldn't be free from harm of the world.

I agree all I feel is the warning time should be extended on the boulder mechanic. I feel like it's fine for the end game to expect personal responsibility of all players involved in this situation and shy away from the idea of feeling completely safe in your camp. It feels like Kiel is leaning into challenging our survival skills and not just our combat ability and I'm all for it.

[Ryusuta]

As someone that almost exclusively cave bases unless I'm playing Wes, the boulders are basically a straight-up deal-breaker for me. It's simply a non-starter. And even if they weren't, the acid rain is.

I love the new cape and cowl as well as the scythe, but they aren't even remotely worth even slightly considering, given the downsides.

[Brago-sama]

At the very least it is a choice.

All the new stuff is basicly just sidegrades of existing stuff besides the scythe, but even then, im not sacrficing the entirety of cave basing for a small amount of extra dps, so ya, charlie can eat it. Fix your own portal

[Antynomity]

7 hours ago, Evelo said:

I'm crazy in that I liked the whole destruction of bases. I liked it with the rifts from the previous update and I like it with the boulders in this update.

This is a survival, bases shouldn't be free from harm of the world.

You forgot you are playing a game where almost every threat is able to be countered with a structure or item that isn't just handed to you right before or after you introduce an issue which is an exception with the new rift stuff.

It's as saying add back flooding from SW without adding back sandbags.

Bases deserve to stay if the owner prepares them to withstand, there are no things that can do that currently with these new features.

Boulders can stay, make them less BS though.

[Shosuko]

8 hours ago, Evelo said:

I'm crazy in that I liked the whole destruction of bases. I liked it with the rifts from the previous update and I like it with the boulders in this update.

This is a survival, bases shouldn't be free from harm of the world.

Destroying a base does nothing for your chances of survival, and adds no challenge to the game.  All it does is tax resources and time.

The primary monetization of DST is skins for structures.  Pretty dumb to drop boulders all over the only reason people spend money on the game...

[bloopah]

9 hours ago, Malfario said:

overheat and raining (not lighting)

Overheating (I'm assuming from global temperature) and lightning in the Caves? Are you sure there isn't already the ceiling of the Caves preventing both?

[Mike23Ua]

On the topic of Base destruction: It’s not hard to rebuild and repair demolished structures.. if the game did NOT have a repair function then I wouldn’t be this biased, but it does.. so use it- or toggle off the things that interfere with your enjoyment.

On the Topic of Boulder Quakes: Im HIGHLY Disappointed in them I can’t play in Beta’s but from my understanding these things only happen AFTER killing FuelWeaver (or through server settings) Therefore for them to just be the same old rocks Ant-Lion drops is really a complete slap to the face of Progression.. these are coming from more powerful Quakes than ant-Lion, they should be dropping more rare or unique resources.

[Malfario]

1 hour ago, bloopah said:

Overheating (I'm assuming from global temperature) and lightning in the Caves? Are you sure there isn't already the ceiling of the Caves preventing both?

i made it more clear editing my post, but i was refering to iverheating and lighting protection when the roofs are placed on the surface

[bloopah]

5 minutes ago, Malfario said:

i made it more clear editing my post, but i was refering to iverheating and lighting protection when the roofs are placed on the surface

Ah, but why would you want to build a cave support structure on the surface? I'd rather have a tree like the Above-Average Trunks that grows on land.

[chirsg]

2 hours ago, Shosuko said:

Destroying a base does nothing for your chances of survival, and adds no challenge to the game.  All it does is tax resources and time.

The primary monetization of DST is skins for structures.  Pretty dumb to drop boulders all over the only reason people spend money on the game...

I don't know how I can like this post twice.
Anyone whose primary goal is survival is capable of doing so with nothing more than the contents of one's pockets.

Survival being interfered with via destruction of structures makes the game converge into a really weird situation where you place no value on what you've built.

If I can name a situation where your base gets sabotaged, your survival chances get reduced and danger ensues, while at the same time, not permanently sabotaging your base is use of the flooding mechanic in shipwrecked.

if you didn't take care, you could create mosquito spawners and get bitten, but after the floods, your base is as good as it used to be. 

I really dislike  hate the destruction aspect and it would actually reduce my playtime or evaluate if rifts are even a feature of the game I'd like to enable.

Acid rain is annoying, but it seems like a fair challenge. I can survive that and it's a ticker where you have to manage your resources and scramble to survive, but the rifts, brightshades, cave-ins and absolutely no control over where a rift will spawn?
Nah, I will be leaving them off.

They're anti megabase and after a certain play threshold, most players who are loyal to the game will just be annoyed.

[Malfario]

21 minutes ago, bloopah said:

Ah, but why would you want to build a cave support structure on the surface? I'd rather have a tree like the Above-Average Trunks that grows on land.

Because it would be fun, this structure i am proposing is not meant to be used only on the caves, you have benefits on the surface as well, and why couldnt we have both giant trees on land and roofs ?

[Antynomity]

9 minutes ago, Satan_ said:

Oh come now, destruction of structures is ok. We'll all learn from this, we'll live and eventually we'll all laugh about it. I actually made a suggestion that it's not enough that they simply destroy structures. Instead, they should be alight! Isn't that challenging? Just boulders engulfed in FIRE? What a sight! And the fire could spread around your base and you could have so much fun extinguishing the flames!

Now THATS survival! 

That will TRULY make the game finally, once again UNCOMPROMISING.

[Zeklo]

48 minutes ago, chirsg said:

If I can name a situation where your base gets sabotaged, your survival chances get reduced and danger ensues, while at the same time, not permanently sabotaging your base is use of the flooding mechanic in shipwrecked.

This would make for a good suggestion.

Rocks that fall onto structures give them a "rock overlay" that requires the need to mine them out to use them again.

A secondary mechanic would be desirable (akin to mosquitos) to not just make this an annoying mechanic with no purpose (danger).

[chirsg]

6 minutes ago, Zeklo said:

Rocks that fall onto structures give them a "rock overlay" that requires the need to mine them out to use them again.

 

This is incredibly sensible and I'm glad my suggestion birthed an idea such as this. Your suggestion is deserving of it's own thread suggestion. Genius.

And to add to the survivability aspect, if you have scaled furnaces in the caves or mushlights/glowcaps, they stop producing light and/or heat. It's oppressive, but it's a fair compromise.

 

[gamehun20]

2 minutes ago, chirsg said:

This is incredibly sensible and I'm glad my suggestion birthed an idea such as this. Your suggestion is deserving of it's own thread suggestion. Genius.

And to add to the survivability aspect, if you have scaled furnaces in the caves or mushlights/glowcaps, they stop producing light and/or heat. It's oppressive, but it's a fair compromise.

 

Honestly this covering structures with dust and grime and having to clean it off is an alright idea better than just removing it could also make it so stuff is a bit damaged like how the relic structures are and you have to add a little resource to them like a stone or a log or whatever and it's repaired

[Malfario]

8 minutes ago, gamehun20 said:

Honestly this covering structures with dust and grime and having to clean it off is an alright idea better than just removing it could also make it so stuff is a bit damaged like how the relic structures are and you have to add a little resource to them like a stone or a log or whatever and it's repaired

please not up keep, there hasnt been any game in the history of this medium were up keep of decorations has beene welcomed

[Mike23Ua]

20 minutes ago, Malfario said:

please not up keep, there hasnt been any game in the history of this medium were up keep of decorations has beene welcomed

I’d like to introduce you to Ark Survival Evolved, a game where.. Your structures would slowly decay over time, or take damage from enemy mobs- Requiring YOU to go out and gather resources to Repair said Structures with constant Upkeep or else: risk the chance of having them break/decay.

After I introduce you to Ark, I’d ALSO like to Introduce you to Atlas & then Conan Exiles..

[Mysterious box]

3 hours ago, Shosuko said:

Destroying a base does nothing for your chances of survival, and adds no challenge to the game.  All it does is tax resources and time.

 Your base and your ability to protect your camp is key to survival in some survival games and can be considered a good challenge. Taxing resources is the cost of failure the worst case scenario that being said I feel the warning time should be extended.

3 hours ago, Shosuko said:

The primary monetization of DST is skins for structures.  Pretty dumb to drop boulders all over the only reason people spend money on the game...

This should not hold back or even have to be considered for the endgame it's not as though mega base builds have to disappear from dst as there are two options assuming the above tweak happens. One would be to simply keep a higher level of awareness in base or two would be to use mega base builds for worlds you don't take into the end game.

If Kiel decides to remove the mechanic fine but it sure would leave a bitter taste in my mouth if we're saying the reason it has to happen is money motivated.

[Mysterious box]

9 minutes ago, Satan_ said:

I agree with this fine individual. This person would have to agree that to make it really seem like home, flames should engulf the boulders to truly ensure you would have to build from nothing once more.

It's a trial. I think it will separate the real Don't Starve Together fans from the fake fans.

You're not going to let a little base destruction stop you from playing the game, will you? Hehehe

No no your right we should make a money net that blocks mobs and seasons from our bases as well with our wallets.

Heaven forbid we actually attempt to avoid bad things happening to our bases they just shouldn't happen at all else we never spend money on this game again.

I pity the fool who interferes with our base building sim claiming survival is a interesting aspect. 

[Captain_Rage]

4 hours ago, Mysterious box said:

No no your right we should make a money net that blocks mobs and seasons from our bases as well with our wallets.

https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=619960620

We were looking for the perfect solution but we had it all along.

On a more serious note, it would feel nice if there was a mechanic that disabled structures, like people just suggested, instead of outright destroying them (in the caves). Then the player would have to struggle for a bit to retake that. Maybe something akin to what Brightshades do to plants. I am all for some base destruction but frequent falling boulders will make the cave feel like the surface, with earthquakes and wildfires and giants. xd