Temperature zones in Constant. Temperature update

[MasterDos]

Hello everyone

Recently, I was thinking about what might be waiting for our favorite game in the future and thought about an interesting idea. Imagine what happens if temperature zones appear in the constant! Similarly to what happens in our world - it is colder from above and below the globe, and much warmer near the equator.

Before you throw tomatoes at me, let me tell you about the obvious advantages of expanding the gameplay.

Answer yourself the question, what are you guided by when you choose a place for a future base in the first days? As a rule, we choose based on the necessary biomes or spawn creatures (bifalo, pigs, and so on)
But now you will also take into account the temperature zones so as not to suffer too much in summer or winter. After all, it is obvious that it will be colder in the far north or in the far south, and it will be hotter closer to the central strip
But it can complicate survival if you decide to build a base where it is colder by default and there will be no fires in summer (although it will be very very difficult in winter) - but all important biomes and resources can be in a hot zone.

It seems to me that this is a very interesting concept that can complicate survival and add more strategic thinking when creating the first base, as well as subsequent ones. This could also be applied to caves, but to link temperature indicators to certain biomes. For example, in a biome with lakes and lichen it will be warmer, but in a biome with bats it will be colder. (Perhaps in some other way)

Given the new obstacles to survival and non-starvation, it is worth adding new crafts)
Perhaps our usual temperature indicator could become more useful. For example, after its construction, you open the map and can activate the temperature mode to show the temperature area around the thermometer. But in my opinion it is better to add a manual thermometer, with which you could make a temperature map that will be needed in long-term survival. You explore the world and also determine where it will be colder, hotter and so on.

I was glad to share this idea with you) I hope you enjoyed it. I will be glad to see your opinion in this topic

[gamehun20]

I really don't want choosing a base location to be over complicated 

[b l a n k]

16 minutes ago, gamehun20 said:

I really don't want choosing a base location to be over complicated 

Let's talk about this, do the players really care, or even know about how complicated it is to choose a base location ?

You usually want a base avoiding Meteor Fields,Tumbleweeds catching fire from Magma Ponds, and Wildfires (ideally without being flingo-dependent).
Now that makes the following biomes to avoid: Mosaic and its neighbouring biomes (including the Rockyland), the 2nd smaller Rockyland that can have another Meteor Field and its neighbouring biomes, and the Dragonfly Desert.
The ideal locations can vary, being on Caves negates all the aboves, but you have the disadvantages from the caves. Basing in the Oasis, with the right location, also negates all those points, but it is RNG-dependant, and as a static place, you probably won't have the luxury to be close to the points of interest you want (e.g. a well-placed wormhole). Finally, you can base close to the sea to plant and grow Above-Average Tree Trunks, then your have a lot more possibilities, and you can put yourself in a more subjective location, without impeding the base efficiency (as long as the bad biomes are avoided).
Also, in the perspective you want a definitive base location (because you're too lazy to move everything you have once you started basing somewhere), you won't know the ideal location until you discovered the map's routes, its 4 wormhole pairs, and some key locations, more or less subjectives.

Do your average player really think about all of this ? In my experience (I only play on vanilla servers, either the survival ones hosted by Klei, or the endless servers), players don't.
They just base at PK, or in a "good" place that isn't even close to the sea.

The point it, wether choosing a base is complicated or not, the players won't care if they don't want to...

[gamehun20]

4 minutes ago, b l a n k said:

The point it, wether choosing a base is complicated or not, the players won't care if they don't want to...

Still i don't want to freeze my butt off or over heat constantly because i accidentally choose a location wrong that doesn't have bad spot sign for the naked eye

[b l a n k]

7 minutes ago, gamehun20 said:

Still i don't want to freeze my butt off or over heat constantly because i accidentally choose a location wrong that doesn't have bad spot sign for the naked eye

Oh yeah I dislike OP's ideas too

[Mike23Ua]

I want islands out at sea, large ones the size of lunar island or bigger, no bigger than that- Make them the size of the highly empty swamp biome found on the main lands.

Yeah I want an island that big… full of stuff, but there’s a catch- these islands require a very specific and unique “thing” to step foot onto and survive on the islands 

Such as for example an extremely cold frozen tundra that needs you to use more than just a heated thermal stone to stay alive.

It could require a Beefalo Hat & Bearger Vest or whatever.. 

the TL:DR- Hamlet poison Gas mask biomes but as Islands put at sea each one unique, each requiring specific gear.

 

 

[Creatorofswamps]

1 hour ago, gamehun20 said:

Still i don't want to freeze my butt off or over heat constantly because i accidentally choose a location wrong that doesn't have bad spot sign for the naked eye

You know, I had an idea. And that if we have a world where there will always be a desert in the south and a tundra biome in the north (this biome is well suited for DST), we can add that the desert is always warmer than in normal biomes. and the tundra is colder than in ordinary biomes. It will be easier for gamers to understand where summer bases can be built. And where you can build winter bases. This way, the world will seem more coherent and logical, and it will be convenient for the players. bases can always be built in a normal biome, but, for example, they will always know where they can safely survive summer and winter, and use this knowledge

here are a few creatures and plants for the tundra invented by @Kur0u

 

[Cheggf]

Your base has things to trivialize the season's temperatures (campfire to warm in winter, ice box + thermal or endofire to cool in summer) so this wouldn't really do anything to change where you'd want to make a base. All it would do is randomly change how long it takes for you to start needing to manage your temperature away from the base in an unintuitive way that I don't think anyone would ever be able to figure out on their own. 

[Jandri]

I like this idea. It makes no sense for a desert and a swamp to have the same weather. It could also rain more in swamps and less in deserts.

It might be better to have the temperature gradient only from south (warm) to north (cold), so that the portal is in a temperate zone.

[Creatorofswamps]

1 hour ago, Jandri said:

It might be better to have the temperature gradient only from south (warm) to north (cold), so that the portal is in a temperate zone.

[gamehun20]

1 hour ago, Jandri said:

It might be better to have the temperature gradient only from south (warm) to north (cold), so that the portal is in a temperate zone.

The problem with this is that deserts and places that would be warm can spawn anywhere and it would be pretty strange to have a cold desert with an oasis or a cold dragonfly desert and no before anyone even dares to say it making it so these biomes spawn only where it's warm is a terrible idea and would make the world gen really dull

[Jandri]

18 minutes ago, gamehun20 said:

The problem with this is that deserts and places that would be warm can spawn anywhere and it would be pretty strange to have a cold desert with an oasis or a cold dragonfly desert and no before anyone even dares to say it making it so these biomes spawn only where it's warm is a terrible idea and would make the world gen really dull

Perhaps random generation could place warm biomes in the south and cold biomes in the north ?

[Mysterious box]

1 hour ago, Cheggf said:

All it would do is randomly change how long it takes for you to start needing to manage your temperature away from the base in an unintuitive way that I don't think anyone would ever be able to figure out on their own. 

If only there were some sort of temperature measuring device that mostly goes unused that could be given a additional function to tell the temperature extremes of a area.

Personally I feel like this along with other things would go a long way to improve the atmosphere in the constant even if it wouldn't necessarily be hard. They could even make new events for those special zones.  

[gamehun20]

8 minutes ago, Jandri said:

Perhaps random generation could place warm biomes in the south and cold biomes in the north ?

That's quite exactly what i said people shouldn't say because that's the water logged biome situation again things only spawn on one side and makes the generation dull

[Creatorofswamps]

27 minutes ago, gamehun20 said:

The problem with this is that deserts and places that would be warm can spawn anywhere and it would be pretty strange to have a cold desert with an oasis or a cold dragonfly desert and no before anyone even dares to say it making it so these biomes spawn only where it's warm is a terrible idea and would make the world gen really dull

if only the desert and tundra will be counted as warm biomes (If they don't want to get a new biome, they can put the swamp as a cold biome.), then this will not greatly change the situation that exists now. the regularity of the location of the bioms is noticeable when you create worlds from time to time. you can make it so that only 1 biome will be spawned in the south and north and the rest will add more random generation to compensate for the non-randomness of the cold and warm biome

[gamehun20]

Just now, Creatorofswamps said:

if only the desert and tundra will be counted as warm biomes (If they don't want to get a new biome, they can put the swamp as a cold biome.), then this will not greatly change the situation that exists now. the regularity of the location of the bioms is noticeable when you create worlds from time to time. you can make it so that only 1 biome will be spawned in the south and north and the rest will add more random generation to compensate for the non-randomness of the cold and warm biome

It still stands that if locations are located to one side of the place it get boring really fast because you always know where it's at. no matter what world you generate the desert will always be in that direction 

[Jandri]

7 minutes ago, gamehun20 said:

It still stands that if locations are located to one side of the place it get boring really fast because you always know where it's at. no matter what world you generate the desert will always be in that direction 

What if north isn't necessarily up when you spawn and south isn't necessarily down?

[gamehun20]

2 minutes ago, Jandri said:

What if north isn't necessarily up when you spawn and south isn't necessarily down?

I'm pretty sure it is right now in game up and down

[Jandri]

1 minute ago, gamehun20 said:

I'm pretty sure it is right now in game up and down

Yes but there is no reason for it to be that way

[Cheggf]

33 minutes ago, Mysterious box said:

If only there were some sort of temperature measuring device that mostly goes unused that could be given a additional function to tell the temperature extremes of a area.

Personally I feel like this along with other things would go a long way to improve the atmosphere in the constant even if it wouldn't necessarily be hard. They could even make new events for those special zones.  

Oh yeah because when somebody is opening DST their first thought is to just make thermal measurers everywhere on the map in-case they added a weird location based temperature system for no reason.

The "atmosphere improvement" would not even be noticed by like 99% of the players. Ask any random person how long it takes to freeze if you stand next to a burning tree for 25 seconds. This is the thing that changes, that number. They won't know what it normally is, they just see that they're freezing so they warm up. Your temperature, the temperature of the world, the rate at which your temperature changes, all of that is invisible. Unless you're suggesting that these areas are completely inhospitable and essentially removed from the map during those seasons people won't even notice. 

[gamehun20]

Just now, Jandri said:

Yes but there is no reason for it to be that way

There probably is a reason to it

[Jandri]

8 minutes ago, Cheggf said:

Oh yeah because when somebody is opening DST their first thought is to just make thermal measurers everywhere on the map in-case they added a weird location based temperature system for no reason.

The "atmosphere improvement" would not even be noticed by like 99% of the players. Ask any random person how long it takes to freeze if you stand next to a burning tree for 25 seconds. This is the thing that changes, that number. They won't know what it normally is, they just see that they're freezing so they warm up. Your temperature, the temperature of the world, the rate at which your temperature changes, all of that is invisible. Unless you're suggesting that these areas are completely inhospitable and essentially removed from the map during those seasons people won't even notice. 

I don't think a player who hadn't watched videos or been informed by friends would have thought that it was going to start snowing and that they would get cold and lose their HPs.

If you started freezing on day 17 instead of day 20, you'd have almost the same number of days to prepare for winter, and if you started building a base somewhere, you might only have one thermal measurer there to know when you would start needing a thermal stone or other objects that you are willing to use to protect you from the cold in this area.

If the cold in specific regions in the far south of the map is high enough, you'll notice that you can stay away from fire for less time before freezing or your thermal stone cools faster. You don't need to know how many seconds you have before you start freezing to notice a change.

18 minutes ago, gamehun20 said:

There probably is a reason to it

Maybe for computer reasons, but I believe the only item that uses cardinal directions is the compass.

[Mysterious box]

25 minutes ago, Cheggf said:

Oh yeah because when somebody is opening DST their first thought is to just make thermal measurers everywhere on the map in-case they added a weird location based temperature system for no reason.

 

I mean did most people open up dst thinking huh I'm gonnna freeze to death or my base might suddenly go on fire in x about of days? Did anyone suddenly think huh meteors are going to fall from the sky here or flaming tumbleweeds are going to fling into my base? Sure noone does it now but if it becomes normalized they'll do it without even thinking about it.

 

27 minutes ago, Cheggf said:

The "atmosphere improvement" would not even be noticed by like 99% of the players. Ask any random person how long it takes to freeze if you stand next to a burning tree for 25 seconds. This is the thing that changes, that number. They won't know what it normally is, they just see that they're freezing so they warm up. Your temperature, the temperature of the world, the rate at which your temperature changes, all of that is invisible. Unless you're suggesting that these areas are completely inhospitable and essentially removed from the map during those seasons people won't even notice. 

The average player doesn't know how to properly farm either doesn't mean there aren't people who enjoy farming for being more in depth and it's not like we can't have the temperature differences impact other aspects of gameplay as well.

[Cheggf]

20 minutes ago, Mysterious box said:

I mean did most people open up dst thinking huh I'm gonnna freeze to death or my base might suddenly go on fire in x about of days? Did anyone suddenly think huh meteors are going to fall from the sky here or flaming tumbleweeds are going to fling into my base? Sure noone does it now but if it becomes normalized they'll do it without even thinking about it.

You are listing things that are clearly visible. Are you saying that people are dying to invisible meteors without knowing they're there? Why are you trying to compare them to an invisible temperature difference? If it really was as apparent as you're pretending like it would be you wouldn't be championing it as a use for thermal measurers. Why would you need them to see something that's obvious?

[Mysterious box]

2 minutes ago, Cheggf said:

Are you saying that people are dying to invisible meteors without knowing they're there?

No I'm saying they'll build there only to later find out that meteors are falling from the sky destroying their stuff.

 

3 minutes ago, Cheggf said:

Why are you trying to compare them to an invisible temperature difference?

Because even if you don't see it temperature effects you.

 

4 minutes ago, Cheggf said:

If it really was as apparent as you're pretending like it would be you wouldn't be championing it as a use for thermal measurers. Why would you need them to see something that's obvious?

3 hours ago, Cheggf said:

All it would do is randomly change how long it takes for you to start needing to manage your temperature away from the base in an unintuitive way that I don't think anyone would ever be able to figure out on their own. 

I brought it up because your the one who made this comment above. So will players need a way to know or not? Also we haven't even settled on how intense this hypothetical mechanic would even be in it's temperature zones I can't really see a reason to even be so against it.